Fort St John Accident topic #2

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:03 pm

What does respect have to do with finding out why a serviceable airplane got wrecked flying passengers on a commercial operation?

Are we to just suposed to bury our heads in the sand like ostriches?

Jeeses , I just don't understand why there is this mindset to hide the causes of these accidents.

Like Doc said, no one was hurt or killed so what is wrong with knowing why someone lands short of a runway?

FL30 · Post by **FL30** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:13 pm

i believe,... correct me if I'm wrong, but 1/4 mile is below approach minima into YXJ as per the "new" law.... no???

bob sacamano · Post by **bob sacamano** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:29 pm

bushguy wrote:i believe,... correct me if I'm wrong, but 1/4 mile is below approach minima into YXJ as per the "new" law.... no???

correct, unless an ops spec was granted for that specific operator? (wich i doubt given that the new ban has been out for a short time).

handyandy · Post by **handyandy** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:54 pm

I have no problem with discussing the accident and what happened, I'm all for learning from mistakes, the intellegent posts like your own, are great and an asset to not only this forum but the entire industry. The ones bashing the pilots aswell as the company are out of line, this sort of thing can happen to any company, although nobody was killed, this is still a difficult time for many people, to make comments like were made on here is a lot like kicking a guy in the nuts while there down, I really think it is disrespectful to those involved.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:21 pm

What contributed to the accident?

Were they under pressure or preceived pressure to get in?

Were they tired?

Is it the culture for their company to " TRY " when common sense says don't?

Was the pairing of the crew a factor?

These are just a few of the more common factors in a lot of these accidents.

I see nothing disrespectful in wanting to know these things.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:32 pm

Would obeying the new approach ban have prevented this accident? Yes. Was vis a factor? Maybe. Maybe not.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:36 pm

" Was vis a factor? Maybe. Maybe not."

If they were flying a G.S. what would vis have to do with being below the G.S.?

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:43 pm

True. But had they not continued the approach due to the vis, they'd have gone elsewhere, and we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place? So, in a way, vis was a big factor. It's the only "black and white" number that said, "don't go there."?
An accident that could have been prevented by obeying the dreaded approach ban? Even if it wasn't a direct factor?

Schlem · Post by **Schlem** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:45 pm

The Ops Spec still requires 1600 RVR or 3/8 sm unless the runway is equipped with centerline lighting in which it is reduced to 1200 RVR and 1/4 sm with a PMA.

disengage · Post by **disengage** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:00 pm

still talking about what may have happened...enough already

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:29 pm

disengage:

" too many replys from the other Topic...i will say i know one of the pilots and for all those idiots to go and run there mouths about..."well they shouldve done this shouldve done that,...well this plane made it down safe..." or W/E... the fact is nobody was hurt and Some of you may know the old saying "ANY LANDING YOU CAN WALK AWAY FROM IS A GOOD LANDING" so shutup and have some respect for your fellow pilots. "

You posted the above and you are calling others idiots?

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:39 pm

So, like, if the multi million dollar airplane is rolled up in a ball, but nobody died, that's a good landing?? I'm confused.

xsbank · Post by **xsbank** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:54 pm

Don't be confused, Doc, he's taken an old bar-room joke and made it gospel. At the risk of lowering myself into the morass, maybe that's how he runs his life? You have to give him some credit, though, he can operate a computer...I just took out my Flying Beaver Bar and Grill sweatshirt and I'm going to get a nice cool Guinness off the porch 'cause the sun just dipped below the yardarm and I'm going to promise to only answer serious posts, 'til tomorrow.

disengage · Post by **disengage** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:00 pm

Too Many Ego's on here, remember Karma is Beautiful Thing

bob sacamano · Post by **bob sacamano** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:02 pm

Landing is like sex.

A good one, the girl goes somewhere else.

A great one, the girl comes back for more.

Which one do you want?

nostupidnickname · Post by **nostupidnickname** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:19 pm

JET A-1 wrote:All CMA/NCA flights to YXJ made it in no prob right before Peace Air's mishap! Just a routine gusty winter ILS to a slick surface. Wasn't like this weather was WAY out of the ordinary for YXJ. Sure it was snowing a little bit more then usual but that is where the PDM comes into play! Or lack of...... Hopefully some of those Mr. Ego King Sh!t pilots at Peace got a reality check!

Um, hello, what would you know about a routine ILS or what is ordinary weather for XJ? Why don't you wait till your off the ramp before you start running your mouth like you know your sh#t.

For now, just stick with driving your Hobart Tug, ok.

disengage · Post by **disengage** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:35 pm

Good Point There Bob...i'll admit maybe that wasnt the right thing to say hahahah

looproll · Post by **looproll** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:22 pm

OK the pieces are coming together...

this was not their first attempt to land at CYXJ, they had previously flown an approach and a missed approach. Lights at the approach end of the runway were clipped by the plane.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:41 pm

looproll...serious? This was their second attempt? That speaks volumes. I can't say I've ever missed an ILS, and then done another one. For me, a missed ILS is a free ticket to an alternate. Unlike the postman, I never "ring" twice.

Flying Nutcracker · Post by **Flying Nutcracker** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:35 pm

Don't mean to butt in her but... I can't even count the number of times I have missed an ILS and done a 2nd attempt. Fog or snow to me means constant change in visibility and ceiling/vv. I will most likely give it a 2nd shot if the first one is unsuccessful. Now if the 2nd one is a miss, well then I have to divert. Pretty simple! The diversion is not even by choice.

Why are all you guys so judgemental about this whole thing??? Let it go! You can voice your opinion all you want but it's not doing any good now is it!?!?! You will get the verdict sooner or later and then you can all say "I told you so!!!"!

Until then... you guys speculating about this whole incident is starting to sound like the equally uninformed media that you are all "mudding" every time there's an aviation related event covered!

Get the facts! Then form your opinions!

looproll · Post by **looproll** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:55 pm

Yeah, seriously.

Subandriyo · Post by **Subandriyo** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:33 am

WOW!! I can't believe how much time some people have.

Post by **avcanada** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:13 pm

I have spent the last hour or so reviewing this topic.

I must have deleted 20 or so posts that I really found to be childish and unprofessional and a true waste of time. The large majority of the posts I removed had nothing even to do with the topic. I am sure I missed one or two posts that could fall into the above category, so if you feel a post is inappropriate or useless, please let me know and I will removed it.

I have deactivated 5 usernames due to the total lack of professionalism in their posts.

I would like to learn from these kinds of accidents and incidents not be burdened with reading garbage.

I am happy no one was injured during this crash and look forward to reading the TSB report.

Post by **avcanada** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:18 pm

While spliting this topic a database error occured. In order to keep the posts active I was forced to create two topics. The original topic started here http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopic.php?t=26153

the_professor · Post by **the_professor** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:56 pm

Doc wrote:True. But had they not continued the approach due to the vis, they'd have gone elsewhere, and we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place? So, in a way, vis was a big factor. It's the only "black and white" number that said, "don't go there."?
An accident that could have been prevented by obeying the dreaded approach ban? Even if it wasn't a direct factor?

I'm still waiting for someone to suggest why it is reasonable to even bother attempting an ILS with 1/4 vis and a 40kt crosswind in moderate blowing snow. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen (which, evidently, it was).

Fort St John Accident topic #2

1/4 mile

Re: 1/4 mile

Re: 1/4 mile