Thunder MU2 in Armstrong

[oldncold]

First, i have read every one of the comments here to be sure that imho comments are fair. you see that is what one should do here agreed!

1) first yyw as posted is a remote airport at 8pm in the winter you are lucky to here a crow calling. you will here the cn main line trains rumble by at warp 5 though.

2) next there is no approved approach into yyw used to be but no more not even a restricted c.a.p./ therefore pic beware applies.

3) I have been in the exact same situation different aircraft but same scenario. it goes like this > empty back after patient return to ygq occ requests wx check to divert to yyw/ well no wx reporting so check notams
wx acceptable/ all you can do is say is well go take a look. that what atpl 's do take a good look and make the call . Then overhead runway check looks ok quick confirmation with the f/o about his observations. fly a vfr circuit do the sop's . brief and be mentally ready with the go around early if things aren't where they need to be. they did it right as far as normal operational situation.

4) as stated dark then toby's butt white surface . aircraft drifts left. .
3yrs back was overnitn in ywg as the only alt that we could hold was yxu and occ did not want the foot the bill in cyqt if we missed with a metar of variable 1/4to 3/4 mile in blowing snow .So next day on the way back to base occ request a diversion to nm5 fuel good/ wx severe clear/ I decllined no runway report after a snow storm . I am expecting 6 inches of the white stuff . advised them no problem once the runway condition report is confirmed and published.

The only thing after a 5k hours doing the exact same thing is possible and this is remote, is to do sim training for this exact scenario/ as the when one touches down and reverse thrust is selected the blade angle goes negative which means the hand/ feet reaction thing becomes a bit unnatural throw in a slippery surface and a departure from ones intended centerline track may be the outcome.

5) as posted the notam thing does need to change. and to all the legal eagles out there. if you read the disclaimer from nav canada the liablity there is enough room to put several semi trailers through the that sideways . in short expect you to follow all the wx rules best info etc then wash their butts with the metars and notams when they pooch the info .

well all of you out there have a very safe and wonderful holiday with family and friends Cheers and call a taxi best wishes in 2011

[frankfrank]

Hmmmm, after finally reading all the facts why wouldn't the crew have gone. It snowed and removal was in progress. I would have gone with that info known to me. Apparently so would Doc and Cat Driver. That's 40000+ hours of experience making that decision. Perhaps YYW MTO should run their airport better, if a runway is unusable then close it till it is usable.

Hopefully the SMS world will remedy a shit show like this.

[Cat Driver]

That's 40000+ hours of experience

I thought Doc had more than 10,000 hours?

[Doc]

Hmmmm, after finally reading all the facts why wouldn't the crew have gone. It snowed and removal was in progress. I would have gone with that info known to me. Apparently so would Doc and Cat Driver. That's 40000+ hours of experience making that decision. Perhaps YYW MTO should run their airport better, if a runway is unusable then close it till it is usable.

Hopefully the SMS world will remedy a shit show like this.

frankfrank, the frightening part is....how do you defend yourself against this kind of stupidity? I know of nobody who this couldn't have happened to.
It's like that annoying little kid who lied about the water...."Come on in dudes, the water's fine..."
We just can't trust these guys.

[Hedley]

I've done a lot dumber stuff in an airplane than these guys did. The difference is, I was lucky enough to get away with it.

IMHO the airport operators have some 'splainin' to do.

[J31]

The NOTAM as posted by Doc:

CYYW RSC 12/30 100 PERCENT SNOW COVERED 4 INCHES 1011261300
SN REMOVAL IN PROGRESS. VERIFY RWY UNOBSTRUCTED PRIOR TO LDG.

Am I the only one that is a little disappointed in the reactions from the experienced aviators here?

The NOTAM states there is FOUR INCHES OF SNOW ON THE RUNAY! If your aircraft can handle 4 inches of snow then make sure the grader is off the runway before you land. Until this NOTAM is changed there is still potentially FOUR INCHES OF SNOW ON THE RUNWAY! Maybe even some windrows, maybe no ploughing because the grader is broke!

Obliviously that RSC exceeds the capabilities of the MU2! But the attitude is “Don’t worry, snow removal in progress” it should be good enough when we get there.

The result was major damage and some bruised egos. Thankfully no one got hurt.

Pretty clear to me…..not an acceptable RSC for the MU2, Metro, King Air, or PC12. Verify that suitable conditions exist or do not land!

Then there is some screaming how the airport operator puts out fraudulent misleading NOTAM’s. How is this NOTAM misleading…….it tells it the way it is! There is FOUR INCHES OF SNOW ON THE RUNAY and there may be equipment removing snow on the runway.

Is the message to ignore the RSC and assume the runway will be cleared as they promised? Ignore the lack of any follow up NOTAM’s indicating a cleared runway?

Some very expensive and potentially dangerous assumptions are being made.

[Flying Low]

The expectation is that "snow removal in progress" means what it says! Not that we are planning to get to it in a day or two. If the RSC had come out as "4 inches of snow on the runway" then no pilot up here would go without further info. As for the grader breaking down...then snow removal is no longer in progress and the NOTAM needs to be replaced.

There always assumptions in aviation. The METARs are done every hour. A Special is done if conditions based on a certain criteria. This is no different...if work is not in progress then this NOTAM needs to be updated.

[trey kule]

It seems the main issue here is that this happened to a respected and experienced Captain with a great deal of friends, so the issue has become a bit emotional for some.Time to bow out before some real nasty name calling starts. I am sure someone will follow this up in time and we can see how it plays out.

Hedley mentioned having done stupid things and just been lucky.. Me too!! The challange, however is when things dont go as planned and you are not lucky.

[Redneck_pilot86]

I have no idea who this captain was, nor am I a friend to him, yet I still don't think he did anything wrong. Given the information available, as has been stated before, it would have been tough to say no to this flight. I would have went.

[Hedley]

The airport operators set a trap, and the pilots fell into it.

[stef]

No need to bow out trey cool. Intelligent debate is healthy for sure. I think you've made an important point that something should have been done about this well known problem ahead of time, and something needs to be done now to prevent recurrence. I feel this is the responsibility of the operators that use Armstrong, and the airport operator--not the crew involved. As I've already stated I think this accident could have very easily happened to any pilot.

I don't know the crew involved either.

[fish4life]

Pretty clear to me…..not an acceptable RSC for the MU2, Metro, King Air, or PC12. Verify that suitable conditions exist or do not land!

very doable in metro and king air

[Rudy]

Very doable in the PC-12 as well. I've heard the MU-2 is a tricky one though so let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps there was much deeper drifts as well.

Also, I'm against giving the MTO operators the power to close runways because of snow on the runway. Give an accurateRSC and let the pilots decide if it's safe for them and the aircraft they are flying.

[stef]

Nice avatar Rudy!

[Brown Bear]

Pretty simple answer here. No more winter operations into Armstrong until this is resolved.
Armstrong....you want air service? Get with the programme.
You need a medevac? Use the land ambulance.
Any questions?

[Brown Bear]

The NOTAM as posted by Doc:

CYYW RSC 12/30 100 PERCENT SNOW COVERED 4 INCHES 1011261300
SN REMOVAL IN PROGRESS. VERIFY RWY UNOBSTRUCTED PRIOR TO LDG.

Am I the only one that is a little disappointed in the reactions from the experienced aviators here?


Some very expensive and potentially dangerous assumptions are being made.

What "assumptions" would these be? That a community might actually "clean" a runway?
And, what "reactions" from experienced aviators disappoint you? The fact that, with the information given, we all would have fallen into the same "trap"? How much MORE information would you require before you actually make a flight? Do you ever launch? Ever landed in snow? Perhaps you can share with us your method of judging snow depth with your landing lights? Or, how you know when a NOTAM is lying to you? I'd sure like to know the answers. Share with us, your wisdom.

[LazyBoy Bandit]

All else aside, wouldn't 4" of snow not help you slow down? I would think if you tried taking off in that much snow it would make your takeof run longer, no?
If on final, the runway was still snow covered, would one not have to assume there was still 4" of snow on it still?
Anyone know how much snow was actually on the runway at the time?

[J31]

Well Brown Bear…here you go.

What "assumptions" would these be? That a community might actually "clean" a runway?

No, assuming that the snow clearing job had been completed when the current RSC still states FOUR INCHES OF SNOW on the runway!

And, what "reactions" from experienced aviators disappoint you?

I am disappointed in the attitude to just ignore a NOTAM because the snow “should be cleared”.

The fact that, with the information given, we all would have fallen into the same "trap"?

I am sorry that an experienced pilot found the runway was not in the condition he expected. Given the current NOTAM I would have expected the runway to be in poor shape unless other valid sources or an updated RSC indicated otherwise.

How much MORE information would you require before you actually make a flight?

An acceptable RSC or some valid info indicating that the runway was suitable for type.

Do you ever launch?

As long as they pay to launch, but it does not mean you have to land if you are unable to get an acceptable report.

Ever landed in snow?

Many times….small wheels, big wheels, wheel/skis, on snow covered gravel, pavement, ice, bog…Been in snow so deep I had trouble getting the doors open, however that was on skis. Landed a King Air in 6 inches of snow when I was told it had been cleared and thankfully I managed to keep from wrecking it.

Perhaps you can share with us your method of judging snow depth with your landing lights?

You made my point! It is very difficult to judge snow depth from the air day or night. Thus reports from the ground are the tools we use.

Or, how you know when a NOTAM is lying to you?

How was the NOTAM lying to you, was there more snow than reported?

Some people are hung up on the “SN REMOVAL IN PROGRESS. VERIFY RWY UNOBSTRUCTED PRIOR TO LDG. This part is the legal disclaimer to alert pilots that there “may” be snow removal equipment on the runway. Maybe you are too young to have heard of or have forgotten Cranbrook in 1978. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_We ... Flight_314

I am not trying to defend the airport operator. Clearly they dropped the ball and were very slow to clean up this runway. But when they did a NOTAM was issued indicating a new RSC.

[Redneck_pilot86]

How can anyone read "SN REMOVAL IN PROGRESS" as anything other than snow removal in progress? The NOTAM clearly stated that the operators were working on clearing the runway, and the incident was 11 hours later. It does not take 11 hours to clear 4 inches of snow off of a runway, so why would anyone think that the runway would not be at least partially cleared? Perhaps the NOTAM should have read CYYW RSC 12/30 100 PERCENT SNOW COVERED 4 INCHES 1011261300
MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL NOT DOING THEIR JOBS. VERIFY RWY UNOBSTRUCTED PRIOR TO LDG

[Doc]

J31 wants a NOTAM to be issued, stating that the snow has, indeed been removed, and the new RSC is such and such. You'll be waiting a very long time, my friend. The NOTAM, as issued is totally normal for the area. It was not ignored by the crew...it was ignored by MTC on the ground at Armstrong.
Hope Santa was good to all of you..

[AOW]

J31 wants a NOTAM to be issued, stating that the snow has, indeed been removed, and the new RSC is such and such. You'll be waiting a very long time, my friend. The NOTAM, as issued is totally normal for the area. It was not ignored by the crew...it was ignored by MTC on the ground at Armstrong.
Hope Santa was good to all of you..

My understanding is that this incident has shaken things up at the MTO RNTO
office. Don't be surprised if exactly that is the new standard for MTO airports! Now that would be a welcomed change!!!!!!

[Doc]

Although I have personally not had a problem (knock wood) with the system as is, that surely was a "wake up" call to all. I'd like to see it go something like this.

NOTAM Runways closed.

We all stay home till we see..

NOTAM Snow removal complete....runways open.

Wouldn't that be a simple solution?

I know this (or something very similar) is the direction MTC will have to go. It's called CYAWP! And, it's long overdue.

[J31]

J31 wants a NOTAM to be issued, stating that the snow has, indeed been removed, and the new RSC is such and such. You'll be waiting a very long time, my friend. The NOTAM, as issued is totally normal for the area. It was not ignored by the crew...it was ignored by MTC on the ground at Armstrong.
Hope Santa was good to all of you..

Well I do not have access to historical NOTAM’s thus I do not have any RSC reports from before the incident. However Doc, there has been a new RSC for Armstrong every day since this discussion started. Maybe there has been a shake-up and improved the reporting? The latest yesterday CYYW RSC 12/30 90 PERCENT COMPACTED SNOW 10 PERCENT ICE PATCHES
1012291430. Bet ya there will be a new one out today!

Happy New Year!

[J31]

Although I have personally not had a problem (knock wood) with the system as is, that surely was a "wake up" call to all. I'd like to see it go something like this.

NOTAM Runways closed.

We all stay home till we see..

NOTAM Snow removal complete....runways open.

Wouldn't that be a simple solution?

I know this (or something very similar) is the direction MTC will have to go. It's called CYAWP! And, it's long overdue.

Why close the runway with 4 inches of snow? Sure it is not suitable for some aircraft but many others can safely use it. Twin Otter, C206, C208, wheel skis, come to mind. Heck some guys said they could operate King Air or Metro into that……..however they have bigger balls than me and I have flown both!

[J31]

Wow these guys are out of control another RSC for Armstrong CYYW RSC 12/30 100 PERCENT LOOSE SN 1/4 INS OVER COMPACTED SN
1012301415