Jazz lands on lights in YAM?

[Clodhopper]

And discuss...

http://www.saultstar.com/2015/02/28/tsb ... lt-landing

A landing at Sault Ste. Marie Airport that caused substantial damage to an Air Canada Jazz plane early last week is being investigated.

Flight 7795, inbound from Toronto Pearson International Airport last Tuesday, was preparing to land at about 6:30 p.m. A sudden snow squall caused the two-person flight crew on the Dash 8 to lose “all visibility,” said Don Enns, manager of Transportation Safety Board's Ontario regional office.

“It went from fairly decent visibility to zero in (a) very short period of time,” Enns told The Sault Star.

The crew was considering trying another approach when the aircraft “touched down short of the runway.”

The nose of the airplane hit a lead-in light. The flight crew, flight attendant and 15 passengers were not hurt.

TSB is an independent agency that investigates marine, pipeline, railway and aviation transportation incidents.

The flight crew was interviewed. TSB has secured the flight data and cockpit voice recorders, said Enns. A request was made for air traffic control tapes.

TSB makes recommendations if its investigators find a safety issue. Its suggestions are not legally binding. The operator being probed has “to answer as to how they're going to respond” to the recommendations, said Enns.

TSB attempts to finish its investigations within 12 months.

In mid-February, the agency released its findings about a landing of a Porter Airlines Bombardier DHC-8-402 at the city airport in May 2013.The aircraft's tail section was extensively damaged. The probe found the plane's airspeed began to decrease and “no longer met the requirements of a stabilized approach.” Another attempt was needed.

That investigation, released 21 months after the incident, “(took) a little longer than we anticipated,” said Enns.

b.kelly@sunmedia.ca

On Twitter: @Saultreporter

[Johnny#5]

Were they headed for a touch-down 1000' down the runway or 10'?

[Illya Kuryakin]

When the vis drops to zero, you toss a log on the fire, and get out of Dodge. Does nobody get this?
Illya

[Rookie50]

Got a question for the big iron crowd.

Is there like, either official or unofficial consequences for go - arounds, or what? Pretty sure its a Cadors, although I can't fathom why.

[Donald]

Nope.

[Cat Driver]

However there are consequences for " not " missing the approach.

[Meatservo]

Got a question for the big iron crowd.

Is there like, either official or unofficial consequences for go - arounds, or what? Pretty sure its a Cadors, although I can't fathom why.

It's important to understand that a CADORS isn't a "consequence". It's not punitive at all. It's just the system by which the guys in the tower are required to report anything that happened that was different than they were expecting. It's not something that you "get" through misdeeds, and you can't be "CADORS'ed" by someone.

The only acceptable way to view a missed approach is, everything went exactly according to plan. Literally. We didn't see the runway so we flew away. THAT's the plan. It's not even "plan B". It's still "plan A". If I ever received negative feedback for doing a missed-approach I would immediately stop working and fill out an SMS report detailing how I was pressured to participate in unsafe work.

****disclaimer: I am not commenting on the Jazz incident. I am only answering the question in quotes above. I don't know anything about the circumstances in Sault Ste. Marie

[Illya Kuryakin]

Meat....nobody will ever give you negative feedback for a missed.
Now, not doing a missed when you should have...resulting in a situation that could have cost lives (like hitting the ground someplace other than the runway...)... pack your bags son.

Wouldn't refer to a Dash 8, as "big iron"...


We've been talking about a certain 737 that should have called a missed. Has nobody learned anything from that??

You lose the ground, you miss. Any questions?
What if there had been something solid, instead of approach lights to hit?

Illya

[Cat Driver]

The beauty of using the PMA method of flying IFR approaches in marginal Weather is hitting something on the approach never happens....as long as you follow the published minimums.

[Donald]

This is how a CP explained it to me....

You won't get invited to the office for a congrats or attaboy if you bust minimums or get in when no one else does.

But if you bend an airplane by busting minimums or doing anything else stupid, you are guaranteed to get called in, or worse.

PMA or not, fly the published approach, followed by the published missed approach, unless you have the required visual reference. You shouldn't have any issues.

[Liquid Charlie]

The nose of the airplane hit a lead-in light

-- my question were they on a precision approach - which in this day is very likely even if it is a GPS - that sounds like a complete loss of the glide scope - mmmm-- no GA initiated - from the wx reports on the cadors I'm thinking 4 eyes outside -- could be wrong but it appears someone was not minding the store -- they should go and buy a lottery ticket -- very fortunate they are still around to have their asses roasted -- small price to pay -- makes my day that all walked away --

[VSF]

On the subject of CADORs: I've never seen a CADOR for a flight that executed a missed approach because of weather.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Wheels down in ten.......make that nine and a half....
Illya

[Samolin]

I have worked for Jazz and it was a great experience and I have moved on since!

A remember once on the line (I was still BLUE at that time) when we commenced a PMA approach with me as PF.

Type of A/C:
CRJ 200

Situation:
Started approach with weather above minimums.
We Passed the FAF and reported visibility went below minimum.
We continued the approach till the missed approach point (which is an altitude rather than a distance or position) since we are doing a Stabilised PMA approach.
We did not see anything at minimums,
We should have done a go around and that was MY FAULT! but here is the conversation went in the cockpit
ME: "Do you see anything?"
no response
at this time I have started reducing the rate of decent and increasing the power to keep airspeed.
ME: "DO you see the runway?"
Capt: "I see the approach lights, no that's not it"

by now we are close to the ground and through my peripheral vision, I can see the tops of houses and tree line and I further reduce the rate of decent. Normally we should have commenced a missed approach around 300 to 400 AGL.

ME: "GO Around"
Capt: "I see the runway, do you want me to take control?"
ME: "NO"

I looked up and continued with the landing.

Our Mistakes:
1) No taking into account the headwind (which was 15-20kts)
2) Not following the Missed Approach Procedure when needed.
One more mistake and I don't think I would be here today.


I can totally relate to their situation, but as have grown some bigger balls since that flight and now enjoy every flight that I do knowing how to control each situation.

There are captains still that will try to do some stupid stuff that will effect Safety, but I the TOOLS to persuade them not to continue in that direction. I was there to assist the Capt and I knew my role!

[pelmet]

On a related note......A couple of weeks ago......

The Jazz CRJ 100-200 (C-GQJA), operating as Jazz 8896, was on a flight from Boston (KBOS) to
Halifax (CYHZ). After landing on Runway 32, the aircraft taxied onto Taxiway Hotel and slid into a
snowbank on the right side of the taxiway. Both the right hand main gear and the nose gear
departed the taxiway. Several aircraft were affected by delays in arrivals and departures and one
aircraft diverted while the aircraft was stuck. Maintenance cleared the snow and towed the aircraft
to the gate. There were no injuries to passengers and crew, and upon inspection, the aircraft did
not sustain any damage.

[FICU]

A remember once on the line (I was still BLUE at that time) when we commenced a PMA approach with me as PF...

That is nowhere close to a PMA... that was a bloody mess!

[Inverted2]

PMA approaches are only for Cat 1/2 ILS approaches at Jazz. Runway 30 at YAM is a VOR.

[Cat Driver]

PMA approaches are only for Cat 1/2 ILS approaches at Jazz. Runway 30 at YAM is a VOR.

If it is not an ILS approach you just keep descending until you either find the runway or hit something?

No one is monitoring the missed approach point?

[Inverted2]

No I'm just saying they weren't (or shouldn't have been doing) a PMA. Looks like a case of 4 eyes looking outside and no one watching the altimeter.

[Cat Driver]

No I'm just saying they weren't (or shouldn't have been doing) a PMA. Looks like a case of 4 eyes looking outside and no one watching the altimeter.

When we went to PMA's ( in the late 60's ) we did not differentiate between the type of approach it was, if the approach was being conducted in IMC it was always a PMA, because it was safer and easier to fly it that way.

Looks like a case of 4 eyes looking outside and no one watching the altimeter.

It avoided the above.

[Samolin]

A remember once on the line (I was still BLUE at that time) when we commenced a PMA approach with me as PF...

That is nowhere close to a PMA... that was a bloody mess!

FICU take a chill pill...
If it has happened to other pilots, then we are not immune to something similar happening to us, unless we study what were the underlying cases of the incident.

But if you are a Jazz hater, then keep ranting!

[FICU]

A remember once on the line (I was still BLUE at that time) when we commenced a PMA approach with me as PF...

That is nowhere close to a PMA... that was a bloody mess!

FICU take a chill pill...
If it has happened to other pilots, then we are not immune to something similar happening to us, unless we study what were the underlying cases of the incident.

But if you are a Jazz hater, then keep ranting!

Nothing against Jazz but have to wonder if some people know what a PMA actually is.

[fish4life]

PMA is SIMPLE, 100 to mins PNF looks outside if he/she doesn't say "runway in sight I have control" by the time the PF gets to the MA point the PF says "minimums go around" or whatever the call might be. No need to check with the other guy and see if they see anything as you are already only 200AGL you don't have the altitude to ask if they see anything as you keep descending below mins.

[Liquid Charlie]

PMA is SIMPLE, 100 to mins PNF looks outside if he/she doesn't say "runway in sight I have control"

I for one think that PMA approaches with xfer of control at 200' in a decent and low visibility is a very poor practise and is a dangerous band-aid to operate under an ops spec created in Canada because the government is too cheap to invest in cat2 and cat3 runways - My opinion is that minimums as published should stand and ops specs are just pure bullshit unless proper training and equipment is available -- simply adopt ICAO standards and if you want to land at lower limits get at least a cat2 program in place. Until such time airports here catch up with the technology at least make aircraft requirements the same as what is required for cat2 if you want to fly below RVR26. Reduced vis on GPS approaches with vertical profile only -- step down approaches should have no reduced minimums -- the list goes on -- back to PMA approaches -- we should all be very capable of a safe landing off a CAT1 ILS -- so why the xfer of control -- Fredricton - Fck -- and in reality are all approaches in a multi crew are PMA or they certainly should be - I just have a major issue with xfering control at minimums --

[av8ts]

Well Charlie i have to disagree with you. I've been doing PMA approaches for 20 years and they are way safer than a pilot flying inside ( instruments ) down to minimums then trying to switch to looking outside and find the runway at the last second, and then switch back to instruments again to fly a missed if required. Imho.