WJ + CYOW + Slippery Rwy = Overrun

[Willie Everlearn]

It's nice to see no one was injured in this mishap. Does anyone have the weather sequence for the night in question?
I'm only speculating here but it looks like the spoilers might not have been armed and possibly the auto brake?

Anyone have a comment?

[wallygator]

Hey, I have a comment. I think that by speculating, you may end up with egg on your face. I'm just speculating though....

[quietwing]

WX reports covering the period (apporx 0400Z)

CYOW 180700Z 05006KT 1 1/4SM -RA BR OVC022 01/01 A2940 RMK FG3SC5 SLP961
CYOW 180639Z 03004KT 1 1/2SM -RA BR OVC022 01/ RMK FG2SC6
CYOW 180631Z 03006KT 1 1/2SM BR OVC022 01/ RMK FG2SC6
CYOW 180600Z 04004KT 5SM BR OVC025 02/02 A2941 RMK SC8 SLP965
CYOW 180525Z 05007KT 4SM BR BKN026 OVC070 01/ RMK SC5AS3
CYOW 180500Z 11007KT 4SM -RA BR FEW012 SCT030 OVC070 02/02 A2941 RMK SF1SC2AS5 SLP967
CYOW 180420Z 13008KT 4SM -RA BR FEW012 SCT030 OVC080 02/ RMK SF1SC2AS5
CYOW 180400Z 13007KT 2SM BR SCT011 OVC030 01/01 A2945 RMK FG2SC2SC4 MOON VISBL SLP979
CYOW 180334Z 10006KT 2SM BR BKN011 OVC030 01/ RMK FG2SF4SC2
CYOW 180300Z 11005KT 3SM BR OVC008 01/01 A2949 RMK SF8 SLP993
CYOW 180254Z 11006KT 3SM BR OVC008 01/ RMK SF8

[Willie Everlearn]

wallygator

Egg or not, you're so right! I don't mind. I simply like to speculate.
Speculating is so much fun. It generates conversation, debate and often thought. Good, bad or otherwise.
So, open 'er up. I've been wrong in the past, but I've also been right. :suspect:

Willie :ok:

[av8r76]

Even with speed brakes not armed they will deploy when:

wheel speed>60kts
levers at idle and
T/R's positioned for reverse thrust.

And with reports indicating icy rwy, autobrakes at gigamax would not have slowed her down. Looking at landing distance charts indicates shorter stopping distances with max manual.

Now if Antiskid was INOP that would be a whole other matter.

[wallygator]

Well Willie, I guess if you don't mind opening yourself up to look like an idiot, than go right ahead. Extremely unprofessional IMO. Read any good National Enquirers lately?

[Willie Everlearn]

av8r76

I'm familiar with the arming criteria, thanks ...
my assumption is that they may not have used reverse either.
Kind of like the "chain" model where a link has been broken. Maybe more than one link?

As for what the crew did or did not do, I realize it's too early to comment.
I'm speculating, with a bit of egg on my face which is apparently "unprofessional" according to wallygator. But I respect that opinion. I'm not here to gloat, merely to ask others their opinion which means you gotta start somewhere.

Why would anyone do that in a professional pilot forum?
(Maybe a little too unconventional for a Canadian audience)

Willie :ok:

[breguet]

What will be interesting to know was the value of the CRFI for the runways. Furthermore, was the amount of water on the runways determined? In the mean time, we just have to wait for the factual report from the CTSB...

[Tan]

IMHO mist at that temperature on a cold runway at best probably equates to poor braking conditions..

[North of You]

Willie Everlearn; “looks like the spoilers might not have been armed and possibly the auto brake”, “my assumption is that they may not have used reverse either”.

Wow. You gleaned all this information from what? No spoilers, no auto break, and no reverse.

(Let me give this speculation thing a try…here we go…)

I would speculate that the pilots were not even in the flight deck but rather in the back having drinks with some wayward Air France female flight attendants. No wait…the pilots were abducted…ya that’s the ticket…they were abducted by Iranian insurgents spies dressed like Air France female flight attendants while having drinks in to galley. But Iranian cross dressing insurgents wouldn’t know about things like spoilers and auto brake systems, but…… but aliens would.

So let the headlines read “Aliens from planet Znork, dressed as female Air France flight attendants cause jet to overrun runway in CYOW while pilots were drinking beer”.
(Hey that was fun…..):O

[Willie Everlearn]

North of You

I like the humorous retort but, try re-reading the original post.:ugh:

I'm not interested in slagging the airline, putting down the crew for what was or wasn't done. I wouldn't have the slightest idea. :{

I threw out a speculative remark to see if it would generate similar comments from other professionals. Not would-be hacks.:mad:
(auto break is spelled auto brake, by the way)

I don't mind your immaturity, but I'd rather know what you thought might have happened here? It's kind of the essence of a "Rumour Network" and the reason behind 'speculation'.:ugh:

Then again, judging by your remarks, I'm not sure you get it.

[ex-beagle]

I don't know about the use of speedbrake, autobrake, or reverse, but apparantly it was a long landing according to the TSB.

[skidoodog]

Having a little experience in the area, this might be helpfull.

I drove just south of the airport a couple of hours before this incident. ****e wx. Patchy freezing rain. Had my full and undevided attension trying to stay on the road.

Ottawa airport is well known to have strong winds aloft. I have seen 65 kts out of the west at the marker and light easterly winds on the surface. Strange local phenominon. Makes a stabilized approach to 07 a challenge but doable if you are ready for it. The increase in performance as you decend out of 500 ft agl often causes longish landings.

Spoke to others who landed jets in YOW earlier in the day. They commented that it was slippery but not nill braking. YOW field maintenance was having trouble keeping on top of the runway conditions despited repeated applications of deice chemical.

My guess from the comfort of my armchair.

Expected a runway in better shape than it was. Once commited it was too late to do anything but ride it out. They almost made it too.

Thankfully no one hurt. Embarasing for the crew and West Jet. Inconvenient for the pax.

We all do our best to evaluate runway and landing conditions. Sometime we get poor or no information and have to rely on our experience.

This sort of incident will happen from time to time as long as we fly in winter.

The Dog

[Smurfjet]

What was the date of this mishap?

I confirm TheDog's comment about the wind behavior on final approach for 07.

Willie why did you assume the spoilers were not armed, instead of say a brake malfunction (not necessarily mechanical)?

[North of You]

Tisk tisk. Now there you go calling me names. I found another incident a professional such as yourself can comment on.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2008/02/22/4869067-ap.html (http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2008/02/22/4869067-ap.html)

What do you think there Willie. You think maybe they forgot to retract the nose gear after they retracted the mains? Or maybe they were flying too fast and the air pressure forced the nose wheel to go cock eyed? Speculate away.

Or maybe try this. Keep wildly unsubstantiated speculation based on not a thread of evidence to yourself. And instead of going on the web and shooting your mouth off about something you know nothing about, ask yourself this very simple question: Are my comments going to lead the general public, who may read it, from misconstruing my comments and causing a loss of confidence by them towards this airline? If yes to any of the above…keep them to yourself. Don’t you see, comments such as questioning the professionalism and proficiency of the flight crew before any facts what so ever are gathered can, and have in the past, spread like wildfire and sometimes take on a life of their own.

To summarize: There is nothing wrong with asking “What do you think happened”. There is something wrong with stating “they forgot to arm the auto break”. :p Got it?

[Willie Everlearn]

North...

I'm not type rated on the MD80. Nor am I interested in American Airlines.
Although they did retire 347 Senior Captains in one day about three Fridays ago.:D

I have done a couple of years of Test Pilot sh*t on the B737-600/700/800, which is why I'm courious about this incident. And if you go back to my original post, I didn't say they forgot to arm the spoilers, nor did I say they didn't arm the Auto Brake. But if you were sharp enough to notice, you would already know that.

Apparently not.:ugh:
The essence of my "question" was what do you think happened? Care to throw something out there? :ok: Some 'professional' comments rather than more of childish drivel written in your last two posts?

By the way, any old hack writer would know that aliens from Znork have been unable to penetrate the Milky Way for centuries.
Really!? What do you take me for?

[North of You]

In post one you wrote: “…..it looks like the spoilers might not have been armed and possibly the auto brake”

In post five you wrote “I didn't say they forgot to arm the spoilers, nor did I say they didn't arm the Auto Brake”

I think you did.

[Willie Everlearn]

North,
:ouch:
The spoilers were probably armed, but I'm suggesting they 'might' not have been armed, but assuming they were, did they deploy? Were they locked out? Was a reverser locked out? What flap setting did they use? 25 or 40? I'm just trying to elicite comments from 'the pilot rumour mongers' out there? Allowing for hydroplanning on touchdown if they were armed, weren't armed or arming failed, a false speed signal from the anti skid would not deploy the spoilers. So much to speculate over?

...over the years, a number of straight-off-the-end overruns have occurred and in similar circumstances. In the majority, speed brakes weren't armed, for, I suppose a variety of reasons, resulting in an overrun.

I have every confidence in the WJ crews who are just as highly professional and polished as the next airline and it would be folly to suggest otherwise. I'm not.

But like I said, the stats are pretty clear when things like this happen.

In recent times, a B747 out of YHZ failed to achieve flight due to a miscalculation in V-speeds. What professional crew would ever do that?
I've done the LCC gig. For my money and from my perspective you can have the 25 minute turn arounds on a sh*tty day, with revised load figures, re-calculated takeoff numbers on contaminated runways with de-icing to add to the lateness of your flight.

My further suspicion is that, while this is yet to be know or proven, it IS the kind of vortex many professional crews find themselves in today. I'm sure WJ is no exception.

This isn't about sensitivities. If it is, and I've touched a nerve, I apologize.
I just wish you would expand on the Znorkians dressing up as women. I highly suspect our Iranian friends wouldn't allow them in the country as non-muslims dressed as female flight attendants.

Do you?

[wallygator]

Interesting Willie, you say:

"I have done a couple of years of Test Pilot sh*t on the B737-600/700/800,......"

....and then you ask the questions:

"What flap setting did they use? 25 or 40?"

Hmmmm.....:confused:

[+TSRA]

You know guys, I see both sides to the fence on this one. For one, Willy, I can see your reason for wanting to have a professional discussion about what could have been a serious accident. At the same time though I see wallygators point of not speculating because of the adverse media attention this industry gets (especially those reporters who act like "ambulance chasers") from such comments.

There are two issues, one good and one bad. The "good" point is discussion of any incident - even speculating - allows us all to think of the consequences of another pilots actions, learning from them and possibly saving ourselves the same fate one day. Also, for those younger pilots who do not have the experience of flying in the soup it gives them an excellent insight into what they need to learn up on to work in the industry. I for one still watch the Discovery Channel to watch the air disaster programs for the simple reason it keeps you thinking (ok decreasing airspeed, increasing aoa with the power trying to increase while the aircraft is not gaining altitude in IMC, Ms. B Betty begins screaming and shaking her stick at you, all the while you have focused your attention on a burnt out bulb or blown C/B...).

On the other hand, speculation is the one recipe for reporters to start cooking rumours about (we've all read about that new mod Cessna has on a 152...you know, the retractable landing gear?). If they see a professional discussion, with no name calling or mud slinging the beast known as a reporter will simply go back under the rock. If, however, there is commotion and arguments, they come out from under the rock because something "interesting" is happening. Even if they are dead wrong it is us who fed them, and the best way to begin the feeding process is to start off by saying "Im only speculating here, but...". No where in the world will you find a sentance more likely to generate an argument. :} (except maybe "the war is over, victory is achieved?") :\

Thats just my 2c though.

Oh...and BTW, I've always prefered an Orion Slave Girl myself. :O

[Willie Everlearn]

+TSRA...excellent remarks and appreciated.

I've often wavered on the so-called media coverage over the years. No one, or not many from our profession (except for Jim Nance) stands to present factual information to the media when any aircraft accident or incident occurs. I'm not suggesting, by any means, I'm the person to do that nor would I want to be. But, if the industry continues to be 'stand-off-ish' about it, the stupidity in the press will continue. The media thurst for information in the early hours of an incident is all that motivates them. The lurkers in this forum from the media are simply stuck for ideas, so I would think a credible comment in a forum like this would be reasonable rather than letting them speculate or insinuate what happened.

Wallygator...
I'm not sure I understand your comment.
Normally, NG operators land with a F30 configuration. By allowing for Human Factors (usually part of any incident) Murphy's Law, etc., I think it's plausible (however unlikely statistically) that a flap selection either side of 30 might have resulted. But I'm only speculating.
We won't know the facts till the TSB publish them.

[+TSRA]

I would agree with you that the industry as a whole is very insular about what information gets out to the public in the minutes, hours and days after an incident or accident. Its almost as if we all feel naked when someone, like a reporter, starts asking questions that in the normal course of our day would never be answered. By no means do I agree with this, but at the same time I don't want to be up front taking the heat either.

The problem is, though, that even a credible statement can be turned to the "dark side", if you will. I used the Cessna example in my last post because I have experience with just such a case where a 152 had a tire problem and circled around until the pilot felt confident enough to land(which required the story of the retractable landing gear). The press release the company put out stated it was nothing more than a blown tire, and the pilot was only circling for safety reasons, but the media decided to do their own thing anyways.

I would still agree though that it is better to put facts to the media, and if speculation is done on the boards, it is done in a professional manner - not the mud slinging, childest ranting that seems to preoccupy most forums...as fun as taking the devils advocate sometimes can be...