Runaway Lear Jet At Gatwick

[GBALU53]

Just heard that on Friday the 18th a Lear Jet was at Gatwick with both engines running , one of the crew members vacated the aircraft to check on something, on returning to the cockpit the crew member triped in the cockpit and hit the starboard throttle and doing so the aircraft went for a trip aroiund the apron and hit a parked vehicle in doing so.:\ :\

One of the crew sustained a broken leg i believe in the incident, and the aircraft if in a hangar somewhere the aircraft registration D-CNIK any further details on this??:sad: :sad:

[Superpilot]

On the ground of course...

[AlphaWhiskyRomeo]

Not another accident for Cirrus???

They only overran LTN a month ago or so.


www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=431862

[Out Of Trim]

Oh so that's what happened - I passed by the 140's that night and saw that the aircraft was parked so extremely close to a silver vehicle that it looked like it was leaning on it. It obviously was! - I clocked some LGW police vehicles in the area but wasn't sure what was going on..

Oops!

[Blu2]

I heard it slightly differently...

Apparently they had the starboard engine running and the Capt. was dealing with ground services/catering when the F.O. accidentally kicked the throttle getting into his seat. The handling agent and Capt. were then 'pinned down' by the aircraft as they attempted to stop the aircraft by pushing the nose (no parking brake/chocks??) and that the Captain is still in a critical condition in hospital!

Am hoping for his sake that this is rumour control and that it is indeed 'just' a broken leg.

Unlucky couple of months for Cirrus though, bet their client base is diminishing rapidly ....

Blu

[Looooong haul]

Was it the same tail as in LTN?

[BizJetJock]

Unlikely, since one was a Challenger and the other a Lear.

[arem]

did he have his yellow vest on?

[Freeway]

If he had his yellow vest on then he will be uninjured. We all know that by wearing the yellow vest we can't be injured or killed. Best piece of safety equipment ever invented.

[ultimatepro63]

parking brake ?

[Glass Half Empty]

shmarking brake!

[WideBodiedEng]

.....the F.O. accidentally kicked the throttle getting into his seat......
What the hell was he doing out of the seat with an engine running??:mad: :mad: :mad:

[Bomber Harris]

He was looking for his yellow vest....to prevent an accident!!!

[Looooong haul]

Any feedback on the Cirrus 604 that overrun a few weeks ago? I cannot find the post anymore....

[Skid_Mark]

If the FO had been wearing a hi-viz vest at the time, he wouldn't have kicked the throttles, it's obvious! :rolleyes:

[OLNEY 1 BRAVO]

The CL604 is still at Luton being repaired. It was in one of the Harrods hanger but is now in a Signature hanger.

I understand that the runaway Lear Jet has left Gatwick this morning.

[Looooong haul]

Thanks Olney

Any pre lim feedback on what happened?

[OLNEY 1 BRAVO]

Sorry ... not heard anything yet other than the eye witness reports at the time that it landed very long and fast.

[EESDL]

I believe Interflight were handling it - first telephone they received from the operator was to see how the aircraft was - not the pilot!

[Consol]

Folks, Learjet parking brake is to be trusted as far as a ...They can slip off even when the handle is correctly set and the parking brake on light is...on! Very simple cable pinch design. Treat with extreme caution and never get out of your seat with an engine running. Sometimes corporate types need to slow down and wait, these big wigs aren't as important as they think or they'd hire a G550!

[GashShag]

I was reading a very informative newspaper yesterday.... from "The Sun"!
Does anyone know any more?

FULL NEWS INDEX ››


By JAMIE PYATT
September 15, 2006

A PASSENGER jet pilot nearly died when he fell out of a door and was run over by his own plane.

The 42-year-old tumbled under the wheels and was dragged along the runway at Gatwick.

The luxury Learjet 45 had surged forward during pre-flight checks — after the co-pilot accidentally knocked a thrust lever.

The jet commander was making his way to the cockpit from the rear of the plane and fell sideways through the open door.

He was seriously injured when he was crushed under the aircraft’s wheels and dragged across the tarmac.

The black twin-engine executive jet — which had no passengers on board — also hit a ground worker and crashed into a parked vehicle before spinning to a halt.

Details of the incident were revealed in a report by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch.

It said the Paris-bound jet was being prepared for take-off when the co-pilot hit the thrust lever.

The report added: “Engine power was increased to 70 per cent and the aircraft moved forwards. The commander fell from the open doorway.”

It said the plane, which can take up to ten passengers, was based in Germany, and the unnamed pilot was German

[FCS Explorer]

yeah, sure.
the lear is sitting on the rwy, engines running, no parking brake, door open, CP decides to go for a nice little walk in the oh-so-spacious cabin. dumb-nut RHS knocks the lever, engines jump to 70% without spool-up and the guy doesn't pull the lever back untill inertia is overcome and the can starts moving. and as it's rolling he forgets how to operate the brakes.

if only all accident schemes where so clear.

[Out Of Trim]

Not on a Runway! - but on a remote stand at Gatwick. The way I heard it was that the Co-pilot tripped in the Cockpit and fell onto the thottles pushing it up to 70% as the Captain was entering the cabin after his walkround.

See AAIB Report here:-

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/september_2006/learjet_45__d_cnik.cfm

[fmgc]

Doors open, engines running and nobody in any of the pilot seats?

hmmmmmm

[outofsynch]

very hard to have sympathy with someone who needs so much protection from his own stupidity.

[FCS Explorer]

..and once again the exec sector lives up to it's cowboy s.o.p. reputation.:ouch:

[PAXboy]

The last line of the summary seems to have the nub of it:
The correct procedure for starting an engine had not been observed.

[LRdriver II]

..and once again the exec sector lives up to it's cowboy s.o.p. reputation.:ouch:

Yes..of course... just like the airline world is oh-so-squeeky clean and such muppetry does not exist.
:hmm:

[Panama Jack]

Good that you mentioned the pilot was German, because I was starting to wonder if it was the same putz who took OY-JET swimming in Atlantic City.

Heck, I'm sure the FO hesitated for a moment when he considered the possibility of a quick upgrade. Captains-- always be nice to your First Officers!

[EatMyShorts!]

I think this incident was discussed in PPRUNE a few months ago already, have a look! I talked to the handling agent who was involved in that.... the pilot's company called the handling office and asked how THE PLANE was!!!!! German biz aviation, a lot of crappy companies.

[Varnish]

..and once again the exec sector lives up to it's cowboy s.o.p. reputation.:ouch:
FCS Explorer - Cowboys exist in all sectors of this industry so I think it's unfair to tar us all with the same brush! I get increasingly annoyed by the arrogant way the exec sector is dismissed like this. I work for a respected bizjet operator where we all take sops seriously and maintain a very high standard of operation. :cool:

[FCS Explorer]

Yes..of course... just like the airline world is oh-so-squeeky clean and such muppetry does not exist.
:hmm:

am not sayin airliners are pure bliss, but there's definetly less self-made procedures and more adherence to sops. larger fleet-> more jocks -> more fresh CP-FO-combinations-> less "hey-u-know-me-let's-do-it-this-way" ops.

i do know guys in exec. nice guys. but when they tell me their adventures ("dude, that was so cool...") i get a chill and i don't wonder anymore, why they can't get in the bus driving biz. it's just a state of mind - thing. we are paid to do it the boring way. adventure is not a part of the plan.

[smallfry]

such professionals in the airlines like the crew of a bright orange and white airbus at luton on tuesday morning at about 730am who set take off power while still in the turn-around on runway 26 and consequently nearly -main wheels within 6 foot of runway edge ( skid makes to prove it ) went off the side of the runway towards the three or four aircraft waiting at A to line up?.

I would love to have heard how the "boring and non adventurous" crew explained that away to the terrified pax in the back.

Did these same professionals worry too much? no they asked to exit at C and have another go.

If thats SOP, wow.

There is no point in painting everyone with the same brush. Professionalism is up to the individual, not the name of the company. You can fly a cessna 152 and behave professionally.

[His dudeness]

FCS Explorer,
smallfry has it right...

I think, also the airlinersworld is full of noncompliance to SOPS to...like e.g. taking off from the wrong runway...just to mention a recent accident. Or the 737 that landed on the wrong airport...or the dudes that left their assigned flight level to take pictures of another aircraft over the north atlantic, I could continue forever.

No point in this.

The exec world is totally different from the airlinersworld, especially in the preflight phase. Would you please refrain from calling my collegues and me mind cowboys ? ("it's just a state of mind - thing. we are paid to do it the boring way. adventure is not a part of the plan.")

[FCS Explorer]

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/Table1.htm

accidents per 100.000 FLT hrs:

scheduled: 0.171
"on-demand": 2.02

factor btw those numbers is 11.8


http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/Table9.htm
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/Table6.htm

and smallfry: don't mix up mistake and intentional deviation. take-off from the wrong runway is a mistake. making a trans-atlantic photo-tcas-f*ck-up is a intentional deviation.

[mambo15]

hmmm... he said factor, not difference:}

[FCS Explorer]

ok, step by step.
just slide the decimal 2 digits to the right.
u get
17.1 (seventeen-point-one)
and
202 (two-hundred-and-two)

even without a calculator you should see that the ratio between those numbers can never be something like 1 or 2.
it has to be around 10

and if u actually use a calculator for 202 : 17.1 =
11.812865497076023391812865497076

the reverse value for the equation is 1 : 11.812..... =
0,0846534....

[discountinvestigator]

and smallfry: don't mix up mistake and intentional deviation. take-off from the wrong runway is a mistake. making a trans-atlantic photo-tcas is a intentional deviation.

Please do not mix up rule violations with other types of error. The take-off from the wrong runway has yet to be allocated its error type. It might have been a slip/lapse/rule based mistake/knowledge based mistake. Those are the simple categories to consider, they get a lot more complicated at the next level down.

What you will find is that the initiating event will probably fall into the rule based mistake category, that there might have been the odd rule violation, there is likely to be a lapse or two and a couple of other mistake types in the recovery factors which failed in this case.

The cognitive modelling of the individual crew members could be quite interesting for this case. Certainly, I suspect that there will be a lack of knowledge in some areas. Still, even the updated Jepps are wrong, let alone those charts carried by the crew.

I bet there was even a "frequency gambling" type in the wrong runway take-off accident.

Happy landings

Discount.

[Stan Woolley]

Sorry but from experience of both operations I agree entirely with FCS Explorer.Of course some airlines are gash but the recognised best practise is more defined and widely accepted.

I believe it's also true that a good 152 pilot will probably be a good operator in any aircraft.

Apologies to disciplined pilots everywhere.

(BTW the very experienced guy who taught me to fly was by my definition as gash as can be. He did however have his own disciplines and had forgotten more about GA flying and instruction than I'll ever know and was fantastic to be with in an aeroplane)

[smallfry]

I never said anything about mistake vs intentional.

You are confusing me with another poster. The event I witnessed last week was not taking off from the wrong runway. It was a crew being unprofessional. Yes it was a mistake, but I am sure the rules that you are so fond of are not the ones saying add take off power half way through a 180 to line up. - Therefore it was 1. a mistake (of judgement), 2. intentional (unless airbus autothrottles are self setting during taxi), 3. unprofessional ( - Or would you like the world to think anything else?)

My point is this.

Dont tar all GA Operations with the unprofessional tag.

The professionalism is upto the crew.

Airline ops tend to have better safety nets to catch the unprofessional errors before they cause a smoking hole in the ground.
GA ops often operate into a wider variety of airports than the Schedules, and often there is no regular routing. Operating every flight into unfamiliar airports increases your exposure to more mistakes.
I am not arguing with your statement that Airline ops are statistically safe, I am merely stating that its is up to the crew to operate as Professionals.

I have been long employed in both the Airline and Business Aviation sectors. I like both. I have a lot of respect for all my collegues in both fields. I do not like unprofessional acting ATLP holders. Do you see what I am saying?

[potatowings]

An unfortunate incident, and I have notices some people casting a judgemental eye upon us biz jet boys and girls, and I would just like to say...

Please understand that we are not flying airliners with all the crew and support staff and we do most of the work ourselves.

Unfortunately I think this was probably a simple mistake of not setting the parking brake properly.

Now thats not something anybody else in the aviation world could ever achieve now is it?????

Anyhow, that's my $0.02 worth.

[Back at NH]

Hmm! Kick start a lear eh?:D