Bae 146

[FJS]

As you've probably heard the Havarikommisjonen in Norway just came out yesterday and declared that the non-functioning spoilers on the BAE 146 that crashed on Stord last week was a main/major factor in the accident.

This sounds unreasonable to me. I flew a Learjet 55 and the spoilers weren't a "necessecity" in stopping the aircraft. All numbers were based on wheel brakes only, and spoilers and reversers were an extra help in the stopping process.

Any BAE 146 drivers out there who care to comment?

[CPDN]

As you've probably heard the Havarikommisjonen in Norway just came out yesterday and declared that the non-functioning spoilers on the BAE 146 that crashed on Stord last week was a main/major factor in the accident.

This sounds unreasonable to me. I flew a Learjet 55 and the spoilers weren't a "necessecity" in stopping the aircraft. All numbers were based on wheel brakes only, and spoilers and reversers were an extra help in the stopping process.

Any BAE 146 drivers out there who care to comment?

As the BAe146 relies solely on its brakes, the spoilers/lift dumpers are needed in order to forces the weels onto the runway thence enhancing the stol capabilities.

[Nordic Spirit]

It still puzzles me how this accident could happen only because of faulty spoilers. My gues is a classic hot&high situation combined with the spoilers not deploying.
At least somebody did something wrong combined with the spoilers

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

Well, aqua planing comes to mind. Consider a smooth landing on a wet rwy with spoilers U/S.

[Nordic Spirit]

Well, aqua planing comes to mind. Consider a smooth landing on a wet rwy with spoilers U/S.

True enough, but was there any aqua?:) The runway was supposedly more or less dry.

[CSI Oslo]

From bt.dk

Fly fra København måtte nødlande





Endnu engang er et fly fra Atlantic Airways ramt af fejl – og måtte på vej fra København nødlande i skotske Glasgow. I oktober døde tre, da et af selskabets fly forulykkede i Stord Lufthavn i Norge.



Selskabet har ifølge norske VG Nett nu taget konsekvensen, og besluttet at fjerne flyet af typen BAe 146-200 og levere det tilbage til udlejningsselskabet.

- Nu gider vi ikke mere! Flyet er med øjeblikkelig virkning taget ud, siger pressetalsmand Bjørn Simonsen fra Atlantic Airways.

Den samme maskine, som landede med flaps-problemer (luftbremserne) i Glasgow på vej fra København, var for nylig involveret i en lignende episode i Bergen Lufthavn, siger han.

Det var ved den lejlighed i øvrigt tredje gang i løbet af efteråret, at selskabets fly, var involveret i højhastigheds-landinger i Bergen p.g.a. problemer med luftbremserne.

Den værste ulykke skete 10. oktober, da et fly fra selskabet kørte af banen. Det kostede fire livet. Spoilerne som skulle reducere farten efter at flyet nåede jorden, rørte sig ikke en centimeter.

- Det fly, som vi nu dropper, har været til service og justeret efter alle kunstens regler, siger Bjørn Simonsen til VG. Så nu kan det være nok!

I starten af januar indsætter vi en nyere maskine, en af typen Avro RJ100, siger pressetalsmanden.

Flyet i går var på vej fra København til Færøerne, da problemerne indtraf. Og besætningen valgte denne gang ikke at nødlande i norske Bergen, men i stedet Glasgow.

[UP and Down Operator]

This sounds unreasonable to me. I flew a Learjet 55 and the spoilers weren't a "necessecity" in stopping the aircraft. All numbers were based on wheel brakes only, and spoilers and reversers were an extra help in the stopping process.

Any BAE 146 drivers out there who care to comment?

I have never been flying the learjet, but am quit experienced on the 146. I think the reason why you can rely on the brakes alone in a learjet might be because it is so light.
When you land a 146, it is very normal to have a weight of between 31-35 tons. So to stop this weight with only brakes, it is very important to have as much weight on the wheels as possible to give them a good contact with the rwy. Otherwise they will just start to block and skid (hence we have anti-skid but this is not enough in this case). The brakes are very effective, but the need to have the full A/C weight on them.
Rule of thumb is, that if the spoilers don't work, the landing distance will be increased by 40%.

[spagiola]

Is there a link to the report (ideally in English)? I could find nothing on-line, even the all-knowing all-seeing Google gave me a blank.

[Nardi Riviera]

That's because it isn't out yet.

Re accidents with fatalities they need some time to complete the report. Even years.

When it is published, someone here will probably pull this thread up again.

:)

[Mister Geezer]

A light 146-200 will require a Landing Distance of around 1100m. A heavy one will require around 1300m. NB That is a LDR figure and not the actual ground roll.

So with the best case scenario with a light aircraft then the LDR of 1100m increases up to 1540m with no lift spoilers. When you take the safety factor out of that figure then the ground roll is going to be similar to the LDA at Stord which is 1200m.

Not a nice situation to be in and the crew sadly had little chance of stopping.