737 veered off landing runway at Arrecife

[readywhenreaching]

seems an AEA 737-800 departed the landing runway this morning at ACE

Flight from Glasgow comes off runway in Lanzarote - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5053349.ece)

[The SSK]

In Spanish, with picture:

Un avión se sale de la pista al aterrizar en Lanzarote · ELPAÍS.com (http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/avion/sale/pista/aeropuerto/Lanzarote/elpepuesp/20081031elpepunac_2/Tes)

[Pilot Pete]

Looks like an over-run to me....

Runway 21 - 7874' long with a VOR approach with a 6.5%/ 3.7 degree final descent gradient, offset 13 degrees from runway centreline.

GCRR 310600Z 28011KT 250V310 9999 -RA FEW010 BKN022 18/15 Q1014=
GCRR 310600Z 28011KT 250V310 9999 -RA FEW010 BKN022 18/15 Q1014=
GCRR 310630Z 29004KT 270V330 9999 FEW018 BKN090 18/14 Q1014=
GCRR 310630Z 29004KT 270V330 9999 FEW018 BKN090 18/14 Q1014=
GCRR 310700Z VRB02KT 9999 FEW025 SCT100 18/14 Q1014=
GCRR 310700Z VRB02KT 9999 FEW025 SCT100 18/14 Q1014=
GCRR 310730Z 24004KT 210V280 9999 FEW025 SCT100 18/14 Q1014=
GCRR 310730Z 24004KT 210V280 9999 FEW025 SCT100 18/14 Q1014=
GCRR 310800Z 27009KT 9999 FEW025 BKN075 19/15 Q1014=
GCRR 310800Z 27009KT 9999 FEW025 BKN075 19/15 Q1014=

A video clip rtve.es/noticias - Un avión de Air Europa se sale de pista en Lanzarote sin producir heridos (http://www.rtve.es/noticias/20081031/avion-air-europa-sale-pista-lanzarote-sin-producir-heridos/186333.shtml) shows it looks like it is still on its wheels, right at the end of the video. Doesn't look like it hit anything, merely stopped over the far end?


PP

[xplorer]

That was close... a few more feet and they'd be taking swimming lessons!! Does anyone know the cause?

[Avman]

From Times Online October 31, 2008

Flight from Glasgow comes off runway in Lanzarote
(Adrian Pingstone )

The Air Europa crash-landing will add to concern about low-budget airline safety

Graham Keeley, in Barcelona
An Air Europa flight from Glasgow to Lanzarote in the Canary Islands crashed off the runway today as it was about to land.

Flight UX-196 developed problems with its undercarriage as it was about to touch down and it finally landed in beach area near the airport.

Don't you just love the standard of reporting - especially the last paragraph :yuk:

[Ennie]

Quote from The Times

"The Air Europa crash-landing will add to concern about low-budget airline safety"

What a load of Bollocks.

[Getoutofmygalley]

That was close... a few more feet and they'd be taking swimming lessons!! Does anyone know the cause?

I would be inclined to believe that they actually have a fair amount of way to go before they were needing swimming lessons.

Just in case anyone has missed it, on the link on the second post, where you can see the picture of the aircraft in the RESA area, to the right of that picture is a GOOGLE Earth image, you can move that image so that you have an excellent view of the runway from above.

After the RESA, there is possibly a road, then a beach then finally the sea.

The Times Online claims the aircraft landed on the beach, but are they just going by the picture from 'Elpais' or have they actually been there and taken a photo at the correct end of the runway?.

The Elpais photo does make it look like the aircraft is almost in the water, but you are seeing a photo taken with a telephoto lens which distorts the proportions of everything.

If you look at the GOOGLE Earth image you will be able to get a better feel for where the aircraft is :)

[CornishFlyer]

What an irrespsonsible idiot that Times reporter is. Underneath the picture of the Air Europa a/c, he writes, "The Air Europa crash-landing will add to concern about low-budget airline safety". What an ignorant comment. As if being a budget airline means you're going to be subject to any more problems than a legacy carrier. Look at AF which overshot the runway at YYZ in 2005 or obviously the BA flight that belly flopped at LHR earlier this year. Stupid reporter

[Agaricus bisporus]

We are so quick to berate the press for printing rubbish!

Misunderstandings often stem from imperfect terminology or sloppy use of language.

We are not exempt from this either, are we?

These two nonsense phrases are quoted from the above thread, one the thread headline!! A foreigner - even an Englishman - might well puzzle over why/how a runway was landing, mightn't he? And when did anyone last see a beach clothed?


departed the landing runway


isn't there a nude beach


Glass houses and stones come to mind...

[HXdave]

looking on google earth, there is an area past the runway (heading out towards sea) with what looks like yellow V's & W's. is this an arrester bed, or just some standard / non standard markings?

[tubby linton]

I am surprised at the choice of runway used as the Jepp10-9 states that 03 is the preferential runway even with a tailwind component of up to 10kts.The Vor approach to RW21 is challenging due to its descent gradient and also the nature of the steeply sloping terrain underneath it.Westerly winds come off the surrounding hills and can produce winds very different to those on the surface.ILS 03 is always my preferred option at this airfield until the tailwind exceeds 10kts .

[Getoutofmygalley]

BBC News channel just showed a picture of the aircraft, from the over side of the airport perimiter fence. The aircraft is in the RESA area and has not gone outside of the airport boundary area and the perimiter fence is undamaged.

[mckionna]

3.7 degree?
I don't know the approach,but I thought 3.5 was maximum for cat C aircraft.

[HundredPercentPlease]

You thought incorrectly, and clearly have never done the VOR 05 at LSGG!

[Madbob]

TL

I agree with you 100%. Much happier with 03, but even then there is a pretty "solid" over-run:rolleyes:.

If you look in the photo with SSK's post there is a windsock on the extreme left which shows a crosswind from the west with perhaps a 40 degree headwind component for 21.

Can't tell the speed but on 03 this would have been a quatering tailwing from the left at a max of 10 kts. 03 also has an uphill slope for landing....

I don't know any more about this accident but I would consider Arrecife a "sporting" approach on 21 at the best of times.....

MB

[DVD]

More pictures at:

Un avión se sale de la pista en Lanzarote - 20minutos.es (http://www.20minutos.es/galeria/5358/0/0/)

DVD

[Pilot Pete]

3.7 degree?
I don't know the approach,but I thaught 3.5 was maximum for cat C aircraft. How about 4.46 degree at Chambery rwy 18?

PP

[barit1]

"Veer" -

Is that verb in the QRH? :}

[justme69]

I'm familiar with the airport. That is indeed the very very end of the runaway, sans the narrow service road.

Then it's pretty much the beginning of the beach, that has a bycicle runaway, which is also kind of narrow. Then it's sand and the ocean.

The airport was closed for a couple of hours, affecting other flights (like a Spanair that finally had to cancel).

The preferred landing and takeoff orientation is the oppossite. Wind permitting, of course. A couple of low mountains makes it preferable to approach from the south. The weather was a bit windy and "messed up" (cloudy, rained hard for like 10 minutes and then scattered clouds, very variable). Now it's mostly sunny.

The beach is clothing optional. Most people wear clothing, though, as the real "nudist" part is usually about 1km northeast.

It's usually a very windy beach and seldom has any people at all. The good beaches start just a few hundred meter southwest.

But it's a great spot to watch landings and takeoffs.

Air Europa commented that it was an unstabilized approach, with some weather issues, but not the exact causes. Technically, it never left the pavement, but it landed at the very end of the safety area. It's a short runway, 2400m I think.

Couple more pictures here: Un avión se sale de la pista cuando aterrizaba en Guacimeta ::: lavozdelanzarote.com ::: La más palpitante actualidad de Lanzarote: noticias, anuncios, ... (http://www.lavozdelanzarote.com/spip.php?article22061)

It seems that there was no damage to the airplane.

[Romeo Oscar Golf]

Sorry folks but couldn't resist it.
From the BBC webpage report..
"It is reported to have ended up perpendicular to the runway"
:eek:

[clipstone1]

perpendicular......is that what they call the nose gear collapsing (since that's what it looks like in that pic?)

[justme69]

That would've been some feat :)

I did turn left a little and the end of the runaway has a small downward slope. The beach also slopes down a few degrees.

Witnesses report the airplane landing way long, touching down like halfway on the runaway.

Duh.

So far it looks like a plain bad landing with some variable wind issues. And a too-close for confort judgement call on the go-around.

PAX speaks of high speed landing with vibrations on the wings.

[rubik101]

It is also interesting to note the number of exits used for the supposed evacuation!
One of eight?
Steps or slides?

[justme69]

The PAX left the airplane through normal steps. No evacuation, just "normal" exit.

After PAX dissembarked, it just took a while to give it a check and figure out how to push it back with the airport pusher vehicles from there and take the luggage out.

The airport re-opened a couple of hours later.

Air Europa says the airplane is just fine and they will investigate the causes of the incident.

[El Grifo]

Just what I was thinking, deplaning via the steps.

There must have been a serious bit of worry amongst the pax whilst waiting to get out.

Thinking about it, that was probably the greatest danger, dealing with a load of bleary eyed, "refreshed", pissed off and freaked out weedgies.

Should be some good stories round the town tonight. :ok:

[One9iner]

video on the bbc..

BBC NEWS | Scotland | Flight skids off airport runway (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7701975.stm)

Can you see damage to the plane at around 1:02 ?

[kotakota]

Ah Chambery , possibly the only Cat C (+) airfield where you can be cleared for the ILS 18 ( yes 4.46 degree G/S ), think you've cracked it at 2500' , F.40 , Landing Checks completed , when ' Zut Alors ' , 'Rosbif 007 , carry out circling approach to R/W 36 , call downwind ' !! so , de-select APP , level at Circling , select Flaps to 15 and do what you are told - all so some 172 can take-off immediatement - cannot possibly wait until you have landed !!
vive Le Sport !!

[justme69]

It did look like some damage to me. Air Europa claims the airplane is fine, though, but maybe they just mean that it doesn't have any significant damage.

But that front landing gear doesn't look fine to me :=

[Jetjock330]

3.7 degree?
I don't know the approach,but I thought 3.5 was maximum for cat C aircraft.

Minus 5.8 degrees we use into Kathamdu VOR 02 (VNKT) in a A332. Not percent, but degrees! We reduce to minus 3,5 degrees at 4 DME to bring the speed back and stabilize.:ok:

[Arkroyal]

One9er:Can you see damage to the plane at around 1:02 No, can you?

[iwhak]

Getoutofmygalley.....another couple of feet and he was in serious trouble.....not so much a beach....but a serious rocky outcrop and then into the plinths that hold the approach lights......that was seriously close. I have noticed in the past and I know I'm going to be shot, but it tends to be Spanish operators that elect for straight in 21 when most others go round for 03.

[dicksorchard]

One9iner (http://www.pprune.org/members/257528-one9iner) I paused the video at 1.02 and it does look like a small area of damage .
The panel looks inverted like its been hit with something - looks distinctly like the hull was breached to me ! but then again what do i know ?

For all you experts out there - what exactly is that caved in area then ?

me thinks pax & crew had a lucky escape - glad everything is ok tho .

[Pilot Pete]

Justme69
But that front landing gear doesn't look fine to me

http://www.lavozdelanzarote.com/IMG/jpg/avion_accidentado_2.jpg

What looks wrong with it? I can't see anything obvious. After PAX dissembarked, it just took a while to give it a check and figure out how to push it back with the airport pusher vehicles from there So I doubt there was any damage to the gear then.:rolleyes:

It's a short runway, 2400m I think. 7874' as I posted on the first page. What makes you think that is short? It is not short for that type of aircraft....if you land in the right place. At 60T on a dry runway with a flap 30 landing maximum manual braking ref distance is 2955' or 900m. If the runway was wet with a good braking action the ref distance is 4720' or 1440m. This assuming that their -800s aren't equipped with a Short Field Performance package, which would of course reduce these figures.


Dick
For all you experts out there - what exactly is that caved in area then ? It is called an air intake for the air conditioning. No damge in that area as far as I can see.

PP

[dicksorchard]

Pilot Pete (http://www.pprune.org/members/19351-pilot-pete) Cheers Pete !

See how easy it is for us non pilots to talk bollocks ?

i've never noticed that air intake thingy before !

Thats the beauty of being on pprune - you learn something new every day .

[Rainboe]

iwhack, agree with your remarks. When I was there, I stopped my walkaround to watch a local MD-something taxi up to 21. I observed the windsock horizontal blowing from the NE. The wind was strong. I watched that take-off with great interest! This looks as close as you can get without bending metal- any further and they would have started sliding off the end and through the fence. Lucky escape. Guess you really can't be hot 'n high on a steep approach on a downhill runway!

[One9iner]

the air intake at 1:02 does look like it sustained some damage when compared to the below image... apologies if I'm incorrect. :ok:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7e/Aircraft_at_Oslo_Airport_Gardermoen2005_2.jpg/800px-Aircraft_at_Oslo_Airport_Gardermoen2005_2.jpg

[Super VC-10]

Air Europa says the airplane is just fine and they will investigate the causes of the incident.

I'd have thought that the Comisión de Investigación de Accidentes e Incidentes de Aviación Civil would want to investigate the accident. :confused:

[Pilot Pete]

the air intake at 1:02 does look like it sustained some damage when compared to the below image... apologies if I'm incorrect. Apology accepted.;) I can see NO DAMAGE and I fly the type. Take a look at http://www.sjap.nl/B-737-NG-WALKAROUND.pdf page 4 and tell me what looks so different?

PP

[One9iner]

I stand corrected. Thanks Pete. :)

[Imperator1300]

Looks like the RESA has perfect dimensions :\

[Spitoon]

I'd have thought that the Comisión de Investigación de Accidentes e Incidentes de Aviación Civil would want to investigate the accident.I'd expect the operator to as well, no??

[drivez]

I'd say that aircraft is a fair bit further than is shown on the google earth map. Not sure, but at that angle looks like the aircraft had some sort of control inputs from the pilot to make it turn like that, maybe an attempt to drastically slow the aircraft to stop it going into the water.

[ChristiaanJ]

I'd have thought that the Comisión de Investigación de Accidentes e Incidentes de Aviación Civil would want to investigate the accident.So far, it doesn't rate as an accident.
No injuries (pax even left simply by the steps).
No significant damage to the airframe.
This is an incident, not an accident.

That said, I agree the CIAIAC would want to look at it. The next occurrence may well be a full-blown accident.

CJ

[jafflyer]

Something immediately jumps into my mind.
I fly the 737 also and very often ACE.

Could it have been a long landing (after the 1000fts) and a "we'll have it stopped on time, don't worry!"?

Endless discussions... go around IS an option (and not a failure)

We have an internal safety magazine in the company and every time a story is told starting with the title: "Could this happen to you?"

of course not, not to me......not

F.

[ComJam]

No point in speculating about the cause as usual...

You really can't get closer to coming a cropper at GCRR than that though! I'll bet that had the spotters at the end of the runway running!

[Dairyground]

Romeo Oscar Golf

Sorry folks but couldn't resist it.
From the BBC webpage report..
"It is reported to have ended up perpendicular to the runway"


From some of the pics it looks fairly close to perpendicular in yaw, much less in pitch and hardly at all in roll.

[captplaystation]

Just watched a little clip on 2100 news in Spain. It would have looked slightly more professional if the aircraft ( filmed long after the overrun) had not been happily flashing the wing strobes for the cameras. :=

[justme69]

Just your usual bad landing, it seems.

The pilot had requested 21 instead of the operational 03 at the time (where MAP's MD83 tookoff clean last year and nearly crashed). Little variable wind. He came in high (there is elevated terrain on that approach) but didn't go around (a very common happening on that situation in this runaway). So he gained speed when he "forced it down".

He hit about the half mark in the runaway.

The airplane had the wheels changed (maybe just for the investigation) and departs tonight, so I guess indeed no damage.

[kaikohe76]

Hi Folks,

Some moons ago before giving up aviating for fishing, we used to take our fairly large 3 engined machine into GCRR. OK for any approach on 03, but in my opinion the 21 landing (steep offset descent path nasty terrain close in) gave very little lattitude for any error whatsoever, it was tight even with the 73/75s etc if the touchdown was a little late, nothing then but the sand & the sea. Not knowing the facts of this particular case, I would only assume the landing may have been fairly well down 21 & this did not help the guys at all, but other factors, brakes etc may well have played a part of course.
Perhaps it's time for the powers to be, to have another look at the approach procedures to 21, ask the operators who use GCRR for their opinions.

As in any incident, very glad to see that all on board got out ok, not the best way to start a holiday.

Regards

[captplaystation]

That perhaps more true for the PIC than the SLF, Oh forgot, unions are still in fashion in Spain so should be alright then.
Guess, like Spanair, the press will find a way to blame someone other than the Crew. How can they blame that nasty Mr Boeing for this one I wonder ? :rolleyes:

[justme69]

Union has already stated they will not comment until the CIAIAC investigation, but inmmediately added talk about work schedules, how the crew was highly qualified, etc.

It looks like maybe it's being rigged to indicate the pilot didn't have time in his work schedule to make the go around, so he landed "as soon as possible" and hence .... :ugh:

What are the regulations regarding work schedules if a flight is delayed, say for weather reasons while on a long haul etc and the pilots cross their schedule limit (obviously by an hour or two at worst)?

And about the strobe lights ... in a situation like this when an object is obstructing a runaway in an "unusual" circunstances, wouldn't it be better to leave the lights on? What is the usual protocol if you can't vacate the runaway? Turn everything off, set the parking brakes and leave the lights on?

[Sir George Cayley]

OK, the hook's there with a big fat juicy worm and I can't help biting:sad:

As my old, not bold instructor said "The amount of runway behind you at the point of touchdown is of no consequence whatsoever"

Sorry, I'm weak and was drawn into saying this.


Sir George Cayley

[Arthur Dent1]

A bit rich invoking loco airline safety, I have been :mad: over twice by a 'legacy' charter operator (if there is such a thing). Once when they went of the RET at LGW, not long after had my roster destroyed again by the BHX over run.

[captplaystation]

justme69, no pax in sight (already on their 3rd beer if it came from Glasgow) & loads of people in yellowjackets wandering round scratching their heads. Given that ATC knew the RW was blocked , not too many reasons to walk away from it leaving the lights merrily flashing away. If they let someone else land & he overan & hit AE there is rather more wrong than a set of strobe lights will solve. Just looks a bit gash to see an uncrewed aircraft sitting there obviously not "secured" following a deplanement as opposed to evacuation.

[justme69]

Thanks, captPS, just wondering if there was a regulation about having the lights on at all the time while in the runaway, even if for a couple of hours ;)

There was some footage on a TV station of the guys doing the investigation with a theodolite taking measures and marking the floor, but as I was typing it was removed and superseeded by some other news. Can't find a link now, I think it's gone.

The press also "confirms" the same version rumored here at the airport: nothing wrong with the airplane or the weather (although the weather was a bit messed up and variable). Pilot chose to land that approach and he landed late and fast.

Some local press talks about that being the orientation (opposite to normal) at the time, but that wasn't the case. The preferred orientation is 03 usually, and it was so at the time, but the weather permited either. The pilot requested and was authorized the closer from the north, direct-but-trickier approach to 21.

[MMENCLLBAMAN]

A worrying factor in my view was that the aircraft was carrying only 74 pax and crew to the Canary Islands during what is traditionally a busy time for holidaymakers (usually better weather than mainland)
I work for a tour operator and whilst loads like this were unheard of a two years ago they are becoming (for our sins) so much more commonplace now..... bad times!!!

From Travel Weekly
A spokesman for Air Europa said "There was a problem on landing"

No S*!&t Sherlock

[wee one]

Lets stop all this "lets not jump to conclusions" nonsense. Anyone who has been to aACE knows that this guy was a smart ass who sprogged his approach to 21, continued to land, and broke it.
Professional solidarity my arse. Macho culture evident daily operating down there. Encouraged by complicit atc. You know who they are.:mad:

[Facelookbovvered]

good job its the credit crunch, it could have been full!! it probably wouldn't have stopped where it did..............

[greatoaks]

my thoughts exactly

had the a/c had a full load of pax what would the stopping distance increase by
or did the pilot assume he could pull up short because of the light load ?

[justme69]

If he factored the weight as perfectly as he factored the rate of descend ...

I'd love to see the FDR for this ... spoilers and everything.

They indeed calculated it down to the meter. Literally.

[PitotTube]

http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/3825/picture3ay7.png
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/32/picture2as8.png
http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/8753/picture1ot2.png

[El Grifo]

MMENCLLBAMAN

The main reason for the low pax load is the fact that this being the half term period, the prices have doubled or tripled as is the norm at times like this.
I paid £285 for a one way onEasyjet from LGW to ACE a couple of days ago.

It is really screwing up the big Villa rental programme down here.

[chasb441]

Not an expert but on viewing the first video the flaps don't seem to be down to me. What would be the normal flap position for landing on this strip? :confused:

[Doors to Automatic]

Whenever I have landed at Luton (Rw 26) in a 737 we have always hit around the 1500ft mark and always clear the runway at the 5500ft point where the last taxiway is. We are usually at taxi speed about 500ft before. Easyjet 90% full plane most of the time.

This gives a ground run of 3500ft with healthy (but I suspect not max) braking.

On the ACE runway which is almost 8000ft this must have been a landing at least half-way down or even more, in other words well past the TDZ.

[muggins]

The main reason for the low pax load is the fact that this being the half term period, the prices have doubled or tripled as is the norm at times like this.

The Glasgow and West of Scotland half term was a couple of weeks ago. More likely the low figures due to the Scottish kids being at school.

[El Grifo]

Fair comment.

The highest recorded seat costs ever are cutting pax numbers severely, the villa rental market is wailing loudly.

Makes you wonder what the best strategy is. Low loads of high paying pax or bigger loads of lower paying pax.

The knock on effect here is visible to all.

[justme69]

Passengers inteviewed speak of strong smell of burning rubber and smoke coming out of the tires. Totally unstabilized descent with frequent roll corrections. Landed fast and hard, about half way through the runaway. Heavy braking and reversing.

Airplane is flying again after a wheel (tire?) change (perhaps only to be used by the investigators or to be closely inspected for defects after the hard landing). They also changed the brakes.

Air Europa, pilots union, etc, do not comment beyond the usual: it was a very experienced crew and the airplane was in perfect shape. It will be investigated (short for: the pilots messed up). The union is bitching about work schedules (seems the crew had been on duty for some 10 hours, it was the last leg of the cycle).

Weather was fine at the time. Runaway was dry.

cuatro.com - Videos (http://www.cuatro.com/videos/index.html?xref=20081031ctoultnot_4.Ves&view=alta)

The animation is not quite right, for a change. The final position had a bit of a turn to the left, but something like 35º, not 90º. For some reason the angle seems steeper than it really is in the pictures (probably because of telephoto). The downward slope angle also looks exaggerated on some photos.

Here they show it being pushed back:
Video: El exceso de velocidad, causa del aterrizaje de emergencia del avión de Air Europa en Lanzarote : Vídeos en ELPAÍS.com (http://www.elpais.com/videos/espana/exceso/velocidad/causa/aterrizaje/emergencia/avion/Air/Europa/Lanzarote/elpepiesp/20081031elpepunac_6/Ves/)

The news piece in the video wrongly states that the wind made the approach from the north necessary at that time. Not so. It was recommended the approach from the south but the weather permitted either one. The pilot requested voluntarily the landing on 21 to ATC and was granted.

[Wellington Bomber]

Looking at that approach plate and the weather, the decision height of approx 1600 ft and decent weather, if the profile was not looking good he should have gone around, full stop.

They continued and with still 4 miles to go up, with all these 737 jocks around and available if I was captain I would be very worried about being invited to see the chief pilot for tea but no jaffa cakes

[scotsunflyer]

Don't wish to speculate on the reasons for the incident, but some items that some may be interested in.

The aircraft had operated to Glasgow instead of Edinburgh, due to AEA refusing to land on the shorter 12/30 runway, as 06/24 was closed for resurfacing. This was the last flight back to Edinburgh of the season, operated for MYT. (Originally flights were operated by FUA)

As there are no returning flights to Edinburgh, hence why there were only 74 peoplpe on the flight back to ACE.

[justme69]

Go arounds in that approach are very common in ACE. No disgrace or further complications, just 10 more minutes wasted, 5 if you shoot for the 03 landing afterwards.

Funny how they didn't want to land in 1.7km in Edinburgh's short runaway and then had to do in 2.4km / 2 (touched down about half way).

It seems that ballpark NORMAL braking figures with both reversers for the type would be 1200-1600m (this doesn't mean, of course, that it can't do it in as little as 700m if necessary and the circunstances allow). Factor you can miss some 500m from the head, and you shouldn't really venture in anything much less than 2km, unless you are willing to brake a bit hard and able land on the spot on dry paviment.

Edimburgh is quite rainy this time of the year, which for a 737 could mean a minimun of 2km landing distance under most circunstances.

[El Grifo]

Right sunflyer.

I was trying to reinforce my high price seats point by checking this weeks flights but kept coming up blank.

Now I know why. Last one of the season etc etc.

Cheers El Grifo

[Philflies]

After looking at all the photos, the following quick question comes to mind.

On this photo:
Un avión se sale de la pista al aterrizar en Lanzarote · ELPAÍS.com (http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/avion/sale/pista/aeropuerto/Lanzarote/elpepuesp/20081031elpepunac_2/Tes)
Why can't you see the opposing approach lights? (the ones on concrete plinths going out to sea)

I would have thought from the angle the photo was taken you would see the continuation of the runway centreline, therefore including the approach lights?

Just an observation.

PF

[Rainboe]

Because it's a long telephoto shot and the distant sea is foreshortened and the intervening objects are hidden by the elevated runway end. So you would have thought wrong!

[justme69]

Well, there is a shallow downward slope and quite more distance than apparent to the first approach lights planted into the ocean, past the narrow beach.

The angle in that picture looks distorted, probably from the telephoto lens.

These videos shows the landings.

YouTube - Avion aterrizando en Lanzarote (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXFQm4w8sZ4)

YouTube - Landing Lanzarote (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMvM-VsVss0)

YouTube - avion aterrizando en lanzarote (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrptzJjHpNo)

If you wanna see the whole deal, you need to get close to the runaway and have some extra elevation. I put my daughter over my shoulders and tip-toe a couple of times when she was a child so she could see the airplane coming in and landing above the end barriers.


http://www.lanzarote.com/fotos_lanzarote/aeropuerto2_g.jpg

http://www.manbos.com/images/bd06/thumbs/lanzarote_mb_045.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/223/526082889_daf660f7e5.jpg?v=0

[Philflies]

Good point. Well made.
Thanks chaps.

[PlasticPilot]

Once again, media reporting has been less than perfect. Don't forget the media guys are here to sell copies and advertisements. I illustrated that by looking, weeks ago, what media were saying about the Spanair accident when the update was published.

The media ranged from "unknown cause" to "wing failure" via "wing flap failure".

[411A]

Ry 21 is very limiting...I've flown L1011's to ACE, Ry 03, thank you very much, for landing.
Much better.

[silverstreak]

ACE is an interesting airport, especially when the wind is gusting - situation normal... Seen many an aircraft float and porpoise along when landing from either direction. With a motorway an one end and Cala Honda, and the beach with lots of salt water at the other, its tight.

[Avman]

Last time I was in ACE I noted that some of the Scandinavian charter companies - whose a/c were probably the heaviest to depart, prefered 21 for departures when there was a crosswind, even with a slight (and light) tailwind component.

[tubby linton]

The final picture in those above of the approach to 21 does not convey how steeply the terrain slopes down towards the threshold.Any landing on 21 will invariably involve touching down deeper than usual unless you get very close to the terrain on the approach.This terrain is a major factor in departing 03 and is why many operators depart on 21.

[Bat Fastard]

Avman,
Reference departures, on the 320 you are pretty much limited to 3tons below normal mtow ( 74 ish instead of 77 tons) if using 03 but can get off 21 at 77 tons with a tailwind and a good flex.

[John Giles]

No one has mentioned the timing of this incident...
The crew had been "up all night" before this approach.
Who knows how much "proper" rest they got before the duty.

You can't just decide...well I'm flying through the night i better get some sleep during the day"...your body clock just dosen't want to know..

[dc9-32]

Just for added interest, I remember being up in Guime village in 1988 (was in the process of buying a villa), and from there we could look down the mountain side with a great view of the airport. On this occassion, we watched an Iberia B727-200 take off from what was then RWY04. Nothing unusual in that, except what followed shocked the s***t out of us. It turned LEFT and proceeded (with a huge amount of noise) to climb parallel with the contour of the mountain and then screamed through the (large) gap in the peak and headed away..........

Check the Jepps and a local map and put 2 and 2 together to get your own visual impression !!!!

[El Grifo]

The fun continues here at ACE.

Just picked up a friend who arrived on LS545 from NCL at 12.27
Aircraft had to do a last minute go around due to "dogs on the runway"


Anyone have any further info, justme maybe ??

[MPH]

El Grifo are you sure they were dogs? I thouhgt they were rabbits!!!;)

[justme69]

Lol.

Indeed a dog found his way through the metal fence yesterday, I think it was. Police phoned in ATC informing it had been seen inside the perimeter.

It took FOREVER to find him, affecting tons of flights. There were three waiting to land on the air when it was reported.

Firesquad finally cornered him and he left through the same fence opening he presumely came in.

The fence was noted for a patch repair.

There was even a false alarm when someone phoned in ATC saying it had been found. Just as a Binter was granted permission to takeoff, another call came in saying it was the wrong dog: that one belonged to some airport worker in the military area. The "real" wild one was found few minutes later.

Lots of lol.

Catching a run-away dog is not as easy a task as it seems, specially in a large area. Funny how such a small critter can cause so much trouble.

:)

[aguadalte]

Does any one knows what was the FOB after landing?:hmm:

[Pilot Pete]

Tubby Linton
Any landing on 21 will invariably involve touching down deeper than usual unless you get very close to the terrain on the approach. Err, why? If you follow the approach procedure and fly a constant descent rate crossing 6d at 2000' and then 400ft per nm you will arrive in the right place. Fly the correct airspeed too and if anything, a correctly flown 'steeper' approach has a corresponding touchdown point which is less than 1000ft into the runway. Chambery is again my example, where it even mentions in the briefing notes that the touchdown point due to the steep glideslope is circa 600' (from memory) in from the threshold.

Your theory is incorrect, it would be a shallower approach which would shift the touchdown point further into the runway.;)

I suspect it is aircraft flying the steeper approach and either flaring too early or having excess airspeed which leads to what you describe.

PP

[tubby linton]

Must be an optical illusion then PP.Always seem very adjacent to the terrain on this approach,perhaps because it slopes at a similar angle to the papis.

[iwhak]

As a non pilot 'risk of being shot again' a correctly flown steep approach as in this case for terrain avoidance, surely would have a lower ground speed. Having no headwind component the requirment to have a stabilised approach 'speed and height' becomes critical as does the touch down zone. One final point, if, as it appears they were flying all night, why take on a challenging approach with a quartering tail wind, to a difficult airfield, for the sake of a couple of minutes to route downwind for the active runway with no headaches and avoid lots of paperwork?

[justme69]

I'm told the "optical effect" that you are flying too close to terrain is very common in that approach and lots of flights "miss" it and shoot for a go around.

Very common, no problems, no shame, easy turn around w/o further complications.

Of course, there are those who insist they can make it even if "a bit" high, "a bit" fast and "a bit" off course. Not counting "a bit" of tail wind or crosswinds.

And sure enough, they needed "a bit" more of braking and "a bit more" runaway. :hmm:

[piton]

iwhak - good comment and I agree totally. As a professional pilot you need to know your limitations and should only go for the "fun" visual when you are well rested and on your game. If you have flown through the night - with probably not enough sleep before signing on - then you should make use of any and all aids available - like an ILS to 03.

This was a demonstration of someone's overconfidence or possibly over macho attitude. Hope he is doing some serious reflection now.....

BTW I was in Arrecife yesterday morning but luckily left before the dog scare! Couldn't see any traces of where the a/c went off.

[captplaystation]

I have done the opposite rotation GLA to the Canaries & back at night & was always fairly wasted by the end of it ( & I was 16 yrs younger then :{ ) so I can imagine they were not feeling too "top-gun" prior to this approach.
As the old saying goes " A superior Captain is the one who uses his superior judgement to avoid situations which may require the use of his superior skills"
Shooting for 5mins earlier in bed turned into more than a few sleepless nights for these poor guys finally :\

[Capt.Paul Skinback]

Definitely a culture issue here. Even on the same night as this incident we were chased into BCN by Air Europa 738 who landed past us at considerable speed in the wet as we made our way along 2nd high speed exit onto parallel taxiway. He can only have been 1.5 miles behind and we had maintained standard approach speeds.

[Buzz Lightyear]

I've thrown one away from 21 just as recently as a couple of months ago. Tubby is correct the perception is you are awfully close to the ground the whole way down the latter part of the approach, and thats not including the volcano that fill the first officers window at about 1800'.

What is not always appreciated is in a strongish headwind the ground rises steeply just a mile or so out on finals so you can be on height at the correct speed but you encounter a huge topographical ridge lift-band so all of a sudden you're high and pushing over to maintain the profile. Speed runs away, so the power comes of, rate of descent increases even more and voila.... !!!

I've watched Spanish aircraft going in there on 21 and my toes have curled at some of the deep landings. Definately a culture issue.

[Doors to Automatic]

From a thread running on the spotters' forum here is an example of a approach which should have arguably been thrown away (the Finnair 757).

Aviation Video: Various Aircraft - Various Airlines (http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Various_Aircraft-Airline_Various_Airlines_Aviation_Video-11009.html)

Had this gone the sameway as the ACE landing it would have ended in catastrophe as there is a sheer drop at the end. It would appear that the plane had still not touched down at the turn-off where most landing aircraft taxi off the runway!

[wee one]

Christ on a bike, stop making excuses for these muppets (joint responsibility dont ya know).Stop all this geeky analysis. Are there any pilots left on this excuse for a forum?

22 yrs in the business and 12 in euro charter, numerous trg details into 21 at ACE in 3 different jet types and widths and guess what, I havent run off the end,etc etc etc . not luck..mitigation. Tired my arse. :ugh:.
If youve been there, and you arent a spotter , youll appreciate my comments.
Ego , compliant atc, rambling in Spanish, innappropiate sequencing ,and we put up with it every year,
God I hope my application for the job of piano player in a whorehouse is sucessful.
Some times this site and its sanctimonious spotter attitide gets on my pubes.:mad:

[justme69]

... and just to make you happier, the pilots are claiming an autothrottle failure ...

Now the CIAIAC is gonna have to go through the trouble of analyzing the performance from the DFR and "prove" that the autothrottle was fine :(

The investigation is gonna take a while.

I guess some pilots just can never make a mistake or a bad judgement call, like we all do in our daily jobs every once in a while.

The usual disclaimer: nobody flat-out rules a failure of any kind. It's just that it looks a lot like the cause could be a different one. Each person is entitled to its opinion and any opinion could ultimately be wrong.

[captplaystation]

" Autothrottle failure " Hmn ? like. . . prior to my dirty dive I forgot to disconnect it ?
Seems a strange approach to be using A/T, I would imagine manual inputs would be the order of the day here. Anyway, if it doesn't do what you want, as promptly as you want ,that is what the disconnect button is for. You are supposed to be in charge of the aircraft not vice-versa. :=

[fireflybob]

Had this gone the sameway as the ACE landing it would have ended in catastrophe as there is a sheer drop at the end. It would appear that the plane had still not touched down at the turn-off where most landing aircraft taxi off the runway!

Doors to Automatic, I seem to recall that an a/c did go off the end at Funchal (at night) many years ago with much loss of life!

If the wheels are not on the ground by the correct point then GO AROUND!

Just found a link:-

PROBABLE CAUSE: (translated from Portuguese:
The Commission of Inquiry established as a probable cause of the accident the impossibility to decelerate the aircraft and to stop in the length of the runway due to, probably, the following factors:
- Very bad weather conditions at the time of landing;
- Possible existence of conditions for hydroplaning;
- Landing at a speed of Vref + 19 knots;
- Landing long with a long "flare";
- Sudden directional correction after touch down on the runway. (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19771119-1)

[Doors to Automatic]

Fireflybob

The sad thing about that accident was that the plane only landed 2000ft past the threshold - which on any other runway would have been ok.

Interestingly he landed with the same distance remaining as the 757 and had the Finnair landing been on the old runway he would have missed it althogether!

I have watched this landing a few times now and still can't believe it! It is probably one of the worst I have ever seen. No excuse - except low fuel.

[aguadalte]

Which leads to my first question, again: what was the FOB at that time?
Does anybody knows?

[diakon]

It was not a fuel issue for sure.
vor 21 app it's not a piece of cake...