View Full Version : RJ85 damaged Florence
Anyone have any knowledge of this event reported in Aerosinside.com?
"A Cityjet Avro RJ-85, registration EI-RJG performing flight WX-281 from London City,EN (UK) to Florence (Italy), landed on Florence's runway 05 at 13:19L (12:19Z) but touched down hard. The aircraft rolled out without further incident, there were no injuries, the aircraft received substantial damage however."
Stated to be still on ground 1st April
DaveReidUK
1st Apr 2016, 11:05
Initially classified by the ANSV as a serious incident, subsequently recategorised as an accident, given the degree of damage to the aircraft.
AtomKraft
1st Apr 2016, 11:07
Well
It must've been bluddy hard!
Not the most fragile of aircraft......
Doors to Automatic
4th Apr 2016, 12:39
Having said that I have seen a number of absolute humdinger landings with this aircraft type - notably that video of the Swiss RJ85 at London City.
qld330
4th Apr 2016, 13:47
The tail got a nasty scratch
Accident: Cityjet RJ85 at Florence on Mar 23rd 2016, hard landing and tail strike (http://avherald.com/h?article=495ee43e&opt=0)
Plane Speaker
4th Apr 2016, 16:24
Flightline had a similar incident at Florence some years ago with G-BPNT. In this instance the aircraft went round and returned to Florence. From the images the damage appears similar. BPNT took 9 months or so to repair. I suspect if the damage below the skin is significant then this will be a write off.
RVF750
6th Apr 2016, 14:17
It takes some kind of expert to land an RJ/146 hard... Seriously tough airframe and gear. The only ones I ever saw manage it were trainers......
ciderman
6th Apr 2016, 17:16
Mentioning trainers. I had some near misses in my time. We once had passengers kissing the tarmac at FCO after a young man had refused to round out and I was a fraction late getting there. I am sure some will know who was involved and with what airline....!
I think it might be worth pointing out that landing at Florence can be rather tricky at times. In my last company we re-qualified all of our pilots in the sim every 6 months.
Nightstop
7th Apr 2016, 08:45
I've got about 8,000 hours on the 146 but none on the RJ I hasten to add. 146 tail scrapes in my experience though can often be caused by flying below the correct bug speed either through mishandling or incorrect bug setting. Here's an example, it's the Princess Air accident at Jersey in June 1990:
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/542303e8e5274a1314000bc5/BAe_146-200_series__G-PRIN_10-90.pdf
Phantom4
7th Apr 2016, 18:50
Two tail strikes in last two years,both mgmt pilots,once is unfortunate,twice begs serious questions of training section.
ciderman
7th Apr 2016, 19:04
Florence used to frighten the life out of people in the old days before the ILS was installed. No more than 600' over the river Arno or you went around and turned left into the hills! It used to be a Cat C field. Not sure now. 146 was fine even full and the RJ is easier, auto throttle and auto spoilers. No real excuse and the METAR was fairly benign.
Flap40
8th Apr 2016, 10:36
That Princess Air report was for their inaugural flight and as with others it was a management pilot.
Florence is Cat B if you only want to land on 05 and depart 23. Land 23 or depart towards the hill then it is still Cat C.
Phantom4,
When was the 2nd tailstrike?
Phantom4
8th Apr 2016, 17:10
Last year at Dublin
Ldg RW05 gives you a nice sinker over the threshold in certain conditions! Just sayin'!
Teddy Robinson
11th Apr 2016, 19:46
There are a couple of other subtle factors with Florence.
For local reasons, the reported wind (limited to 10kt tail with the last operator I flew there with) and the GNX display often varied by 10kts or more. I am reliably informed that this disparity is well noted by seasoned operators into FLR.
The other interesting one is the balked landing case on 05 which has DAYLIGHT VISUAL ONLY rather prominently displayed. Having watched a car using the runway a shortcut one fine Summer's evening, one must wonder how night ops are permitted.
What is so challenging at Florence compared to the other end of the route, and Cityjet's operating base, at London City ?
JW411
12th Apr 2016, 10:01
Close-in terrain; not too many hills/mountains around LCY.
I guess you've not made an approach into LCY when on easterlies, with the Canary Wharf towers, and even nowadays The Shard when turning from right base, notably (in fact very notably) close, as you do the 5.5 degree steep approach. And then the next time you arrive you are doing the same in solid IMC.
papazulu
12th Apr 2016, 15:04
What is so challenging at Florence compared to the other end of the route, and Cityjet's operating base, at London City ?
Close-in terrain; not too many hills/mountains around LCY.
+
one-way RWY (both for TO & LDG)
+
TW often of the gusty type
+
short RWY
+
critical for the OEI SID
JW411
12th Apr 2016, 15:22
WHBM:
You might (or might not) be interested to know that I spent some time in the BAe146 simulator at Hatfield in 1992 with the FAA looking at the possibility of making 7 degree approaches into London City (also Aspen, Colorado and Casper, Wyoming).
We successfully proved that a 7 degree slope was only just possible if absolutely everything was done in a perfect fashion and there was absolutely no room for error. In order to cater for an average crew in an average aircraft on an average day, 5.5 degrees was eventually decided upon by those in power.
I would much rather operate into LCY than FRZ any day but that is a personal opinion of course.
JW411
12th Apr 2016, 15:50
Just out of curiosity, I've just dug out some ILS 05 plates for Florence which were valid when I retired in 2006. The MSA in the approach sector is 4,300 ft, in the go around sector to the east it is 7,500 ft. To the west and north west it is 8,400 ft. The touch down elevation for runway 05 is 123 ft so it really is a bit hilly round there!
HeartyMeatballs
12th Apr 2016, 16:00
Is it not one of 'those' places, you know the type where the conversation goes something like:
AIRCRAFT: wind check please
ATC: 230/12G22
AIRCRAFT: that's out of our limits, request the circle to land on XX
ATC: what are your limits
AIRCRAFT: tail wind of 10KTS
ATC: ok, wind 230 at 10, you're cleared to land
AIRCRAFT: Um, OK.........
Heard something similar elsewhere in Italy. We held off and did the circle to land. Much to their obvious annoyance. But in some places they couldn't care less about you or your passengers.
You might (or might not) be interested to know that I spent some time in the BAe146 simulator at Hatfield in 1992 with the FAA looking at the possibility of making 7 degree approaches into London City (also Aspen, Colorado and Casper, Wyoming).
We successfully proved that a 7 degree slope was only just possible if absolutely everything was done in a perfect fashion and there was absolutely no room for error. In order to cater for an average crew in an average aircraft on an average day, 5.5 degrees was eventually decided upon by those in power.
Maybe not commonly known is that London City opened, and operated for some years, with a 7 degree glideslope, when operations were principally with the Dash 7. Harry Gee had flown the trial Brymon Dash 7 onto Heron Quay, where Canary Wharf now is, to demonstrate this 7 degree approach, and it all went on from there (here it is if you've never seen it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANRlDw3nB9Y ). It was subsequently determined, as prospects of larger and different types came along (the Dash 7 had unhelpfully gone out of production just as LCY opened), that the slope could be reduced to 5.5, which was done. It's all determined by the surrounding obstacles, in particular an agreed bridge over the Thames just to the east of the runway not in the end being built.
Is LCY a Commander Only landing for Cityjet ? What about Florence ?
Jwscud
13th Apr 2016, 09:09
Italy is notorious for reporting tailwinds within limits rather than switch runways or give you a circling approach. ATC think they're being helpful to saving hassle. Ciampino is notorious for it, and the number of times I've sat at the hold there observing the windsock and then listening to tower reported wind and wondering how they could possibly get away with the discrepancy (and making sure we departed with full thrust and speeds for a limiting tailwind!)
ciderman
13th Apr 2016, 13:11
To emphasise JWscud's comments about tail winds. I once stopped a flight in BOL because everywhere in the Po valley was giving strong southwesterly winds except FRZ which was calm. We disembarked the pax and they were bussed to FRZ. The agent in FRZ heard of this and cabled head office asking why the Captain had not come over the hills to FRZ. Just as she pressed the "send" button Meridiana came in on 05 and went straight off the end. You could see the tyre tracks half way up the hill for months. Needless to say the Chief Pilot only said to me that he fully supported my decision to abort the flight where it was. The agent was very nice (if a bit sheepish) to me for a while afterwards. Anyone who was about at the time will recognise the airline and the personalities concerned and I still smile about that story today.
Skydreamer1
13th Apr 2016, 13:17
Florence are one of the worst airports for lying about winds due to the majority of airlines including cityjet only allowed to make an approach onto 05. They know aircraft have a tailwind limit of approx 10 knots so you can be sure the wind will never be reported as more than that. It's a captains only landing in LCY and FLR for Cityjet.
Teddy Robinson
13th Apr 2016, 16:59
Challenging place FLR ... Then again as somebody else pointed out, Easterly ops at LCY with a 25knot crosswind, rain, and cloud down to the 390' minima, at night .... Now that is downright nasty.
Phantom4
15th Apr 2016, 19:39
Sky Dreamer1
Why is it that flight ops Cityjet take those tail wind components as correct then and call crews to account if they land. Your post inaccurate.
Uplinker
18th Apr 2016, 11:41
Is it not one of 'those' places, you know the type where the conversation goes something like:
AIRCRAFT: wind check please
ATC: 230/12G22
AIRCRAFT: that's out of our limits, request the circle to land on XX
ATC: what are your limits
AIRCRAFT: tail wind of 10KTS
ATC: ok, wind 230 at 10, you're cleared to land
AIRCRAFT: Um, OK.........
.
I'm sure that Cork (Ireland) used to do something similar. It was amazing how often their reported (out of limits) conditions changed 10 minutes after you told them you would have to divert. The clue was when Ground ATC said "well done" after you had landed !!
Jwscud
19th Apr 2016, 09:58
Used to? They still do!
Also done in LDY where the wind can be similarly sporting.
Nightstop
19th Apr 2016, 10:40
ATC reporting false W/V seems incredulous to me. In the event of an accident they'd be hung out to dry after the AIB have analysed the recorded W/V data in the Tower. In Italy they'll be in prison for sure.
Una Due Tfc
19th Apr 2016, 13:39
ATC reporting false W/V seems incredulous to me. In the event of an accident they'd be hung out to dry after the AIB have analysed the recorded W/V data in the Tower. In Italy they'll be in prison for sure.
Not to mention liable for civil suits from the employer for reputational damage, the airline for damage to aircraft, the crew and pax for injuries, emotional damage etc. Mad
ciderman
19th Apr 2016, 19:50
"ATC reporting false W/V seems incredulous to me. In the event of an accident they'd be hung out to dry after the AIB have analysed the recorded W/V data in the Tower. In Italy they'll be in prison for sure. "
Italians can't even get Berlusconi into jail!
Italians can't even get Berlusconi into jail!
They are however REALLY keen on putting ATCOs in jail......
IFATCA press release - Cagliari crash (http://www.iceatca.com/kerfi/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/IFATCA_PR_Italy_290310.pdf)
Telegraph article on 3 controllers sentenced after Linate (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1485605/Controllers-jailed-over-Milan-air-crash.html)
Croqueteer
19th Apr 2016, 21:00
;)I remember your incident, Ciderman. I think I was there the next day. Happy days!
Jwscud
19th Apr 2016, 21:42
It may seem incredible to you, but it does go on. Ask anyone who flies regularly in and out of one way Italian airports, or airports where wet runway crosswind limits apply like ORK or LDY mentioned above.
For all I know they are reporting at the exact second their devices measure the wind on limits and ignore exceedences, or the anemometer may be creatively placed, but I have several years of personal experience of incorrectly reported winds operating out of a restrictive Italian airport.
Nightstop
20th Apr 2016, 09:55
Well, I flew the 146 into FLR for many years and don't recall their ATC ever being creative with W/V info. I now fly the A320 regularly into FNC which is subject to strict W/V limitations based on the 2 minute mean (as well as cloud ceiling). Never doubted the accuracy of FNC ATC reported W/V :ooh:
Jwscud
20th Apr 2016, 10:28
FNC is rather critical though - I've never been in but have read enough to know there's no margin for that kind of stuff.
However, somewhere like CIA where they hate using runway 33 as it causes all manner of bother an ATC reported 5-10 knot tailwind compared to calculated ground speed short final and the rather obvious visual evidence of the windsock suggest the ATC reported wind is not substantially accurate.