Flair Air 737-800 overruns runway - YKF - Canada

[MLHeliwrench]

https://skiesmag.com/news/flair-737-overruns-runway-ykf/

[EddyCurr]

https://skiesmag.com/news/flair-737-overruns-runway-ykf/
Flair 737 overruns runway at YKF
Skies Magazine | November 25, 2022
.
Runway 08/26 at YKF is a 7,003-foot by 148-ft asphalt runway. In the summer of 2021, the airport widened the runway from 145 ft to 148 ft in order to better accommodate larger aircraft arriving and departing..
Judging from photos that accompany the Skies article, this incident might have been less likely to have ended in an excursion if the 21,009 sq ft of asphalt laid in 2021 had been used to extend the runway by 144 ft - instead of to widen it by 3 ft.
.

[WHBM]

Yet another 737-800 runway overrun. How many does that make now ? Always seems to be the -800.

Is it more now than MD-11s overturned on landing ?

[fdr]

Sad to hear, they do a pretty good job there normally. The 738 has a pretty quick approach speed,


Peter K C Rudolph pointed out pretty clearly the issues of the NG's flaps compromises. The beancounters liked it, the underwriters probably would have preferred a better optimisation of the flaps.

Funny thing, they can still take more than 10 kts off the speed for the full flap landing, reduce sideline noise, and reduce cruise drag for the cost of a couple of cups of Seattle's best coffee. Seems pretty insipid to not avail themselves of an improvement to their product that improves safety, improves cruise drag, and reduces vibratory loads on the flap tracks that currently act to increase wear and damage... but, it's Boeing. :ugh:

[A320LGW]

Yet another 737-800 runway overrun. How many does that make now ? Always seems to be the -800. Is it more now than MD-11s overturned on landing ? I believe it being the -800 as opposed to say the -900 is simply because the -800 is by far the more popular variant out there.

High approach speeds as mentioned don't help ..

[WHBM]

Peter K C Rudolph pointed out pretty clearly the issues of the NG's flaps compromises. The beancounters liked it, the underwriters probably would have preferred a better optimisation of the flaps.


It was a good analysis, but my reading was he didn't like what the A321 had done (relative to the A320, and more generally) either. Yet the A321 does not seem to have the same history.

[megan]

Peter K C Rudolph pointed out pretty clearly the issues of the NG's flaps compromisesA link please chaps and chapesses.

[ea200]

I think it is a reference to this Rudolph report for NASA:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjA3aT8ztD7AhUKQEEAHec4AmkQFnoECCsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fntrs.nasa.gov%2Fapi%2Fcitations%2F19960052 267%2Fdownloads%2F19960052267.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2GJ2HGS74elb7RrGI5dMW1

[fdr]

I think it is a reference to this Rudolph report for NASA:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjA3aT8ztD7AhUKQEEAHec4AmkQFnoECCsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fntrs.nasa.gov%2Fapi%2Fcitations%2F19960052 267%2Fdownloads%2F19960052267.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2GJ2HGS74elb7RrGI5dMW1

That's the one NASA Contractor Report 4746


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1218x1380/peter_rudolph_7012491bccafe8678bb66429742ad982785553d6.png


Its a bit out of date, there are later developments, but it is still relevant

[megan]

Thank you. :ok: