Runaway Lear Jet At Gatwick
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: london
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot run over by his own jet
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
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
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
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/publicati...45__d_cnik.cfm
See AAIB Report here:-
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/publicati...45__d_cnik.cfm
Paxing All Over The World
The last line of the summary seems to have the nub of it:
The correct procedure for starting an engine had not been observed.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Stansted
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: "como todo buen piloto... mujeriego y borracho"
Posts: 2,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
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.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the Moment
Age: 49
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,439
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.")
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.")
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
waste of time
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....
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....
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A oneworld lounge near you
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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)
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)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?