Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc.
Reload this Page >

BHX closed due accident

Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

BHX closed due accident

Old 19th Nov 2010, 21:16
  #101 (permalink)  
DB6
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Age: 61
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
StressFree, it is my understanding that Cat2/3 ops are known as LVOs. LVPs are ground procedures put in place during low visibility to ensure things aren't where they're not meant to be when no-one can see them (more or less). LVPs don't imply Cat 2/3 conditions. Your company may have called them LVP qualifications, however I am not aware of a JAA LVP qualification. Having said that I will stand corrected and have learnt something new if wrong!
DB6 is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2010, 21:39
  #102 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you have a look at Google Maps, you'll see that the ILS localiser antenna (for 33 I presume) is pretty close to the perimeter fence.

From memory, I think that the fence is on lower ground than the runway itself, but if they hit the antenna they must have been very close to coming down outside the fence.

This could have ended up so much worse, let's hope that they both recover quickly.
Feathers McGraw is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2010, 21:59
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Back Of Beyond
Age: 53
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Am I the only one to ask why the moderator has moved this very pertinent thread from R & N? I thought N referred to NEWS! Does this serious accident have less credence than a cracked windscreen in America that is still on R & N (with on replys after hours on the website)? What are you thinking Mr. moderator? Anyway, hope the crew recover soon.
Could not agree more. I will probably get banned for this but this was a really poor (and very quick) decision!
Trash_Hauler is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2010, 22:24
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The BBC news article first reports the aircraft took out the ILS antennae (plural) it then goes on to report a Mr. Kehoe as saying the aircraft took out the ILS glide path antenna. It also reports him saying the aircraft ended-up to the right of the southern-facing runway. Mr. Kehoe's reported comments would at least be consistent. There is no mention anywhere of the aircraft specifically hitting the ILS localiser antenna having just made it to the airfield perimeter.

As is common in accidents, there are more questions than answers so, as said before, it is pretty useless at this time attempting to speculate on cause based on snippets of information from arbitrary news articles.

AVF

Last edited by AV Flyer; 20th Nov 2010 at 00:07.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2010, 22:37
  #105 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good point, I hadn't considered that.

Looking at Google Maps again, I can see the glideslope antenna, and in fact it's between runway 15 and Hatchford Brook golf course where one of the originally interviewed witnesses was located so it seems quite likely that this was the antenna that was involved in the collision. It's hundreds of metres from the perimeter fence that's next to the localiser antenna.
Feathers McGraw is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2010, 22:38
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Staffs, UK
Age: 57
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From Home - Birmingham Airport
Following an incident at Birmingham Airport on Friday afternoon, involving a private Cessna aircraft, the Airport runway remains closed until 12:00 Saturday 20th November at the earliest and no flights will operate before this time.
BrummyGit is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 00:20
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a nice house
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The only people who knew if there was thick fog on the approach/ threshold are the pilots on this approach. On the ground you can be in thick fog and then 10m later be in a clear patch. So please can all the non commercial pilots please stop saying it was a gin clear day. At the time and place the jet landed, the only people who knew the weather at that specific point of the airport would have been the pilots.

And yes, I am a pilot, thousands of hours on jets and yes, LVO qualified.
Airbus Girl is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 00:52
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Warrington
Age: 65
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A very sad day for all concerned.
Until a few months ago I used to work for the operators of the aircraft involved and had flown the aircraft concerned on many occasions.
I await the investigation report with interest.
My heartfelt thoughts go out to the two crew members and their families. Get well soon guys.
CR
C550jockey is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 03:51
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airbus Girl,
The only people who knew if there was thick fog on the approach/ threshold are the pilots on this approach
Really? Bloke in the tower? Ranger guy in the landy, where was he? Anyone else at the hold waiting? Aircraft 5 or 10 miles behind them?

On the ground you can be in thick fog and then 10m later be in a clear patch
So are you saying that I can't see fog 10m away? If I could see fog 10m away would I say it was a gin clear day?

So please can all the non commercial pilots please stop saying it was a gin clear day
Are commercial pilots, like you and I, the only people capable of seeing the weather? Non-commercial pilots (whatever that means) don't know what fog looks like?

At the time and place the jet landed, the only people who knew the weather at that specific point of the airport would have been the pilots.
Agreed but entirely irrelevant. We are more concerned with the visual range down the runway rather than "that specific point of the airport" are we not?

And yes, I am a pilot, thousands of hours on jets and yes, LVO qualified.
Good for you.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 05:32
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thats what I like about this place. You read through the posts and realise that on the face of it the pilots did a fantastic job and look like there going to be fine. They may well have saved some ones life (the purpose of the flight in the first place)

So how many posts actually congratulate the drivers. Not many.

Slagging each other off. Check
Slagging off the press. Check
Slagging off the mods. Check
Arguing about the weather when most of you were not even there. Check
Putting in your 2p's worth about how it happened Not yet but it won't be long.

To the pilots on the day when you start to read this thread about you first off get better soon and hope you return to what your good at and love and I you for what you did.

standby by and see how long some of this ends up blue and slagged off. 5 4 3 2 1
B.U.D.G.I.E is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 06:00
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NE of LON VOR
Age: 54
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airbus Girl

You are talking out of your retto. You are not a commercial pilot and I have arrived at that decision by simply examining your posts.

We need to get back on topic chaps. Stick to the facts and the facts only.

Malicious rumours, lies, fabrications of the truth or mere and uneducated speculation can end up being sourced in the media. The family of the pilots injured would not like that to happen.

You remember what happened to Peter Burkill?

Good. Let's remain on topic.

I believe the pilots were carrying out a CAT III approach when they shouldn't have been in the first place. Pilot error.
Aviophage is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 06:45
  #112 (permalink)  

I Have Control
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Appropriate terminology

Human error, old chap. (Unless you employ terms like wife error, police error, ATC error, politician error, fireman error, judge error, doctor error)
RoyHudd is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 07:00
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
about the thread being moved...

This is the biz jet section, and the accident was a biz jet, it happened at a UK airport. Most of the news on the R&N main page is of INTERNATIONAL importance. Since the title is visible on the R&N page (where I also went looking for it), what's the problem?

Good luck to the pilots and patient waiting for the new liver!
WestWind1950 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 07:23
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<Really? Bloke in the tower? Ranger guy in the landy, where was he?>>

The Air Traffic Control Officers in the tower have instrumented RVR readings which would have been passed to the pilot. They have no discretion on otherwise reporting visibility. "Ranger guy in the landy"?? I think you are some years behind the times if you mean the counting the edge lights!
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 08:11
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The reported weather would indeed suggest that the runway was CAT III at the time of the accident. However, it is not pilot error if the aircraft commander reasonably believed that he needed to land immediately; an uncontained fire would surely qualify.

Now this is speculation, but if the a/c had been able to safely maintain flight, and had diverted to a suitable alternate, it is likely that the organ would have been lost, which would have endangered the life of the recipient. I am curious - would that in itself constitute sufficient reason to continue the approach below minima? Not saying this is what actually happened, just curious.

In the event, it appears that the decision to continue saved at least one life. Respect to all concerned.
Sillert,V.I. is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 08:24
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here's an eyewitness report of sorts for you.

At the time of the accident the airfield was in brilliant sunshine however a fog bank could be seen around the 15 threshold (viewed from the Elmdon Building (old terminal). Myself and colleagues had watched the previous landings (a BEE DH8D and AUR AT72) disappear into the fog on short finals and emerge well over the runway. We commented that we were surprised they hadn't gone around, especially the ATR. Comments from those crews would be illuminating.

The fog was purely at the 15 end and we were actually questioning why ATC were still positioning traffic for 15 when the 33 end was in the clear and the wind negligable. The fog bank was steadily moving along the runway, hence the rapid drop in touch down RVR. I didn't see the Citation on approach or hit(?) the ground but did see it emerge from the fog nose pointing away from the runway and saw a rapid fire and a very large plume of black smoke (I assume this was as it hit the 15 GP aerial). A few seconds later it was obscured by the fog. There was then a delay of several minutes before the fire service turned out which lead us in the office to question what we had actually seen, particuarly as the aircraft could no longer be seen because of the fog

From my viewpoint the fog seems to have been a serious factor here with a rapid deterioration of visibility at low level. I cannot say what the touchdown RVR was at the precise time of the accident but it had been above CAT 1 imediately before, but within about 10 minutes of the accident the whole airport from our viewpoint was enveloped in thick fog although the Helimed Agusta from Coventry let down visually on the 33 threshold but could not be seen from the tower.

From my perspective the two areas of interest would be the rapid loss of visability around the 15 touchdown zone and the initial confusion and delay in responding to the accident, probably the sudden loss of visibility played a part in that?.

After seeing the above I cannot tell you the relief at hearing the Helimed depart to Walsgrave Hospital and seeing an ambulance leave on blue lights shortly after...

Regards
OV
oldventure is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 08:30
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: ask crewing
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AD Aviation Ltd Home Page
Cloud Chaser is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 08:42
  #118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Airbus Girl

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are talking out of your retto. You are not a commercial pilot and I have arrived at that decision by simply examining your posts.

Aviophage........oh, she is a commercial pilot.....that much is definite.....and you can tell what a/c she flies, hint is in her profile name (oh, and the fact i've flown with her whilst i was working out back helps confirm my knowledge)

As for talking out of her "retto" (not heard that before lol), i think not - all she is saying that due to the rapidly changing nature of the "fog bank","mist", etc., only the crew know what THEY could or could not see from a visual perspective, regardless of who else was in the vicinty of the accident area - i believe that might be the point she was making, apologies Airbus Girl if it isn't ?!



Malicious rumours, lies, fabrications of the truth or mere and uneducated speculation can end up being sourced in the media. The family of the pilots injured would not like that to happen.
I believe the pilots were carrying out a CAT III approach when they shouldn't have been in the first place. Pilot error.
Ah, Aviophage - definitely no uneducated speculation in your post there then, nice to see someone berate a colleague, post his/her reasons and then apply absolutely no thought - and even in the same post - still, maybe that's because your head is in your "retto" ?? (i still don't know what a "retto" is ??)
First.officer is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 08:48
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good to hear that the liver transplant operation went ahead last night.
manrow is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2010, 09:24
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Decision Height......Nothing Seen.....Going Around ???!??
davelongdon is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.