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

Challenger crash at KASE

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.

Challenger crash at KASE

Old 18th Jan 2014, 10:20
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 558
32,000lbs Vref SL = 128kias, 10,000 = 132kias.

So yes, different, but not dramatically.
BizJetJock is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2014, 11:53
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 558
TAS @ 10,000 = 149 for 128kias vs 153 for 132.
So the difference due to the change in Vref is still only 4 knots, and even less significant than at sl!
BizJetJock is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2014, 12:45
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 63
Posts: 641
Yes, but what would Vref be with an added allowance for gusts?
deefer dog is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2014, 21:45
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 945
Thanks for the info BizJetJock.

4 knots isn't much by itself, but is still extra airspeed. A few knots incorporated into the AFM derived Vref, a few more for gusts, a few for the home folks and pretty soon you're talking too much airspeed to to touch the mains down without touching the nose too. Add the effect of a pilot pushing the nose down and forcing the airplane onto the runway due to diminishing runway remaining and you have a scenario similar to what occurred in ASE. In hindsight a diversion to RIL or GJT and an hour ride with Mountain Limo don't look so inconvenient now...

Like I said, it will be interesting to see the FDR traces when or if they become publicly viewable.
westhawk is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2014, 13:56
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by deefer dog View Post
Yes, but what would Vref be with an added allowance for gusts?
The adders for Challenger 60x are half the xwind and ALL of the gusts. But never more than +20 total.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 02:20
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York City
Posts: 311
Surveillance video of the crash released:

Video from Aspen airport infrared cameras of Jan. 5, 2014 jet crash
MikeNYC is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 02:48
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 38
Camera 5 shows what appears to be a really hard push over after the bad bounce...a drastically hard pushover....
OD100 is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 02:54
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 426
Crash was captured on CCTV and released today;

https://twitter.com/bizjet101/status/425822200285757440
robbreid is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 03:36
  #189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,507
Wow, that pushover was intense.
West Coast is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 04:05
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 996
Camera 4

The sobering - blowing snow on the ramp shows just how fierce the gusts/tailwinds were.

The piquant - the onlooker (left) who kicks out at a piece of equipment in anger/frustration/sickness over what he just saw happen.

Mother Nature was in a surly mood that day, and not to be trifled with....
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 04:51
  #191 (permalink)  
VFD
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: us
Posts: 93
Watching camera 5 it was hard to distinguish from the background but it looked like they made a couple of nose down push overs in succession dropping about 10ft at a time before they made the first contact with the runway.


Not sure I have ever seen that technique before.
VFD is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 05:37
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 77
Posts: 1,458
Watching camera 5 it was hard to distinguish from the background but it looked like they made a couple of nose down push overs in succession dropping about 10ft at a time before they made the first contact with the runway.

Not sure I have ever seen that technique before.
It may not have been a technique. They may have been pushed down to the runway by turbulence. Aspen is a mountain strip after all.

But I have to admit, I think I can see the tail moving up and down in the attempted flare before the bounce and ugly pushover. Must have been ~ 20 degrees nose down.

Could they have broken something in the controls in the bounce immediately prior that would cause that? Otherwise it had to be a panic response to the high nose bounce attitude.
Machinbird is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 07:43
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Unhappy

Reminds me of the Fedex MD11 crash in Narita......not good
solent is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 09:33
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 368
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5cc_1390360523
stalled after the "touch 'n go" ?
mattpilot is online now  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 09:53
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: chances are, not at home
Posts: 265
The final snap nose over does look like a stall - but I'm not sure I'd call it a touch and go; There was at least one prior bounce, and even the first bounce seemed to create some sparks from the nose gear.

Very noticable the tailwind from the spindrift and the speed with which the smoke cloud drifts away.
Joe le Taxi is online now  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 10:11
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 822
I have seen the technique mentioned by vfd.

i call it fishing for the ground or pumping the yoke.

I do not encourage it for anything.


ONE OF THE GREAT visual miscues of mountain flying is the apparent location of the horizon (visual horizon)>

IT IS NOT at the top of the mountains, it is at the base of the mountains.

AS bad as it would have been to just level off to lose some speed and then go off the end, it would have been better than the result.
glendalegoon is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 12:19
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Londinium village
Posts: 158
Wonder why they didn't choose to circle for 33?..... considering they had already thrown away the first approach to 15
specialbrew is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 13:32
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 841
WOW! That was a very hard hit.

For sure there are two instances of a push over. It will be interesting to see if these were totally pilot induced or the wx conditions (tailwind/windshear) had something to do with it.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 16:03
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 556
You'd think the mitigating factor would be the wind report on the ATIS. Eagle, Rifle, Montrose, Grand Junction had to be better. Incredible.
Desert185 is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2014, 16:08
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
Rifle was much better, winds pretty much down the westerly runway. I looked as soon as the accident reporting was posted here.
galaxy flyer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.