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 7th Jan 2014, 02:58
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 368
Airport is set to reopen at 1200Z tomorrow (7th).
B-HKD is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 05:07
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,510
That doesn't jive with the NTSB statements. As of today, in the afternoon they still hadn't accessed the inside of the aircraft as was unstable and still had fuel onboard.
West Coast is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 06:09
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NYC
Age: 37
Posts: 27
I sat up front on a packed Whiskey 146 during the summer when I was going to attend a cousins' wedding. It was nothing like the EGE or HDN approaches we shot in the sim. I still remember grabbing the two seats in front of me as I looked at pine trees that were seemingly a few hundred feet away on the right side of me.

What a ride. The CA and FO rightly gave me a hard time as I grabbed my baggage.
Sky Slug is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 06:17
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,789
Sorry Latte tester...no published landing distance charts for the specific flap setting...no-go...it is black and white...and how you "feel" about it won't wash in court...im surprised the aircraft doesn't offer various flap settings for landing with appropriate landing distance data provided...but if it doesn't..then it's not debatable
ironbutt57 is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 07:22
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 175
acroguy Well, you don't have to be a brain surgeon to realize that a close to 7 degree GS from FAF to the runway and a 25 knot+ tailwind is not a recipe for a good conclusion.
7 degrees?! Where do you get that from? Have you been there? I'd like to see any jet make a 7 degree glide path. I think you mean 3.5. Steeper than normal but doable with planning.
lifeafteraviation is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 07:38
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,872
11,700' Not Below at 5.7nm to the threshold...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 09:04
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: VVTS (Saigon)
Posts: 5,208
ATAN( (11700 - 7837) / (5.7 * 6080) ) = 6.36 degrees
India Four Two is online now  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 09:08
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,872
Chart shows 6.59. I'm impressed!

Do you guys left or right circle to 33 off 15? Chart doesn't say.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 10:02
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 175
Yeah I guess you're right....It's been a long time since I've been in there. Pretty steep. London City is 5.5 and I thought that was steep.

I do recall having to get down to approach speed by DBL or not being able to slow at all.

Those Challenger pilots never had a chance. I wouldn't be surprised if they issue special rules that flat out close the airport to jets under tailwind conditions. It would take away the ability of pilots with poor judgement to do such things.

It occurred to me today while thinking about this accident. If that captain knowingly violated the published limitations of the aircraft he could be found to have operated recklessly. With a fatality involved it goes beyond a simple accident and he could be charged with manslaughter. Imagine if he had rolled off the runway in the other direction and slammed into aircraft on the taxiway, the ramp, fbo or terminal!
lifeafteraviation is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 11:12
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,109
lifeafteraviation, you have the wrong country. We don't do that here in the US.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 11:38
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 175
you have the wrong country. We don't do that here in the US.
Are you kidding? Most pilots who believe that are naive. The reason it doesn't happen very often is most pilots are professional enough and most countries don't scapegoat innocent pilots for political reasons as easily as they might in say...Brazil.

If you have an accident it's not criminal but if you knowingly operate in a dangerous and reckless manner for personal gain... It doesn't matter what profession you are in, it's criminal if you damage property or injure or kill someone due to deliberate negligence or recklessness.

I can't see any way that this situation doesn't qualify unless the facts we have so far are completely wrong...but we can listen to the tape.

This is something you need to consider if you are a pilot for a small operator and feel pressured to do something dangerous or reckless for fear of losing your job....you can definitely be charged with a crime if things go wrong like this did.
lifeafteraviation is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 12:16
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 240
Originally Posted by lifeafteraviation View Post
This is something you need to consider if you are a pilot for a small operator and feel pressured to do something dangerous or reckless for fear of losing your job....you can definitely be charged with a crime if things go wrong like this did.
The captain is, at least, fortunate enough to face this possibility. In the Cork accident (which would seem to me to have worrying similarities; pressing on after a missed approach when the weather is outside limits for the a/c), the crew would likely have faced serious charges, had they still been alive.

In both cases, the controller passed weather information to the pilots which was clearly outside limits for the a/c, but the pilots chose to continue .

I wouldn't want for a minute to place responsibility for these incidents other than at the pilot's door, but I can't help wondering if safety would be enhanced if controllers had a mandatory duty to report suspected serious violations of this nature.

IIRC there was at least one case described here when a UK controller advised a foreign crew that he would be obliged to report them if they continued an approach in weather below the approach ban limits; on hearing this, they quietly went someplace else.
Sillert,V.I. is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 13:22
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
Silbert,

US private operators don't have an approach ban, so it might be understandable that a US crew would try the approach. No saying they shouldn't know, the US regs require a pilot to adhere to the regulations of the country they're operating at, but it isn't uncommon to see this situation come up in conversation.
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 14:08
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montana
Age: 57
Posts: 4
acroguy

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Egremont, MA, USA
Posts: 18
Well, you don't have to be a brain surgeon to realize that a close to 7 degree GS from FAF to the runway and a 25 knot+ tailwind is not a recipe for a good conclusion.



This is not accurate. Open up the approach plate. This is a non-precision approach I.e. No glide slope. So from the FAF to the MAP is 3.1nm which is a 6.59 degree angle. We all agree very steep and the tailwind and altitude do not help. But then the crew has 2.6nm to lose 2003 feet to the runway threshold.

I will let you someone else figure that rate.
Cloudyifr is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 14:10
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 175
It's just like driving a car....or playing irresponsibly with your firearm if you're in law enforcement. If you get away with it and no one is hurt and nothing seriously damaged....it's not a problem most of the time. But if you have an accident that's the direct result of your willful negligence...you can be charged.

law enforcement officers have been charged for leaving a loaded gun unattended and a kid gets a hold of it and someone dies. The logic is they have a professional responsibility.

Reckless driving is criminal even if you don't cause an accident. You kind of have to enforce it with drivers because so many idiots operate a car and the potential for injuring others is very high. I would hate to see that type of logic pushed on to pilots because of a few irresponsible individuals.
lifeafteraviation is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 14:21
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 56
Posts: 1,541
Originally Posted by Spooky 2 View Post
lifeafteraviation, you have the wrong country. We don't do that here in the US.

Actually, Lifeafteraviation is right, we *do* do that in the US. It's not common, but the precedent has been set. The was a guy a few years back who was giving someone a ride in a biplane (Waco, I think) someplace like Wisconsin, or Michigan, that part of the country. Anyway, he was flying low along a river and hit a crossing powerline. Plane ended up upside down in the river and his passenger died. He wound up going to jail for the accident. According to AOPA it was the first time that pilot had gotten a criminal conviction for an aircraft accident. But, that genie is out of the bottle now. If you consciously chose to violate the FARs, and that violation causes someone's death, you just might wind up in jail. It happens, even in the US.
A Squared is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 14:35
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 63
Posts: 641
Unlike demonstrated crosswind, maximum tailwind for landing is a limitation that all that day seemed to ignore!
deefer dog is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 15:03
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 240
Originally Posted by lifeafteraviation View Post
I would hate to see that type of logic pushed on to pilots because of a few irresponsible individuals.
I must confess I'm not too comfortable with the idea that someone out there is just waiting for me to commit some minor indiscretion so they can snitch on me.

But this kinda suggests that if you get away with it, it somehow isn't irresponsible, which doesn't sit very comfortably either.

I suspect most pilots sitting reading this thread in an armchair would think it absolutely idiotic to continue a steep approach in a jet with a reported tailwind gusting to 36kt, yet a professional crew sitting in the cockpit somehow made that choice. Similarly at Cork (which was a public transport flight), a professional crew made a decision to attempt and continue an illegal approach in a Cat 1 a/c when the weather was significantly below the approach ban limit not once, but three times.

Understanding why pilots sometimes make choices while airborne which they likely wouldn't even consider when on the ground would go a long way to explaining why this type of accident keeps happening.
Sillert,V.I. is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 15:21
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,151
Risk/reward problem - circle to land in tight mountain valley or land with 30 kt tailwind.


Solution - ILS into EGE. 1+25 scenic drive to Aspen.


Outcome - eat regular food vs. hospital food.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2014, 15:41
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montana
Age: 57
Posts: 4
Misd-agin,
That is exactly right. I have tried an approach twice but never three times. Inconvenience is just what it is but it is my life in their too!
Cloudyifr 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.