Lear 36 crash at Freeport, Bahamas
|
On Huffington this morning they had photos of the accident site, labeled that a Cessna 402 had crashed, but then in the text they reported that 'the Lear 36' had departed Miami.
So I was pretty confused. Looks like it could be weather related, just going to have to wait and see. |
Now there are multiple reports of the Lear hitting a crane in the shipyard where it crashed.
The cranes are NOTAMed to be at 400 feet AGL and they are located around four miles from the end of the runway the Lear was attempting to land on. |
The following makes an interesting read. Happened this January:
ACN: 1140592 Synopsis: A flight crew on the MYGF VOR Y 06 approach took evasive action from a crane extended to around 600 FT, 3.2 miles from the approach end and were told after landing that the TRACON Controller should have notified them and further that only visual approaches were conducted during the crane's presence. MVFR conditions prevailed with cloud bases reported at 2,800 FT. After passing VALRY, the pilot flying initiated a descent to 700 FT MSL while established inbound on the 069 final approach course. At approximately 3.7 DME, the pilot not flying alerted the pilot flying of a crane existing on the final approach course to Runway 06. The pilot flying stopped the aircraft's descent and maneuvered right of the final approach course in order to avoid the unreported crane. Given that MVFR conditions prevailed, the crew proceeded to execute a visual approach to Runway 06 and landed without further incident. The crane was resting on-top of a ship that was docked at the harbor southwest of the airfield on the final approach to Runway 06. The pilots stated that the NOTAM referencing the three cranes, with Crane 8 disabled boom up, is not the same crane that the crew avoided. The crane in place that day restricts approaches to VMC only, visual approaches. Also TRACON controllers are required to notify the crew about itīs presence. Neither of those conditions were met. The Tower Controller informed them of the restrictive conditions after landing. If IMC conditions prevailed, the unreported crane would have posed a serious threat to the safety of the flight given that it existed exactly at the 3.2 DME/ 620FT step down fix. A NOTAM should be issued for this obstruction and its location should be passed along to aircrews conducting approaches to Runway 06. In addition, the VOR Y Runway 06 approach should not be utilized during this crane's presence. Narrative: 1 (Pilot flying): An unreported, unlit crane approximately 600-700 FT AGL existed at 3.2 DME on the final approach course to the VOR Y Runway 06 at MYGF. The MYGF NOTAMs for MYGF did not contain temporary obstructions nor did they include amendments to the VOR Y Runway 06 IAP. On initial contact with MYGF Approach, the Approach Controller did not alert our crew of the temporary obstruction. Prior to the VALRY FAF, the Approach Controller cleared our crew for the VOR Y Runway 06 approach. Narrative: 2 (pilot monitoring): We were not cleared for the visual or told of the hazard on our approach path. The pilot flying was watching instruments. If the flight was in IMC conditions I believe fatalities would have resulted from impact with the shipyard crane. Date : 2014-01 MYGF Airport Flight Conditions : Marginal Light : Daylight Make Model Name : Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng Crew Size.Number Of Crew : 2 Operating Under FAR Part : Part 121 Flight Plan : IFR Nav In Use.VOR / VORTAC : ZFP Flight Phase : Final Approach Anomaly.Inflight Event / Encounter : CFTT / CFIT Detector.Person : Flight Crew Miss Distance.Horizontal : 1000 Miss Distance.Vertical : 200 When Detected : In-flight Result.Flight Crew : Became Reoriented Result.Flight Crew : Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification Result.Flight Crew : Took Evasive Action - - - @con-pilot: where did you find the NOTAMed crane? Only thing I got was 06 PAPI and wx freq u/s |
@con-pilot: where did you find the NOTAMed crane? Only thing I got was 06 PAPI and wx freq u/s The shipyard that they hit was approximately 4 miles from the approach end of Runway 6, and the cranes in that shipyard are listed as under 400 ft on the Sectional. However, from the incident report you posted, the cranes can be 600 feet AGL. Sorry if I caused any confusion. |
Thank you, con-pilot.
This is the current FAA sectional chart: http://abload.de/thumb/mygf_sectionalops4q.jpg The pilots must have known about the cranes - the latter have been standing there virtually forever (been @MYGF in 2002 and the cranes are already mentioned in my old charts). Thatīs why I wonder why the aircraft was so low on the approach. |
|
Sounds like another case of "Minimums" "continue"
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:28. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.