When the airplane finally stopped bouncing/leaving the runway, there was only 1000 Ft of runway remaining. The drag from the collapsed right main gear and the deceleration of going through a chain link fence might have prevented this from being so much worse. The airplane could have continued on across the highway, into another ditch and possibly impacted other structures. I'm sure the crew is devastated, but everyone got out alive and well and that's by far the most important thing.

Can you be bothered to read the thread before posting ? 4500ft of rwy is plenty for C680/C680A. At 35°C she'd use, at MLM, an unfactored LDR 2740ft. 2350 at a reasonable LDM of 22000lbs.

BOM about 19000 plus 1000 payload (2,5 person is way less, just lets pretend they have a lof luggage = 20000lbs. Mindiv fuel roughly 1500lbs, that would put the AC at about 21500-22000.

2350*1,67 -> 3925ft. And LDA apprently had nothing to do with the accident.

IAD. WATAUM? Even the FAALOA IOLU.*
 

I have looked at several data bases of Aviation Acronyms, including three belonging to the FAA, but I'm still unaware of the meanings of your acronyms: BOM, LDA, LDM, LDR and MLM. It's been a long time since I've flown anything professionally (steam gauge era), so I admit my relative ignorance. I would appreciate a translation. Oh, by the way, I agree with your analysis ... to the extent I understand it.

Cheers,
Grog

* I Admit Defeat. What Do The Acronyms Used Mean? Even the FAA List Of Acronyms Is Of Little Use.

As a retired steam gauge professional, I salute you, Grog!

BOM Basic Operating Mass. The Euro term for Weight.
LDA Landing Distance Available.
LDR Landing Distance Required
MLM Maximum Landing Mass

Thanks and yes, thats what I meant to say. Plus CG, I started on steam gauges and weights as well... but being in lala-EASAland (Europe) means, reinventing the wheel is just what "we" do. Operating currently on the 4th set of rules til I started flying (started on German Air Law, then transferred to JAA Rules and regs, then EU-OPS and now I have to obey to EASA-OPS regs. I´m glad I remember my own name....

All well and good, but we Yanks are reading this thread, also. And I bet the FAA-approved flight manual onboard N8JR didn't have the word "mass" anywhere in the weight & balance section.

Hi!

This is getting way off topic now, but I am a proud European ;.) who flies a plane built by Yanks. The "AFM" (different Yanks call it "POH") keeps talking about "weight", but the figures it displays are all accompanied by units of mass ("lb" and "kg"). A big confusion so to say which I guess is caused by handbook writers with very little background in phyiscs. I am pretty much certain that the engineers who designed the plane used "mass" for their calculations otherwise the thing wouldn't fly as good as it does.

Okay. Fine.

NTSB Accident Docket

Impressive review and summary:
Engineering Review of Data

Vref+19; throttles at idle during entire approach; time at idle 1:52; no speedbrake deployment at touchdown; bounce lasted 9.4 seconds.

Not good but (unfortunately) not unheard of...

Well given the above if anything they certainly did not more thrust... Or am I missing something ?

Is there some automation for this on the C680/C680A ?

Woaaa... that not a bounce, it's a go around !

No, pilot has to deploy spoilers after touchdown

• Scud running when there is an appropriate IFR approach available
• Behind the airplane
• No go around on approach when high/fast (when initially spoken about it)
• No checklists
• No (apparent) crew briefing for landing (would have included risk factors such as high landing weight, short runway, weather, etc.)
• Non-standard landing procedure (immediate deployment of T/Rs before speedbrakes and established ground mode)
• Flat landing with no apparent flare (likely due to speed) causing bounce
• Horrible bounce recovery and subsequent ambiguity about 2nd bounce recovery
• Attempted go-around without power (due to T/Rs not stowed) and inappropriate response to it (although airborne T/R deployment may have caused pitch up)
• Absolute lack of appropriate use of speedbrakes
• Lack of appropriate use of T/Rs throughout the event, both in deployment and (lack of) retraction

Did I mention no checklists? I trained a few years ago with another knuckleheads who didn't use checklists...imagine my shock when it turns out his flight department was involved in a somewhat high profile multi-fatality accodent?! It boggles my mind...how lazy and unprofessional do you have to be to not read & respond for 5-10 seconds?!

Anyway, reading that was downright scary. Collision with the ditch at the end had to hurt but more importantly looking at the pictures it doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how the cyclone fence could have also blocked all exit from the aircraft. This could have been way worse.

I'll give them this, that the T/Rs deploying at this time may have cause an uncommanded pitch up that they were not prepared for and didn't have enough elevator authority to stop...but this is the THIRD bounce...the control of the aircraft was lost well before then.

Juan Browne: