Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Canada
Reload this Page >

747 accident on landing at YHZ

Canada The great white north. A BIG country with few people and LOTS of aviation.

747 accident on landing at YHZ

Old 7th Nov 2018, 11:08
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 736
747 accident on landing at YHZ

A Sky Lease B747 has overrun the runway on landing at Halifax.

It appears there were only minor injuries -- but the poor old noble aircraft looks to be in very bad shape...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...-747-1.4895103
grizzled is online now  
Old 7th Nov 2018, 12:20
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 299
ATC transcript can be revealing sometimes:

Tower: "SkyCube 4854, tailwind now 280 at 16 confirm gusting 21, confirm runway 14 still acceptable ?"
GG 4854: "Confirm..ah, still for 14."

2018-11-07 Sky Lease Cargo B747-400F overrun at Halifax Airport » JACDEC
readywhenreaching is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2018, 12:42
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Canada
Age: 62
Posts: 102
Also being discussed on the main Rumor's section
roybert is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2018, 14:54
  #4 (permalink)  
Longtimelurker
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: killington Vt
Posts: 386
Originally Posted by readywhenreaching View Post
ATC transcript can be revealing sometimes:

Tower: "SkyCube 4854, tailwind now 280 at 16 confirm gusting 21, confirm runway 14 still acceptable ?"
GG 4854: "Confirm..ah, still for 14."

2018-11-07 Sky Lease Cargo B747-400F overrun at Halifax Airport » JACDEC
7700 ft wet and with a tailwind ...come on man.......
filejw is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2018, 16:12
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,872
Is the book value for the B-744F max tailwind 15 knots? They had a little more than that with the gusts...
Airbubba is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2018, 16:17
  #6 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 13,122
Well at least they didn't have far to walk to the nearest road for a taxi cab to the hotel...
ShyTorque is online now  
Old 9th Nov 2018, 06:22
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Syndey
Posts: 15
Would anyone have a link to the ATCLive Audio file?

Makes you wonder what their operations manual and or flight manual says about landing with a 14-21 kt tailwind.

While the crew asked for and got a clearance to land on 14,
why did the Controller clear it land with 14-21 kts of tailwind.
He or she must have known the probable outcome.
Sparrow_start is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2018, 17:07
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Amantido
Posts: 665
Originally Posted by Sparrow_start View Post
Would anyone have a link to the ATCLive Audio file?

Makes you wonder what their operations manual and or flight manual says about landing with a 14-21 kt tailwind.

While the crew asked for and got a clearance to land on 14,
why did the Controller clear it land with 14-21 kts of tailwind.
He or she must have known the probable outcome.
Banana Joe is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 15:01
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Great White North
Posts: 191
At the peak gust, that's 19 kts of crosswind and 9 kts of tailwind, not 21 kts of tailwind.
Mostly Harmless is online now  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 23:13
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Florida USA
Age: 58
Posts: 0
Just use the long runway, Like the old timers say " Takeoff/Land go for the long pavement, always backtrack, never leave runway behind or fuel in the fuel truck "..... Relax take it easy no rush.
4 Holer is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 23:35
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 22
Originally Posted by Mostly Harmless View Post
At the peak gust, that's 19 kts of crosswind and 9 kts of tailwind, not 21 kts of tailwind.
For Runway 14, a wind of 260/16G21 (last one given by ATC) will give at peak gust 11kts tailwind and 18 kts xwind, but previous wind readings from TWR prove that is was changing constantly so touchdown wind only the FDR will tell us.
Max tailwind per B747 FCOM is 15kts.
PhantomPilot is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2018, 16:10
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Great White North
Posts: 191
Originally Posted by PhantomPilot View Post
For Runway 14, a wind of 260/16G21 (last one given by ATC) will give at peak gust 11kts tailwind and 18 kts xwind, but previous wind readings from TWR prove that is was changing constantly so touchdown wind only the FDR will tell us.
Max tailwind per B747 FCOM is 15kts.
I got different numbers than you. However, my point was simply this, not 21 knots of tailwind.
Mostly Harmless is online now  
Old 21st Nov 2018, 09:37
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 16
@ Sparrow_start Are you actually a pilot? ATC has no idea what tail wind component applies to your A/C or authority for that matter. They only know the magnetic direction of the wind relative to the runway. PIC needs to calculate whether his/her bird can handle it. This was poorly done as Rwy 23 was available METAR was wind 260 16G21 500 bkn….RNAV 23 easily doable
B737NOTGOOD is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2018, 11:31
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by B737NOTGOOD View Post
This was poorly done as Rwy 23 was available METAR was wind 260 16G21 500 bkn….RNAV 23 easily doable
I believe the problem is that the aircraft was not capable of doing RNAV approaches or that the company SOPs did not permit it... The investigators of this accident will certainly look into this matter to determined why the RNAV to 23 was not used.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2018, 23:07
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Ref: While the crew asked for and got a clearance to land on 14,
why did the Controller clear it land with 14-21 kts of tailwind.
He or she must have known the probable outcome.

ATC cannot withhold a landing clearance for wind-related reasons. But if there's anything other than a headwind or headwind component there's an absolute need to make sure the pilot has the correct wind information.
ezalpha is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2018, 10:31
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 16
Hey Jet Jockey, that's an interesting point. As I am sure you are aware, RNAV approval is simple and the 747 is capable. GNSS would need GPS A/C. It would be very re miss of management to not seek RNAV approval for an A/C that operates worldwide. Literally the delta's in training between a RNAV and non-precision are setting RAIM RNP to .3 and adding 50ft to baro minimums. If they are relying on traditional approaches alone, well it was only a matter of time before something went off the rails. The Wx in YHZ will start to get nasty now until June and regular maintenance of approaches is not something new.

TSB #1 concern is FRMS...Cargo drivers do not follow the same rules. It will be interesting to see how long the crew was on duty. There are new CRM mandatory training for 705 operators that now include TEM. Commanders need to be aware of the possibility of latent threats and call G/A if anything goes off the rails. This has not been ascertained yet but one can assume that he didn't plant the A/C on the markers. No shame in a G/A. TSB report from AC SFO debacle quoted NASA as saying crew were clinically drunk due to fatigue. Very poor decision making ability.

The external pressures will bound to be a contributing factors as well. Was he already behind schedule? Were the lobster that everyone comes to NS for time sensitive? Having to divert due to fuel may have been on his mind as well, hence exasperating the situation.

Time will tell. There for the grace of god go I...
B737NOTGOOD is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2018, 19:19
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by B737NOTGOOD View Post
Hey Jet Jockey, that's an interesting point. As I am sure you are aware, RNAV approval is simple and the 747 is capable. GNSS would need GPS A/C. It would be very re miss of management to not seek RNAV approval for an A/C that operates worldwide. Literally the delta's in training between a RNAV and non-precision are setting RAIM RNP to .3 and adding 50ft to baro minimums. If they are relying on traditional approaches alone, well it was only a matter of time before something went off the rails. The Wx in YHZ will start to get nasty now until June and regular maintenance of approaches is not something new.

TSB #1 concern is FRMS...Cargo drivers do not follow the same rules. It will be interesting to see how long the crew was on duty. There are new CRM mandatory training for 705 operators that now include TEM. Commanders need to be aware of the possibility of latent threats and call G/A if anything goes off the rails. This has not been ascertained yet but one can assume that he didn't plant the A/C on the markers. No shame in a G/A. TSB report from AC SFO debacle quoted NASA as saying crew were clinically drunk due to fatigue. Very poor decision making ability.

The external pressures will bound to be a contributing factors as well. Was he already behind schedule? Were the lobster that everyone comes to NS for time sensitive? Having to divert due to fuel may have been on his mind as well, hence exasperating the situation.

Time will tell. There for the grace of god go I...
Well not to be insulting to that company (because of their financial history), I doubt very much they had an aircraft with the proper equipment and lots of Airlines including our very own Air canada still has aircrafts that cannot do the GPS/RNAV type approaches... remember the Air Canada crash in Halifax?

BTW, in our operation we do not add the 50' to these types of approaches... we treat them like an ILS a go down to the published MDAs.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.