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

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

Also being discussed on the main Rumor's section

7700 ft wet and with a tailwind ...come on man.......

Is the book value for the B-744F max tailwind 15 knots? They had a little more than that with the gusts...

Well at least they didn't have far to walk to the nearest road for a taxi cab to the hotel...

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.

At the peak gust, that's 19 kts of crosswind and 9 kts of tailwind, not 21 kts of tailwind.

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.

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.

@ 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

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.

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.

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.