C17 Lands at wrong (3600 foot!) runway
The duty bod at 16 Flt AAC at their tiny strip in Dhekelia was most surprised one afternoon in 1980, to here the roar of engines as a Romanian Tarom Airways Antonav landed there instead of Larnaca. It became the star of the Flight open day the following weekend. It departed with a very large dayglo 16 Flt AAC logo on the tail, after all the seats and most of the fuel had been removed and the perimeter fence and a few trees had been levelled.
While it was a clearly a mistake to land at the wrong aerodrome, the crew certainly reacted well when they realised how short the runway was and executed a safe maximum effort landing.....
Let's hope that, since there was no damage to anything except pride, the safety board just get the crew to write up their experience so that others can learn from it - and that no career-damaging 'disciplinary' action is taken.
Let's hope that, since there was no damage to anything except pride, the safety board just get the crew to write up their experience so that others can learn from it - and that no career-damaging 'disciplinary' action is taken.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I concur with BEagle that the crew appeared to have executed a safe landing, I can't help thinking that they should have 'gone around' - unless they really thought thta they were at McDill.
Duncs
Duncs
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hopefully the guys won't be joining the "Flying rubber dogsh*t out of HKG" airline.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North-East England
Age: 62
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I lived in Melbourne in 1985 a Garuda 747 landed at Essendon (YMEN) R26, 3,600ft, instead of Melbourne (YMML) R27, 7500ft, which was 5 miles away. There was a massive strip-out before it could take off again!
Garuda Airlines
The Age - Google News Archive Search
Garuda Airlines
The Age - Google News Archive Search
US procedure for an Aerodrome controller, from FAAH 7110.65:
"When an arriving aircraft reports at a position where he/she should be seen but has not been visually observed, advise the aircraft as a part of the landing
clearance that it is not in sight and restate the landing runway."
PHRASEOLOGY−
NOT IN SIGHT, RUNWAY (number) CLEARED TO
LAND.
Although the aircrew may have some explaining to do, I've no doubt that there are some ATC types doing a bit of explaining as well - if they'd been properly surveilling their airspace, this incident could have been prevented.
"When an arriving aircraft reports at a position where he/she should be seen but has not been visually observed, advise the aircraft as a part of the landing
clearance that it is not in sight and restate the landing runway."
PHRASEOLOGY−
NOT IN SIGHT, RUNWAY (number) CLEARED TO
LAND.
Although the aircrew may have some explaining to do, I've no doubt that there are some ATC types doing a bit of explaining as well - if they'd been properly surveilling their airspace, this incident could have been prevented.
HH, no, that was a silly rumour.
The B-52 was holding clear under ATC direction, then was given an impossibly tight vector for its flypast, which the crew were unable to accept.
Whereas an F-3 most certainly did carry out a display at the wrong village fête....
The B-52 was holding clear under ATC direction, then was given an impossibly tight vector for its flypast, which the crew were unable to accept.
Whereas an F-3 most certainly did carry out a display at the wrong village fête....
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote+beagle]the crew certainly reacted well when they realised how short the runway was and executed a safe maximum effort landing[/quote] - I fail to see how they can even remotely be considered as 'doing well'!
1) CAVOK, We look up from our copy of 'Peanuts/ (insert other comic as applicable) on short finals, expecting to see, what 11000ft of tarmac? They see several 100% less. As Duncan says, to do 'well' would be to go round and think about things.
2) Now, we don't notice and land anyway - 2 options arise
a) Shout 'Holy Shiite', stand on the brakes, pull max reverse and close your eyes.
b) Shout 'Holy Shiite', then "WTF, let's just roll off the end, who gives a Shiite?"
They were LUCKY - not 'doing well' - that it stopped, and yes, I would firmly believe significant disciplinary action is called for (plus an eyesight check?).
1) CAVOK, We look up from our copy of 'Peanuts/ (insert other comic as applicable) on short finals, expecting to see, what 11000ft of tarmac? They see several 100% less. As Duncan says, to do 'well' would be to go round and think about things.
2) Now, we don't notice and land anyway - 2 options arise
a) Shout 'Holy Shiite', stand on the brakes, pull max reverse and close your eyes.
b) Shout 'Holy Shiite', then "WTF, let's just roll off the end, who gives a Shiite?"
They were LUCKY - not 'doing well' - that it stopped, and yes, I would firmly believe significant disciplinary action is called for (plus an eyesight check?).
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In all fairness to the pilots, their view of the runway may have been 'obstructed' by those pesky dual HUD's, which have little use other than to provide enhanced situational awareness.
At least they were not dumb enough to attempt a go around after touching down.
I still think some one is in a lot of trouble, no tea and biscuits type of trouble.
But, it was an impressive landing in any case.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: isle of man
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many years ago I was a young ATCO at HMS Fulmar (Now RAF Lossiemouth). It was during the Summer Leave period and the RAF controllers remained on duty to provide Approach Control for Kinloss and Moray Radar services, as Lossie airfield was closed except for the SAR helos. I had just released a CAF Argus to Kinloss Tower for a visual join and went on to the balcony to have a break as there was no other traffic expected and it was a hot summer day.
Some few minutes later I was alerted to the sound of aircraft noise only to see the Argus touching down on Lossie's main runway.
The aircraft did a quick backtrack and was soon airborne for Kinloss. The next day we were the surprised recipients of a barrel of beer!!
Some few minutes later I was alerted to the sound of aircraft noise only to see the Argus touching down on Lossie's main runway.
The aircraft did a quick backtrack and was soon airborne for Kinloss. The next day we were the surprised recipients of a barrel of beer!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mare Nostrum
Age: 41
Posts: 1,427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There were four pilots assigned to this mission. The rest of the 19 crew was partly as a result of the DV onboard. This probably won't wend too well for the pilots, possibly a FEB.
Champagne anyone...?
Good to see some finger pointing at those pesky new fangled heads up display thingumajigs. The rot set in with that Spinning Jenny I tell you.... 
These guys f**cked up cosmically. Runway 33% the size of the one they were expecting, covered in Cessnas. Nav kit & magenta/white line telling them they had 7 miles to the threshold. CAVOK weather too.
Had they briefed the approach they might have read the warning on every plate for rwy 22:
Unfamiliar airfield in relatively busy airspace - vectored ILS? Or is that too uncool? There may well have been 4 pilots on the flight (there could well have been 400 for all that it matters) but ultimately this is a two man flightdeck aircraft and should be capable of being operated as such. What was the PM/PNF doing?
These guys f**cked up cosmically. Runway 33% the size of the one they were expecting, covered in Cessnas. Nav kit & magenta/white line telling them they had 7 miles to the threshold. CAVOK weather too.
Had they briefed the approach they might have read the warning on every plate for rwy 22:
Unfamiliar airfield in relatively busy airspace - vectored ILS? Or is that too uncool? There may well have been 4 pilots on the flight (there could well have been 400 for all that it matters) but ultimately this is a two man flightdeck aircraft and should be capable of being operated as such. What was the PM/PNF doing?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ctually I think that may had a lot to do with it. They really didn't look out of the windshield (passed the HUD display) until after they touched down, then it was first 'Oh ****e', followed by 'what the hell did we do' after they got it stopped.
Much prefer to fly with INS/GPS istead of a nav and a HUD any day.... 3000 hours glass cockpit and not a single whiff of Pi$$....
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find this 'HUD fixation' quite unbelievable and TOTALLY inexcusable. What if there had been a Cessna at the touchdown. What if the runway was closed/disused/cratered? Don't folk look 'out' any more?