Air France crash at YYZ (Merged)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Beverly Hills 90210
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming that a "standard" deceleration on a wet runway was achieved then the touchdown point calculates to the half-runway mark.
Or, if a "standard" touch-down point was achieved then that would mean 45% of the braking force was lost compared to on a dry runway !
Hmmmmm
Or, if a "standard" touch-down point was achieved then that would mean 45% of the braking force was lost compared to on a dry runway !
Hmmmmm
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
172driver -
No offense intended, but the logic of that story is due to the location of the major roadway at the end of the runway, the ravine kept an airline accident from becoming a car accident.
I keep wondering when it will sink in to the idiots (worldwide) who zone and approve building adjacent to airports that busy highways, roads, large structures, homes, and oh, say, gas stations, do not belong at the end of runways.
Remember the SW Burbank "long landing'" that almost stopped on top of the pumps of a gas (ur, petrol) station?
Of course the self loading cargo wants the airport close by with easy access... just not close enough to disturb their sleep.
We need real sanitized overrun (and undershoot) areas, perhaps with that nifty crushy cement stuff, without gullys or gas stations in the way.
2 cents in. And my comment is directed at the civic planners and media who let them get away with their planning, not you 172driver.
No offense intended, but the logic of that story is due to the location of the major roadway at the end of the runway, the ravine kept an airline accident from becoming a car accident.
I keep wondering when it will sink in to the idiots (worldwide) who zone and approve building adjacent to airports that busy highways, roads, large structures, homes, and oh, say, gas stations, do not belong at the end of runways.
Remember the SW Burbank "long landing'" that almost stopped on top of the pumps of a gas (ur, petrol) station?
Of course the self loading cargo wants the airport close by with easy access... just not close enough to disturb their sleep.
We need real sanitized overrun (and undershoot) areas, perhaps with that nifty crushy cement stuff, without gullys or gas stations in the way.
2 cents in. And my comment is directed at the civic planners and media who let them get away with their planning, not you 172driver.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aeronautic, check a map of the airport - the high way is ALMOST in the same direction as the runway. it would have needed to go MUCH further too make it on to the high way...
I saw the google aerial image posted earlier in this thread, though did not recall the orientation you describe.
But I'll take you at your word...
Uhmmm.... removing flight boot from mouth on this incident.
Why do people keep going on about the spoilers? If you look at the ailerons on a bus you'll see they droop without hydraulic power. As has already been said the spoilers will not remain up once hydraulic pressure has been removed, and since the hydraulic fluid has likely been burnt off and the engines are shut down you’re not going to get much hydraulic pressure. It's extremely unlikely that the pilots missed the blue ECAM memo on the landing checklist.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, Chris Yates, a transport analyst at Jane’s publications, said that if the ravine had been filled in, Flight 358 would have ploughed on, straight on to the busy highway running alongside the airport. (emphasis mine)
One soundbite made in haste gets picked up and transmitted round the world as gospel
I'll say no more about the meeja, but I would hope posters here might at least look at one of the diagram/aerial picture links which have been supplied.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Europe
Age: 14
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nigel OD & others,
1. declaring a low fuel emergency should sound like: "MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY! KLM 691 declaring low fuel emergency request direct Syracuse at 15000ft" (or whatever optimum altitude). A PAN,PAN call is not correct. That's an URGENCY call; ultimately it was treated as such by ATC not giving them their optimum altitude rightaway.
2. Whatever your alternate: you aim to land anywhere with 45min. It might be legal and not unsafe to land with 30 minutes, but far from preferable. SYR was KL691 alternate. If you want to make it all the way to SYR and planning to land with 30'' hoping to get your optimum altitude is flying on fumes in my book.
3. KLM 691 also got stuck in the hold, giving them plenty of time to contemplate options. Going 'in' to an area with +TS and gambling on a expeditious landing & the risk of overshooting or someone blowing a tire on the runway ahead of you and knowing that in that case you will end up in an emegency is STUPID. KLM691 crew had their options and chose to ignore them.
1. declaring a low fuel emergency should sound like: "MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY! KLM 691 declaring low fuel emergency request direct Syracuse at 15000ft" (or whatever optimum altitude). A PAN,PAN call is not correct. That's an URGENCY call; ultimately it was treated as such by ATC not giving them their optimum altitude rightaway.
2. Whatever your alternate: you aim to land anywhere with 45min. It might be legal and not unsafe to land with 30 minutes, but far from preferable. SYR was KL691 alternate. If you want to make it all the way to SYR and planning to land with 30'' hoping to get your optimum altitude is flying on fumes in my book.
3. KLM 691 also got stuck in the hold, giving them plenty of time to contemplate options. Going 'in' to an area with +TS and gambling on a expeditious landing & the risk of overshooting or someone blowing a tire on the runway ahead of you and knowing that in that case you will end up in an emegency is STUPID. KLM691 crew had their options and chose to ignore them.
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, Chris Yates, a transport analyst at Jane’s publications
Leave it to those who know what they're talking about to comment, eh?
16B
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with all the comments regarding the evacuation....well done to the CC.
One area not been commented is ATC. Have listened to the ATC tapes and once again have only admiration for the professionalism of the ATC guys/gals who, even before the accident, juggled traffic in the midst of bad weather and weather avoidance requests, and after the accident calmly dealt with the go-arounds, fuel emergency etc.
Well done to all concerned.
One area not been commented is ATC. Have listened to the ATC tapes and once again have only admiration for the professionalism of the ATC guys/gals who, even before the accident, juggled traffic in the midst of bad weather and weather avoidance requests, and after the accident calmly dealt with the go-arounds, fuel emergency etc.
Well done to all concerned.
Runway Length vs. Arrestor Beds
The image showing the tire tracks exiting 24L directly to a downslope makes plain that the GTAA has chosen to maximise runway length with zero allowance for overruns.
An EMAS arrestor bed would likely have made this overrun a near non-event like this one:
But the total runway length would be some 500' shorter which would reduce maximum weights and therefore revenues for the carriers and the GTAA.
Oh Yes, EMAS arrestor beds are not cheap, but somehow I think AF's insurers would find it easier to cough up for rehabilitating an arrestor bed than hull replacement.
Other EMAS Installations
An EMAS arrestor bed would likely have made this overrun a near non-event like this one:
But the total runway length would be some 500' shorter which would reduce maximum weights and therefore revenues for the carriers and the GTAA.
Oh Yes, EMAS arrestor beds are not cheap, but somehow I think AF's insurers would find it easier to cough up for rehabilitating an arrestor bed than hull replacement.
Other EMAS Installations
Last edited by RatherBeFlying; 4th Aug 2005 at 20:43.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top respect for the Cabin crew performance, and the ATC control.
I hope the pilots will have made the correct choice in their options. This must be a tough time for the captain right now. Certainly, all my toughts are for them. It seems Air France has not been "lucky" those last ten years!
And by the way it's impossible to discuss about that crash on the french forum Eurocockpit if you ask question about Air France and it's reliability!
They will just erase your message!!!
I hope the pilots will have made the correct choice in their options. This must be a tough time for the captain right now. Certainly, all my toughts are for them. It seems Air France has not been "lucky" those last ten years!
And by the way it's impossible to discuss about that crash on the french forum Eurocockpit if you ask question about Air France and it's reliability!
They will just erase your message!!!
Combine Operations
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K.
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've never heard of an arrestor bed like this, but it looks extremely impressive. No indication at what speed the aircraft entered the bed, though.
I reckon a gravel bed might work; I've seen how effective they are with heavy lorries with brake failure going down a steep hill at an incredible rate of knots. You just need a tow truck to pull it out and a bloke with a rake to level out the bed. It doesn't work with Formula 1, though - the cars don't have any ground clearance, so they just bounce over it all into whatever's on the other side.
If you have a road actually running parallel with the runway, there's no way, of course, that an aircraft will run into it. It's absolutely impossible. Unless, of course, the aircraft loses directional control.
I reckon a gravel bed might work; I've seen how effective they are with heavy lorries with brake failure going down a steep hill at an incredible rate of knots. You just need a tow truck to pull it out and a bloke with a rake to level out the bed. It doesn't work with Formula 1, though - the cars don't have any ground clearance, so they just bounce over it all into whatever's on the other side.
If you have a road actually running parallel with the runway, there's no way, of course, that an aircraft will run into it. It's absolutely impossible. Unless, of course, the aircraft loses directional control.
Last edited by Farmer 1; 4th Aug 2005 at 19:34.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of observations and then a comment…..
Every runway constructed should have an arrestor bed as part of its design…..retrofit existing runways wherever feasible.
Regarding the spoiler discussion…..would not retracting the spoilers be on the EVAC checklist?
Perhaps the title of the site should be changed to WPPRUNE, the “W” standing for “Wannabee”…….
And now to the point…..it will be months, if not a year or more until the cause of this accident is fully investigated and reported on. One of the aspects that will/should be discussed is the approach and landing proficiency of long haul pilots. With supplemental crews and the range of current generation aircraft, it is not at all unusual for a crewmember to lose landing currency (U.S. – three landings every 90 days). That is a minimum….not guaranteeing any type of proficiency. Some airlines have reduced time between training events on their long haul fleets to address this issue (some did so voluntarily, some with a nudge from authorities), and some have added some shorter and/or multiple leg flights for crewmember proficiency.
Comments?
Every runway constructed should have an arrestor bed as part of its design…..retrofit existing runways wherever feasible.
Regarding the spoiler discussion…..would not retracting the spoilers be on the EVAC checklist?
Perhaps the title of the site should be changed to WPPRUNE, the “W” standing for “Wannabee”…….
And now to the point…..it will be months, if not a year or more until the cause of this accident is fully investigated and reported on. One of the aspects that will/should be discussed is the approach and landing proficiency of long haul pilots. With supplemental crews and the range of current generation aircraft, it is not at all unusual for a crewmember to lose landing currency (U.S. – three landings every 90 days). That is a minimum….not guaranteeing any type of proficiency. Some airlines have reduced time between training events on their long haul fleets to address this issue (some did so voluntarily, some with a nudge from authorities), and some have added some shorter and/or multiple leg flights for crewmember proficiency.
Comments?
Gravel Arrestor Beds
The problem with gravel as an airport arrestor bed material is that the jet blast blows it out.
Also gravel in the wrong place is FOD.
Also gravel in the wrong place is FOD.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Age: 68
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- Several "journalists" asked several questions about the JBI (James Brake Index). He replied Canada uses a different index CxBI (???).
It's CRFI, Canadian Runway Friction Index. Scale of 0 - 1 with .8 equating to bare dry concrete. Not used for standing water on the runway. However water up to 1/10 inch equates to approximately .3 and water in excess of 1/10 inch is something less than .1
Need to consult appropriate CRFI tables to see what that does to your landing distance or landing field length.
Above provided as background info only. No opinion/comment intended or inferred.
It's CRFI, Canadian Runway Friction Index. Scale of 0 - 1 with .8 equating to bare dry concrete. Not used for standing water on the runway. However water up to 1/10 inch equates to approximately .3 and water in excess of 1/10 inch is something less than .1
Need to consult appropriate CRFI tables to see what that does to your landing distance or landing field length.
Above provided as background info only. No opinion/comment intended or inferred.