Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BACX E145 off rwy @ HAJ

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BACX E145 off rwy @ HAJ

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 14th August 2005 | 15:33
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: UK
BACX E145 off rwy @ HAJ

rumour has it a BACX e145 (G-EMBD) has come off the rwy at HAJ, after having braking difficulty on a wet runway....

anyone got more info?
Ascot is offline  
Old 14th August 2005 | 20:24
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
From: Cloudbase
just made it into the online media. Embraer 145 overshoot on the wet runway, 49 people evacuated, seems noone was injured.
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,369758,00.html
SoaringTheSkies is offline  
Old 14th August 2005 | 23:38
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
From: brighton
Thats in German for everybody else that plans to click on the above link
flyer55 is offline  
Old 15th August 2005 | 06:28
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
From: London & Edinburgh
BBC Story is also available here

Jordan
Jordan D is offline  
Old 15th August 2005 | 07:11
  #5 (permalink)  
RMC
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 578
Likes: 2
From: Sutton
Wasnt going to post here but, as usual, the media have got it wrong. To stop people diving down the wrong bunny hole... the problem is less of a "downpour" / pilot error issue more of a total system failure issue. Shouldnt be too long before the facts come out. The bit they did get right was that everyone is OK.
RMC is offline  
Old 15th August 2005 | 07:16
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
Presumably you're hinting at a total brake failure as the BACX Embraers don't have reversers fitted?
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 15th August 2005 | 09:00
  #7 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
http://www.flugzeugbilder.de/show.php?id=374027
threemiles is offline  
Old 15th August 2005 | 09:24
  #8 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 991
Likes: 128
From: big green wheely bin
Glad to see everyone got off, although I have to say if I was sitting by the overwing exit I would have opend it!
Jonty is offline  
Old 15th August 2005 | 13:38
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Why? Aircraft is upright on its wheels. I'd take the steps, thanks.
MaxReheat is offline  
Old 16th August 2005 | 15:24
  #10 (permalink)  
100 Countries Visited
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 442
Likes: 12
From: Denmark
I understand that a BA 757 encountered a slippy runway at FRA on Sunday evening.
Copenhagen is offline  
Old 16th August 2005 | 16:05
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
I imagine lots of aircraft encountered slippery runways in Europe on Sunday. Where's the news?
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 17th August 2005 | 08:50
  #12 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 991
Likes: 128
From: big green wheely bin
MR

I didnt say I would have got out of it, but I would have opened it just in case.
Jonty is offline  
Old 31st August 2005 | 22:35
  #13 (permalink)  
The Cooler King
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 30
From: Europe
Embraer 145 overrun at Hanover

Can anyone tell me why it overran? Was on the 14th of August, but can't find anything about it here

Farrell

http://www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/open.file?i...=907552&size=L

God I\'m such a T@SSER! - thanks!
Farrell is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 05:16
  #14 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
From: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Smile

For sure the runway was not long enough
threemiles is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 07:19
  #15 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
From: England.
.....the BACX Embraers don't have reversers fitted?
Surprising lack of take-up on that comment. I'll admit I've no idea if BACX have reversers fitted, though.

Often looked at the shirt-button tyres on the 145, added to which the phenominal approach speed and considered that not having reversers really is asking for the inevitable. Maybe not applicable here. But if it is, then it warrants discussion, IMHO.
acbus1 is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 14:20
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
From: Bath
Why no thrust reversers? Cost, weight penalty maybe?
interestedparty is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 14:31
  #17 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
From: UK
Certainly a cost/weight penalty.

Also they can't be taken into account for performance calculations so runway has to be long enough to land without them regardless.

Carbon brakes on the ERJ wear far less when hot so one is supposed to brake v.firmly anyway to reduce brake wear. Thrust reversers leading to light brake application will therefore actually increase this brake wear.

All in all a no win situation (Unless the brakes fail, along with the accumulator pressure and the emergency/parking brakes too - but then why stop there, why not have parachutes and anchors in case the reversers fail..... )
Ropey Pilot is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 15:01
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: SEA (or better PAE)
Ropey,

can you get a quote on your statement on brake wear for EMB 145 (I presume the same is on 140, 135)?

I can not bet my life on it but a combination of loads from thrust reverser + light breaking is on some other a/c resulting in LESS wear on brakes.

I presume you have hands-on experience for that statement, or if not a good quote.

It seems strange, however, they opted out thrust reversers. I've never seen that been done on comparable CRJ 200 fleet (1000+ a/c).
Grunf is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 16:42
  #19 (permalink)  
RMC
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 578
Likes: 2
From: Sutton
ACBUS - No t/r on BACX 145 a/c as it adds half a tonne at the back end. This would mean we had to kick off 10% of our pax when MTOW restricted.

GRUNF - RP is right with the 145 carbon brakes they wear less when halfway up the amber band than when cold (source 145 maintenance conference)

It appears Embraer have a problem here. I understand the German AIB are investigating another 145 which overran a week or so before in similar conditions.

The aircraft will not allow "normal" pressure to be applied to the wheel brakes until the wheels are rotating at 50 knots. The 145 tyre pressure makes them prone to aquaplanning....so you can be pressing/releasing like hell and nothing happens.

The emergency brake does bypass the normal system but also bypasses the anti skid and on a dry surface is like hitting a brick wall if you apply at 10 knots...you really would not want to use it.

HAJ is built on a marsh and it has some of the worst CBs / rain showers in Germany. Apparently there had been a huge downpour just before the incident and the reports of poor braking action were not passed onto the BACX crew.
RMC is offline  
Old 1st September 2005 | 17:38
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
From: uk
I think the thrust reverser option adds 130 kg,s per side so nearer to .25 tonne heavier which is still significant with only 21 tonnes max all up.We almost always had to carry ballast to get the c of g rearwards.The brakes are excellent if you use them as designed,and i never aquaplaned one in over 2000 hrs.The windshield wiper system is the best ive seen ,why did Boeing put those "moggy minor" ones on 73,s?
I thought (may be wrong) that the ammount of pressure used when you select the emergency brake was proportionate to the ammount you displace the lever.
nitefiter is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.