Aircraft "off runway" in Stuttgart
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: planet earth
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
METAR: EDDS 260850Z 08002KT 0800 R25/0900N SN BR FEW001 BKN003 M03/M03 Q1012 07650265 TEMPO 0600
Landing distance available 3045 m
Check the braking coefficient in relation to the available RWY length and make your own judgement...
Landing distance available 3045 m
Check the braking coefficient in relation to the available RWY length and make your own judgement...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EC
Age: 55
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This morning at 08h10 local time, a SWISS Embraer 145 with the flight number LX1164 arriving in Stuttgart from Zurich, rolled off the runway into the frozen grass upon landing. Nobody was hurt. There are no visible signs of damage to the Embraer 145 aircraft.
An Embraer without reverse thrust again. Would have been a good investment.
bla
An Embraer without reverse thrust again. Would have been a good investment.
bla
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Mostly out of suitcase
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that the accident occurred at about 0800 hrs LT, hence the following metar would have be vaild for this period:
EDDS 260650Z 12001KT 1400 R07/P1500D -SN BR VV/// M03/M04 Q1012 RESN 07650265 TEMPO SN
With such a ceiling, they might have been doing a LVP approach & hence flaps 22.
No reverser thrusters certainly can't help things.
Anybody closer know anything??
EDDS 260650Z 12001KT 1400 R07/P1500D -SN BR VV/// M03/M04 Q1012 RESN 07650265 TEMPO SN
With such a ceiling, they might have been doing a LVP approach & hence flaps 22.
No reverser thrusters certainly can't help things.
Anybody closer know anything??
Last edited by Kanger; 26th Jan 2006 at 13:47.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think some of you are missing the point. The aircraft performance is based on the equipment it has. If the performance says it can land safely in the conditions then the crew were unlucky. If the performance says they shouldn't land then they screwed up. Thrust reversers are nothing to do with it.
Of course, it could have been brake failure, burst tyre, plain bad luck, stupidity or any combination of the above.
Of course, it could have been brake failure, burst tyre, plain bad luck, stupidity or any combination of the above.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Obvious
Age: 78
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the Crew should read this thread
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=204897
a useful braking technique
a useful braking technique
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Midlands (apparently)
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Focus.de
Here is a picture of the Swiss a/c that according to the article "missed the runway".
Looks more like it rolled off it gently if I may say so in my non expert opinion.
Looks more like it rolled off it gently if I may say so in my non expert opinion.
The aircraft performance is based on the equipment it has. If the performance says it can land safely in the conditions then the crew were unlucky.
Our industry does not maintain its excellent safety record with luck. Luck is where the safety factors are just good enough; we require safety margins providing defence in depth to accommodate the many threats to safe operations and the assumptions or mistakes that we often make.
If the performance says they shouldn't land then they f*cked up.
Thrust reversers are nothing to do with it.
JAR-25 NPA 14/2004 allows operators to take credit for reverse thrust on contaminated runways. Operators who do not have reverse due to MEL or equipment choice should make the necessary adjustments to the published landing performance, and in the latter case there would only be one standard.
“a useful braking technique”; the extensive discussion raised doubts about the value of the technique. In addition, it would not affect the published performance on which decisions are based and it is unlikely to make any significant difference in the actual stopping performance without additional landing risks.
The critical safety defences in contaminated operations are the decisions considering the landing taken before making an approach, not the dependence of non standard techniques or luck when on the runway.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: France
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to take any chances on what happened or blame anyone here but I've been a Captain on this aircraft for 4 years for that very company and I've flown it all over Europe on icy runways, even very icy ones sometimes which makes for a good surprise when the braking coefficient is supposed to be good, and not having reversers has never been a problem. None of the Embraers Swiss-Crossair operate have them and they have been flying around Europe since 1999, if it was really that unsafe, don't you think something like this would have happened before? Their operation subjects them to these conditions 4 or 5 months a year, think about how many flights that is...
Anyway, I think unfortunately this is a golden opportunity for Aeropers, the ex-Crossair will understand
Anyway, I think unfortunately this is a golden opportunity for Aeropers, the ex-Crossair will understand
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Mostly out of suitcase
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Altyre,
Have you ever had experiences of aqua-planning?
Slush can provide superb conditions for this to occur. Then of course, all the calculation goes out the window regardless how much one lies within the calculated values.
I wonder if this was a factor in this incident?
Have you ever had experiences of aqua-planning?
Slush can provide superb conditions for this to occur. Then of course, all the calculation goes out the window regardless how much one lies within the calculated values.
I wonder if this was a factor in this incident?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safetypee - The point I'm making is that thrust reversers are not fitted to the Embraer and not considered in the performance calcs of this aircraft, therefore they are completely irrelevant to this incident. Heck, an arrester hook or a braking chute might have helped as well but you wouldn't consider that now, would you?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2mm Slush
2mm slush but braking action very good (65), strange. Then again having no reversers certainly does not help in this situation regardless if some office fart approved it or not 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 18A
Age: 38
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aeroBits i was a crew member when an embraer 145 went of the runway at another german airport and i can tell you now,it may look like it rolled gently off the runway in a still picture,but when youre rolling across the grass at 70 knots its a whole different story
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have it on very good authority that the BACX EMB145 that rolled off the runway end in Hanover last August made a perfect touch down, in the right place but experienced aquaplaning. The root cause was the landing being too soft to spin the wheels sufficiently to create braking effect.
So, on a wet, or contaminated runway, it appears you need to touch down harder than normal to get the initial tyre contact with the concrete and get the wheels rotating fast enough for the brakes to take effect.
The lack of reversers would appear not to be an issue if the wheels were not turning fast enough to cause friction on the runway surface.
I will be reassured when I feel a resounding thump on touchdown.
So, on a wet, or contaminated runway, it appears you need to touch down harder than normal to get the initial tyre contact with the concrete and get the wheels rotating fast enough for the brakes to take effect.
The lack of reversers would appear not to be an issue if the wheels were not turning fast enough to cause friction on the runway surface.
I will be reassured when I feel a resounding thump on touchdown.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Obvious
Age: 78
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Value of Progressive Backstick Braking
Speedpig said:
Which is why you need the backstick braking technique. On the wrong (i.e. contaminated) surface, either the wheels won't rotate or the anti-skid will ease up on the braking sufficient to keep the wheels rotating / not blow the tyre. It's called aquaplaning and firm arrivals won't resolve that poor braking condition when there's slush on the runway. "Up elevator/backstick" loads up the main-gear if used early on against braking => much more effective braking.
.
SafetyPee said:
So when you're down and suspect that you might be running out of bitumen, you must just take your lumps - not use an unapproved (yet proven) technique?
.
The root cause was the landing being too soft to spin the wheels sufficiently to create braking effect.
So, on a wet, or contaminated runway, it appears you need to touch down harder than normal to get the initial tyre contact with the concrete and get the wheels rotating fast enough for the brakes to take effect.
So, on a wet, or contaminated runway, it appears you need to touch down harder than normal to get the initial tyre contact with the concrete and get the wheels rotating fast enough for the brakes to take effect.
.
SafetyPee said:
The critical safety defences in contaminated operations are the decisions considering the landing taken before making an approach, not the dependence of non standard techniques or luck when on the runway.
.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canīt comment on the Bigboystoys, but on a Citationjet (without Reverser) Flight Safety recomments stick back after touchdown, on the Reverser equipped Citation Bravo/Ultra they recommend stick forward. Worked well for me (keep fingers crossed).
The CJ2 (C525A) had a several major ADīs to the brake system, I operated the first in Europe and had, prior to the mods, one encounter on a very wet runway (landed during a heavy shower) in EDSB, this runway is something like 9700ft, give or take a bid (was a training flight) we used up more than 2000 meters to stop. Antiskid cycle was waaay to long. This aircraft has a MLM of 11500lbs - and Groundflaps, speedbrakes and thrust attenuators. Vref was something around 110 kts. I guess an Embraer is a tad faster, heavier and doesnīt have Thrust attenuators - Iīd guess (wild speculation) that maybe the brake system doesnīt work too well in snow/slush/verywet scenarios...given the record of overruns
The CJ2 (C525A) had a several major ADīs to the brake system, I operated the first in Europe and had, prior to the mods, one encounter on a very wet runway (landed during a heavy shower) in EDSB, this runway is something like 9700ft, give or take a bid (was a training flight) we used up more than 2000 meters to stop. Antiskid cycle was waaay to long. This aircraft has a MLM of 11500lbs - and Groundflaps, speedbrakes and thrust attenuators. Vref was something around 110 kts. I guess an Embraer is a tad faster, heavier and doesnīt have Thrust attenuators - Iīd guess (wild speculation) that maybe the brake system doesnīt work too well in snow/slush/verywet scenarios...given the record of overruns
Join Date: May 2005
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Met and runway conditions apply to all aircraft/airmen and the law of physics are the same for everyone, even to ex-Crossair pilots and Embraers. So if the other guys and aircraft enroute to and from STR the same days didn't experience a runway excursion there must have been a reason for that one. Either a technical failure or a operational failure, inquiry will tell.
And please spare us the song of how much more difficult it is to operate the regionals and how easy 320's and 737's are. Most of us have passed through the earlier stage and know. Everyone has to get their act together in whatever equippment, bad luck can't hit unilaterally just one category.
GF
And please spare us the song of how much more difficult it is to operate the regionals and how easy 320's and 737's are. Most of us have passed through the earlier stage and know. Everyone has to get their act together in whatever equippment, bad luck can't hit unilaterally just one category.
GF