Comair CRJ crash in Kentucky
Aviation night ended at about 6:25, about 20 minutes after the takeoff attempt. Depending on clouds and terrain there would be some light in the sky and the sun would be somewhat behind them.
My guess is that they saw "enough" of the runway environment that they did not feel runway edge lights were needed.
During this twilight period, the runway 26 lights would be getting gradually less prominent.
My guess is that they saw "enough" of the runway environment that they did not feel runway edge lights were needed.
During this twilight period, the runway 26 lights would be getting gradually less prominent.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAR 121.590 says you can't takeoff at night without lights
the definition of night refers to civil twilight
and if takeoff was at 6:07 am EDT another 31 minutes would have to pass before takeoff without runway lights.
the runway 26 lights were not on at all.
if memory serves the runway CENTERLINE lights were inop on the long runway, the short runway all lights were out.
a fast or hurried reading of notams might confuse the issue and be another hole in the swiss cheese for you.
however, taking off without runway lights is a violation of the regs and there ain't no way around that.
I recall working for two different airlines that had the runway light questions on their written exam in ground school.
IF I were an attorney I would demand full access to training records and sylabus.
sometimes we do dumb things to make schedule.
the definition of night refers to civil twilight
and if takeoff was at 6:07 am EDT another 31 minutes would have to pass before takeoff without runway lights.
the runway 26 lights were not on at all.
if memory serves the runway CENTERLINE lights were inop on the long runway, the short runway all lights were out.
a fast or hurried reading of notams might confuse the issue and be another hole in the swiss cheese for you.
however, taking off without runway lights is a violation of the regs and there ain't no way around that.
I recall working for two different airlines that had the runway light questions on their written exam in ground school.
IF I were an attorney I would demand full access to training records and sylabus.
sometimes we do dumb things to make schedule.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NY
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough already
488 posts.
They screwed up.
Why? I guess we will know when the inquiry has been completed and published.
Will all of you who have pontificated about how just remember one thing - if ONLY that one thing - when you line up for goodness sake check the compass, heading bug and aircraft are lined up on the heading you expect to be on - if not STOP - THINK and do something about it.
They screwed up.
Why? I guess we will know when the inquiry has been completed and published.
Will all of you who have pontificated about how just remember one thing - if ONLY that one thing - when you line up for goodness sake check the compass, heading bug and aircraft are lined up on the heading you expect to be on - if not STOP - THINK and do something about it.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NY
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
poor practice if nothing else
consider: if this had been a minimum visibility takeoff ( I don't know comair's ops specs, but lets say 1/4 mile) the crew probably would have looked at the compass/dg etc. might even have had the localizer for 22 up.
If the takeoff had been done in full night, even in good visibility, the crew might have checked the compass.
But here the crew was above basic VFR with things brightening up minute by minute (though still dark).
If the takeoff had been done in full night, even in good visibility, the crew might have checked the compass.
But here the crew was above basic VFR with things brightening up minute by minute (though still dark).
Seems like poor training, poor SOP's and very poor airmanship!
Sorry guys but I think they just screwed up and whilst it would have been nice if the ATCO had noticed and done something/anything it is certainly not his responsibility. The Captain is in command.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My part 121 carrier (and, I'm guessing, Comair as well) allows takeoffs down to 1/4 mile visibility with runway lights inop, provided the captain has adequate forward visibility.
Last edited by Huck; 16th Sep 2006 at 05:00.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: MN
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alerting the crew
Just wondering if anyone has thought about the possibility that there may have been one or more frequent flyers on the flight who used the airport on a regular basis and would have known the layout of the airport and may have realised that the wrong runway was being used. What would be the protocol in this case for a passenger to alert the crew.
I know it was early morning but I also wondered if the position of the Terminal Building (which I presume was illuminted to some degress) relative to the aircraft's position as it started it's take off roll provided any visual indication that they were on the wrong runway.
I know it was early morning but I also wondered if the position of the Terminal Building (which I presume was illuminted to some degress) relative to the aircraft's position as it started it's take off roll provided any visual indication that they were on the wrong runway.
a. assume the pilots were correctly using an active runway, even if it were different than what they were used to
b. ring the flight attendant call button; but, during taxi, the flight attendant is to be seated unless on a safety related duty, so it would be ignored unless the aircraft was stopped and in a hold position on the taxiway. I doubt any flight attendant would be jumping out of their safety harness to answer a call button on a take-off roll (!)
c. jump out of their seat and go pound on the cockpit door, at which time everyone in the cabin would assume the passenger was a terrorist, and the flight attendant would be commanding the passenger to return to his seat during a takeoff....
This question is just not realistic.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
huck
there are few regulations which can be countermanded by ops specs...while I understand what you are talking about and indeed my airline has something similiar
I wouldn't say that you could legally takeoff at night.
I would say that what you are talking about would pertain to a daylight takeoff down to 1/4 mile...if you took off at night, you would need lights if you were 121 (probably 135 too).
and in the comair case, did he have adequate visibility IF HE TOOK OFF ON THE WRONG RUNWAY?
I hope you will ask that question of your cheap pilot ;-) or legal department or ACDO.(air carrier district office) before you try it.
there are few regulations which can be countermanded by ops specs...while I understand what you are talking about and indeed my airline has something similiar
I wouldn't say that you could legally takeoff at night.
I would say that what you are talking about would pertain to a daylight takeoff down to 1/4 mile...if you took off at night, you would need lights if you were 121 (probably 135 too).
and in the comair case, did he have adequate visibility IF HE TOOK OFF ON THE WRONG RUNWAY?
I hope you will ask that question of your cheap pilot ;-) or legal department or ACDO.(air carrier district office) before you try it.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: below the sky
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in post #289 I asked this question?
One of the things that doesn’t add up to me about this accident is the repeated statements that runway 26 lighting was inoperative.
Would any professional pilot line up and roll on an unlit runway before dawn without any question to the tower like “where are the runway lights?”
Still waiting for an answer from the Pro's.....
Regards nooluv..........
One of the things that doesn’t add up to me about this accident is the repeated statements that runway 26 lighting was inoperative.
Would any professional pilot line up and roll on an unlit runway before dawn without any question to the tower like “where are the runway lights?”
Still waiting for an answer from the Pro's.....
Regards nooluv..........
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: EBSL / EDYY
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nooluv in post #492 Jondc9 mentions something about a notam.
I haven't read the whole thread but if a notam was out on LEX concerning or incorporating the rwy lights I don't think any pilot will ask again.
(in such a case, such a question would give me the impression the pilots were not aware of the notam; <-- if it all there was a notam)
I haven't read the whole thread but if a notam was out on LEX concerning or incorporating the rwy lights I don't think any pilot will ask again.
(in such a case, such a question would give me the impression the pilots were not aware of the notam; <-- if it all there was a notam)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nooluv
your question is a valid one . the answer is a good pilot would have asked about the lights.
a good pilot who was tired, pressured to make schedule, who misunderstood certain provisions for no lights in reduced visabilty takeoffs and a WHOLE LOT OF OTHER THINGS might have taken off.
a bad pilot might have just gone for it
early on in this now HUGE thread, I mentioned that the NTSB SAID the CVR indicated cockpit mention of NO LIGHTS.
I asked who said this and gave a chain of events questioning possible CRM problems.
if the copilot asked about the lights and the captain dismissed it with something (see previous post) then that was the problem
if the captain mentioned it, he might have just picked up the mic and asked.
unless he misunderstood the notam about centerline lights and took it to be the runway lights and he mis understood ths bit about low vis takeoffs...the exemptions for low vis takeoffs don't WAIVE part 121.590 about NIGHT TAKEOFFS.
Often the NTSB will come up with a prelim report along the way with all the facts...sometimes quotes from the CVR show up and will give us more of a clue.
your question is a valid one . the answer is a good pilot would have asked about the lights.
a good pilot who was tired, pressured to make schedule, who misunderstood certain provisions for no lights in reduced visabilty takeoffs and a WHOLE LOT OF OTHER THINGS might have taken off.
a bad pilot might have just gone for it
early on in this now HUGE thread, I mentioned that the NTSB SAID the CVR indicated cockpit mention of NO LIGHTS.
I asked who said this and gave a chain of events questioning possible CRM problems.
if the copilot asked about the lights and the captain dismissed it with something (see previous post) then that was the problem
if the captain mentioned it, he might have just picked up the mic and asked.
unless he misunderstood the notam about centerline lights and took it to be the runway lights and he mis understood ths bit about low vis takeoffs...the exemptions for low vis takeoffs don't WAIVE part 121.590 about NIGHT TAKEOFFS.
Often the NTSB will come up with a prelim report along the way with all the facts...sometimes quotes from the CVR show up and will give us more of a clue.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roadmap to a Just Culture - cite
under the "products" tab (on top), then the
Flt Ops/ATC Ops Safety Information sharing tab
(on the left). It's there in both English and French.
For anyone who is interested, here are
some other resources on the trend replacing
a culture of blame with a culture of safety, with
significant improvements in overall safety for everyone:
A powerpoint on Threat and Error Management in ATC is
at http://www.eurocontrol.int/safety/gallery/content/public/library/TEM%20&%20NOSS.ppt
and in CRM here
www.icao.int/anb/humanfactors/KL2005/TEM-KL.PPT
and applied to hospital settings in a powerpoint here
bmj.bmjjournals.com/misc/bmj.320.7237.781/
and applied to high-risk organizations in general (someone mentioned three-mile Island and Chernobyl):
"Organizational Learning From Experience in High-Hazard Industries: Problem Investigation as Off-Line Reflective Practice", on the MIS Sloan School of Management Working paper site (Working paper #4359-02, March 2002). It is by John S. Carroll, Jenny W. Rudolph, and Sachi Hatakenaka.
It's on the Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=305718
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A oneworld lounge near you
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new Jepps are WRONG too!
Having told you that the new FAA charts are wrong, it is interesting to note that the new Jepps are wrong too.
Now we have the situation where Jepps have caught up with the FAA and they are all still wrong.
http://www.jeppesen.com/download/nav...pt-109aapt.pdf
Yes, I have reported it to Jepps. Yes, I left them details. Yes, I have offered them all the stuff that I have. No, they did not ring me back. Might be nice if they had a big telephone number for these things on their website that was bloody obvious so you could speak to the real people responsible for making changes.
The other reason that stuff like signs and markings should be right, is that even if you line up on the wrong runway, and then realise your mistake, you might just get squashed by somebody on approach.
Now we have the situation where Jepps have caught up with the FAA and they are all still wrong.
http://www.jeppesen.com/download/nav...pt-109aapt.pdf
Yes, I have reported it to Jepps. Yes, I left them details. Yes, I have offered them all the stuff that I have. No, they did not ring me back. Might be nice if they had a big telephone number for these things on their website that was bloody obvious so you could speak to the real people responsible for making changes.
The other reason that stuff like signs and markings should be right, is that even if you line up on the wrong runway, and then realise your mistake, you might just get squashed by somebody on approach.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DISCOUNT (not to be confused with Viscount).
Jepp gets their data from state authorities ( meaning the nation's aviation authority) and so does FAA, so it is Garbage in Garbage out. Jepp was sued and LOST over placement of mountain or terrain feature in Alaska about 20 plus years ago...they (jepp) argued that they just drew what NOS told them. Judge ruled it was still their responsibility.
We may see something like that again.
Jepp gets their data from state authorities ( meaning the nation's aviation authority) and so does FAA, so it is Garbage in Garbage out. Jepp was sued and LOST over placement of mountain or terrain feature in Alaska about 20 plus years ago...they (jepp) argued that they just drew what NOS told them. Judge ruled it was still their responsibility.
We may see something like that again.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in post #289 I asked this question?
One of the things that doesn’t add up to me about this accident is the repeated statements that runway 26 lighting was inoperative.
Would any professional pilot line up and roll on an unlit runway before dawn without any question to the tower like “where are the runway lights?”
Still waiting for an answer from the Pro's.....
Regards nooluv..........
One of the things that doesn’t add up to me about this accident is the repeated statements that runway 26 lighting was inoperative.
Would any professional pilot line up and roll on an unlit runway before dawn without any question to the tower like “where are the runway lights?”
Still waiting for an answer from the Pro's.....
Regards nooluv..........
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A oneworld lounge near you
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not only were the 04/22 runway edge lights said to be on, but of course the markings on 04/22 take priority over 08/26, so you get the runway used for take-off cut by the two white lines of the instrument runway side stripe.
The edge lights appear to upstanding omnidirectional runway lights. You would not see bi-directional runway lights which are used at some airports, except for a very short time in periferal(?) vision.
the line up lines on 26 do not go over the numbers, and there are no line up lead on lines on 22.
The edge lights appear to upstanding omnidirectional runway lights. You would not see bi-directional runway lights which are used at some airports, except for a very short time in periferal(?) vision.
the line up lines on 26 do not go over the numbers, and there are no line up lead on lines on 22.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
confirmation bias - speculation on how it might happen
Second, someone could have advised him that taxiway A-7 , the farthest Northeast taxiway was closed and he'd be using the next one down the runway from that. He might look at the official Airport Diagram and the next taxiway shown (incorrectly) is A-6, that takes him directly to the
intersection of 22 and 26.
So, in his mind, he will taxi out A-6 to this intersection, which will be unlit, and the runway markings may be paved over, so he needs a quick way to identify the right runway. That's "easy" - there is only a taxiway at his 12 o'clock, a 75-foot-wide cracked concrete runway (26) at his 10 o'clock, and a 150-foot-wide asphalt runway (22) at his 8 o'clock. Maybe that's his mental frame.
However, he ends up taxiing to the end of 26 instead. At this point he sees a closed taxiway at his 12 o'clock, a narrow concrete(?) strip at his 10 o'clock [ the taxiway not shown on any official chart ], and a 150-foot
wide asphalt runway at his 8 o'clock. [because, despite being nominally 75 feet wide, 26 is really 150 feet wide. And, because it was just repaved, it's asphalt not concrete.]
So, he sees exactly what his mental frame was set to see. Skip the taxiway, skip the narrow runway, take the far left wide runway, and you don't even need to check the compass. He has three "confirmations" that he's at the right point, based on pavement width and orientation, and no lights, signs, or runway markings to contradict that.
This is entirely speculation based on no inside information, but it might be one way that "confirmation bias", an incorrect airport diagram, and an ambiguous identifier ('next taxiway') could add up to a stong enough "confirmed" picture that vigilance relaxed and holding for a compass-check seemed irrelevant. There is no published reference to any "next taxiway" conversation.
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the lawyers apparently have taken notice of the signage.
Here's an article I came across today...
Lawsuit over Comair crash cites airport signs, taxiway names
Associated Press
LEXINGTON, Ky. - The family of a Canadian woman killed in a central Kentucky plane crash last month filed a lawsuit citing inadequate airport signs and confusing taxiway names and alleging that pilots were negligent in taking off from the wrong runway
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky...s/15559360.htm
Here's an article I came across today...
Lawsuit over Comair crash cites airport signs, taxiway names
Associated Press
LEXINGTON, Ky. - The family of a Canadian woman killed in a central Kentucky plane crash last month filed a lawsuit citing inadequate airport signs and confusing taxiway names and alleging that pilots were negligent in taking off from the wrong runway
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky...s/15559360.htm
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it would seem as if this attorney has done some homework , or at least had it done for him.
and lest we think too poorly of the attorney...
we must remember that DELTA and COMAIR have their attorneys, PR people, and those who will drop a hint to the media. There are airlines that have people on standby to paint over the NAME of the airline on any crashed plane. Employees of the airline that are trained to be KIND to family members in the hopes of mitigating law suits.
if I were an attorney, it would be an easy prosecution of this case...defending it will be a bear. one might try to palm this off on the airport or the Feds and there will be deals cut here and there. and if 10 percent of this effort had been used in training, 8 bucks for paint, a few signs, extra controller, a large map in operations we wouldn't have one of the longest threads in PPRUNE history!
and lest we think too poorly of the attorney...
we must remember that DELTA and COMAIR have their attorneys, PR people, and those who will drop a hint to the media. There are airlines that have people on standby to paint over the NAME of the airline on any crashed plane. Employees of the airline that are trained to be KIND to family members in the hopes of mitigating law suits.
if I were an attorney, it would be an easy prosecution of this case...defending it will be a bear. one might try to palm this off on the airport or the Feds and there will be deals cut here and there. and if 10 percent of this effort had been used in training, 8 bucks for paint, a few signs, extra controller, a large map in operations we wouldn't have one of the longest threads in PPRUNE history!
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not an exact science...
but more an art and a craft, aviation.
For a pilot it should be enough to realise that one is sat at the end of the airplane that gets to the crash site first to achieve focus on safety issues.
What the lawyers get up to after the fact and pretty much all of our armchair analysis is of little use, although I did enjoy the suggestion that SLF might be able to check whether one is using the correct runway in a situation such as this one.
I look forward to reading the NTSB report on this accident. There might be something useful in that. This here is mostly informative for showing a typical human response to what would seem to be an avoidable accident, the sort of thing we all hope never to be involved in.
For a pilot it should be enough to realise that one is sat at the end of the airplane that gets to the crash site first to achieve focus on safety issues.
What the lawyers get up to after the fact and pretty much all of our armchair analysis is of little use, although I did enjoy the suggestion that SLF might be able to check whether one is using the correct runway in a situation such as this one.
I look forward to reading the NTSB report on this accident. There might be something useful in that. This here is mostly informative for showing a typical human response to what would seem to be an avoidable accident, the sort of thing we all hope never to be involved in.