Citywing incident Isle of Man
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TAF EGNS 230800Z 2309/2318 30030G45KT 9999 SCT007 BKN014
TEMPO 2309/2311 32036G55KT 3000 RA SHRA BKN007
PROB30 TEMPO 2311/2318 6000 SHRA
BECMG 2316/2318 31025=
I don't see how they could avoid taking action
TEMPO 2309/2311 32036G55KT 3000 RA SHRA BKN007
PROB30 TEMPO 2311/2318 6000 SHRA
BECMG 2316/2318 31025=
I don't see how they could avoid taking action
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 42G56, it probably doesn't matter.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that is straight down the runway it will be OK
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: More or less all over the place
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An aircraft landed during winds straight down the runway, just before a huge storm was going to hit the airport.
Getting off the runway, perpendicular to the high winds, was considered not desirable as the upwind wing could have been lifted.
Remaining on the runway, the aircraft 'jumped' due to lift created by the same high winds.
Two firetrucks were parked in front of the aircraft, close up against the wings as a precaution to 'spoil' the lift and prevent the aircraft from 'jumping'.
After about fifteen minutes the weather had passed and the aircraft taxied uneventfully to the ramp.
Getting off the runway, perpendicular to the high winds, was considered not desirable as the upwind wing could have been lifted.
Remaining on the runway, the aircraft 'jumped' due to lift created by the same high winds.
Two firetrucks were parked in front of the aircraft, close up against the wings as a precaution to 'spoil' the lift and prevent the aircraft from 'jumping'.
After about fifteen minutes the weather had passed and the aircraft taxied uneventfully to the ramp.
I REALLY SHOULDN'T BE HERE
I have always thought that safety was improved incrementally on the basis of learning from past errors and experience.
https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/let-...8-january-2007
https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/let-...8-january-2007
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just as oranges are not the only fruit , crosswinds are not the only wind limits and you could practically have flown a steam-packet ferry as a kite in those winds.
Were it not for the CAA getting involved, it sounded close to a non-story. The aircraft departed, could not land at its intended destination and diverted back to its departure field. There, due to the strong wind, unusual measures were taken to get the passengers off the aircraft. So far, so good. But this does not explain why the CAA has taken such an interest at shortest notice and why the 737, which surely struggles just the same in these wind conditions was brought in instead.
Something is still odd here.
Something is still odd here.
I can't answer the first part, but presumably the 737 was chartered because (a) the weather conditions were no longer as severe and (b) its size would allow the passenger backlog from all the cancelled L-410 flights to be cleared more quickly.
Last edited by DaveReidUK; 25th Feb 2017 at 07:09.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The winds at IOM seem >20kts X, so what was the weather at BFS? What's the flight time IOM BFS & what was the METAR at departure. DUB has RW28 & 34. Would a diversion there be better than IOM for the pax? Lots of questions, perhaps not the same number of answers.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: West of the rockies...
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like they leveled off at 3900 approaching Belfast, overflew, then turned back to IOM...
Out:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/a...ok-laz#c8b7dae
Return:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/a...ok-laz#c8b8a3a
Out:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/a...ok-laz#c8b7dae
Return:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/a...ok-laz#c8b8a3a
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to point out, there is no approach ban for winds and just because metar says 42G56 doesn't mean they landed in that, at 500 feet could have got a spot wind and it may have been inside limits.
The same day people landed all day at BHX it was right across at 50 most of the day but people landed on instant winds when there was a lull
The same day people landed all day at BHX it was right across at 50 most of the day but people landed on instant winds when there was a lull
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is on the citywing facebook page:
If you were on the plane you'd understand why they are grounded now, the full truth about from Thursday belfast flight hasn't came out yet. Shouldn't have taken of and wasn't allowed to land in belfast despite being 2 foot off the runway in belfast.
If you were on the plane you'd understand why they are grounded now, the full truth about from Thursday belfast flight hasn't came out yet. Shouldn't have taken of and wasn't allowed to land in belfast despite being 2 foot off the runway in belfast.