UPS contract plane off runway - KCRW
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Visibility was 10 miles so the approach was legal for any category. Is the SD-330 category B (max speed 135 knots) for circling perhaps?
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kc...2017-1030Z.mp3
The audio is not great and it sounds like the VOR-A was requested by the SD-330 crew from the context. As aterpster observed, DME is required for the LOC Rwy 5 but not for the VOR-A.
There is indeed a pilot with a name similar to that of the first officer with a commercial license and a current Class I medical listed at a New Hampshire address in the FAA Airmen database.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. There are witness statements and apparently more than one surveillance video showing the aircraft landing at a "very strange angle". What could be the cause? Sudden gust / windshear? Last minute side-slip? Mechanical trouble?
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm. If there was no impact prior to the threshold, I guess the most "plain" possibility is that the aircraft broke out of clouds significantly high or offset from the runway centerline and impacted while attempting to maneuver back to the centerline? Or alternatively stalled while attempting to go-around, causing a wing drop and subsequent crash.
Those who've seen the videos probably have a good idea of what happened.
Those who've seen the videos probably have a good idea of what happened.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple key questions at this point:
1. There's a report that the aircraft struck trees on final approach. Has this been substantiated?
2. There are witness statements and apparently more than one surveillance video showing the aircraft landing at a "very strange angle". What could be the cause? Sudden gust / windshear? Last minute side-slip? Mechanical trouble?
1. There's a report that the aircraft struck trees on final approach. Has this been substantiated?
2. There are witness statements and apparently more than one surveillance video showing the aircraft landing at a "very strange angle". What could be the cause? Sudden gust / windshear? Last minute side-slip? Mechanical trouble?
Only thought I can add to points already considered is that KCRW is a "tabletop" airport, with a steep upslope rising to meet rwy 5.
A south tailwind could result in an updraft under the approach, that may have interfered with the pilots' planned maneuvering.
Picture also shows the landslide that "ate" part of the EMAS.
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/apps/pb...=1493510400069
A south tailwind could result in an updraft under the approach, that may have interfered with the pilots' planned maneuvering.
Picture also shows the landslide that "ate" part of the EMAS.
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/apps/pb...=1493510400069
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Yep. Although some of that is the repair work - and raises the question of what effect the on-going repairs (lights? parked equipment?) may have had, sitting right at the runway end. I'm sure no one was probably on the job at 6:53 ayem - but was the site itself a distraction?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those gouge marks in the runway surface (video 3) look to be 1 or 2 inches deep which means the aircraft hit pretty damn hard. The marks also evidence a touchdown travelling at an angle of 30deg across the runway centreline so the approach was very far from being stable. The debris field appears to indicate airframe break-up started BEFORE the main body went down the ravine.
Considering that the cloud ceiling was 500' above the runway it is difficult to imagine how a stable approach (even one that busted minimums) could have been mishandled enough to result in crossing the runway at 30 degrees with such a rate of descent. It is quite possible this aircraft was stalled at impact.
Considering that the cloud ceiling was 500' above the runway it is difficult to imagine how a stable approach (even one that busted minimums) could have been mishandled enough to result in crossing the runway at 30 degrees with such a rate of descent. It is quite possible this aircraft was stalled at impact.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, the angle of the gouges is 'opposite" the misalignment angle of the final approach course of the VOR-A approach.
Possible scenario. They got the runway in sight late and by the time they had turned left to align with runway heading they had overshot the runway centerline considerably, which would necessitate continuing left turn back toward the runway, and then a right turn before touchdown to align with runway heading. Ran out of altitude to complete right turn to runway heading, so impacted in bank, while travelling at angle to runway.
Possible scenario. They got the runway in sight late and by the time they had turned left to align with runway heading they had overshot the runway centerline considerably, which would necessitate continuing left turn back toward the runway, and then a right turn before touchdown to align with runway heading. Ran out of altitude to complete right turn to runway heading, so impacted in bank, while travelling at angle to runway.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Isle of Man
Age: 72
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reminds me of an accident at Newtownards N.I. around 15 years ago where the pilot seeing the runway late (in that case due to limited visibility rather than breaking through low cloud) turned over-sharply towards the runway so that the wing on the inside of the turn stalled with insufficient height to recover.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VOR-A final approach course with missed approach fix MACSA and FAA airport diagram.
If they didn't have an operating DME they would have been required to time the approach.
If they didn't have an operating DME they would have been required to time the approach.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as we're speculating about the operational status of their equipment; If they didn't have an operating localizer receiver, they would have had to take the VOR-A, with a tailwind, and an MDA above the ceiling.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doubt they would have had VOR but not LOC. They are usually the same receiver, more or less.
I am not speculating that they did not have an operational DME. I am stating what anyone would have to do to fly the VOR-A without DME whether inoperable or not installed.
I am not speculating that they did not have an operational DME. I am stating what anyone would have to do to fly the VOR-A without DME whether inoperable or not installed.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More "less" than "more". Yeah, they're typically housed in the same box with the same power supply, but the LOC portion is functionally separate, and they have separate antennae. Having VOR but no LOC is quite plausible.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speculation about which type of approach they were flying...... and how this precipitated the crash is pretty immaterial and will not lead to the 'why'.
Despite this aircraft being flown by two capable guys who were both visual with the field from 500' down to the runway they crashed hard at a steep crossing angle to the centreline. That strongly suggests that the aircraft was not under control when it hit the runway - This is where the focus of the investigation will lie.
Despite this aircraft being flown by two capable guys who were both visual with the field from 500' down to the runway they crashed hard at a steep crossing angle to the centreline. That strongly suggests that the aircraft was not under control when it hit the runway - This is where the focus of the investigation will lie.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for why they chose that approach, no, that's not terribly relevant, but it's certainly something pilots would tend to wonder.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The question is why would they fly that approach to circling mins if the LOC Rwy 5 with runway alignment and lower mins was available? They were told to expect the LOC Rwy 5 on initial contact with CRW approach control.
Nope, the VOR-A at CRW mins are 739 feet above field elevation without DME and 619 above with DME to identify FOGAG intersection. That stuff in parentheses is for military pilots like the C-130 drivers with the WV ANG.
Again, here is the VOR-A chart:
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1705/00852VA.PDF