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

UTair Boeing 737 crash landed in USK

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

UTair Boeing 737 crash landed in USK

Old 10th Feb 2020, 03:34
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
Any idea what percentage of runways are EMAS equipped ?
What is your definition of "runways" - cleared space? sand? grass? gravel? asphalt? concrete?

83 airports have EMAS on one or more runways, worldwide (2019 numbers). There are about 10,000 airports with scheduled air service with aircraft of more than 50 seats. So about 0.8% of those have EMAS.

But call it "On the order of 1%" to allow some statistical wiggle-room - since someone is sure to claim that any grass glider strip counts as a "runway," or point out that a 9-seater BN2 Islander may count as "scheduled commercial service."
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2020, 08:36
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Västerås
Age: 42
Posts: 55
Reading the comments on AVHerald, I got curious: what kind of braking action would that runway have? People are slipping on what looks like ice/compacted snow. I bet landing on that is a bit interesting even without a underrun! Also, is that why they seemingly deployed the reverser ?
sandos is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2020, 09:57
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sunny Jersey
Posts: 9
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
It may be worth making the transition from the grass into the pavement a bit less abrupt, possibly a gentle slope of tarmac underneath the turf leading to the beginning of the runway..

Ideally, pilots would land in the touchdown zone like they're supposed to but this isn't the first time that landing gear and fuselage have parted company because the paved surface was a couple of inches higher than the surrounding area and it won't be the last.
RESAs and delethalization are already ICAO airport design standards which are in place and designed to reduce the risk of damage to an aeroplane undershooting or overrunning the runway.

Clearly this will not prevent all damage to the a/c, but is designed to increase the survivability of these types of accident, something which fortunately appears to have been the case here.

The a/c is replaceable, people are not.
discorules is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2020, 10:19
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 924
Originally Posted by piperpa46 View Post
What is your solution to this problem for EMAS equipped runways?
For those who would like to inform themselves about ICAO standards (as opposed to rewriting them from scratch) for runway construction, aerodromes even, I recommend a jolly good read of CAP 168, Chapter 3, the UK CAA's publication, much easier to read and better presented than the ICAO equivalent (in which see 3.5.11). As you might guess, someone has already thought about aircraft touching down in the undershoot and running without damage onto the runway; bearing strength is one issue, obstructions also, and feathering the runway pavement edge, if needed, another.

If USK does not meet the ICAO standards for its published level of licensed operations, that's the issue, not the standards.
old,not bold is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2020, 12:56
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 844
It looks to me as though they landed with Flap 15?
If so that would be a curious choice for a 2500m ice-contaminated runway.

Last edited by meleagertoo; 11th Feb 2020 at 13:44.
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2020, 14:01
  #26 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Zurich
Posts: 1
Why not assume wind shear?
ProPax is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2020, 21:45
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: unknown
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by meleagertoo View Post
It looks to me as though they landed with Flap 15?
If so that would be a curious choice for a 2500m ice-contaminated runway.
I was wondering when I saw the video, if the flaps were less than normal. As for landing short, I also wondered if there could have been a flat light situation combined with no PAPI/glideslope. It looks OK out the side window due to the trees but perhaps the forward view was more whiteoutish.

That being said, there does seem to be pavement visible for the runway instead of 100% snow cover so, who knows.
tcasblue is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2020, 22:07
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 844
Eheh! Flat light may well be a player, I have little experience in landing visually in snow country on a snow covered runway but from what I have done can well understand they were so distracted with descrying runway from bundhu that they simply misssed calling 'Flap30'.
And if the airport had built up snowberms on the runway ends as they seem to have done than any undershoot turns into something altogether different.
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2020, 01:23
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 532
Quote...'And if the airport had built up snowberms on the runway ends' These could have produced some turbulent windshear.
Also the snowed up runway would make it hard to spot where the white runway markers were.
phiggsbroadband is offline  
Old 30th May 2020, 00:40
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,122
Aviation Herald: Preliminary report is available.
Accident: UTAir B735 in Usinsk on Feb 9th 2020, landed short of runway, gear collapse and runway excursion on landing

The meat: Once on RNAV approach, airport was just a minimums. Aircraft was low on approach, EGWPS was functional, runway was visible at 700 ft AGL, PNF commented on low altitude twice, PF increased thrust but did not correct GS. Main gear hit 1.1m snow berm 32m before runway threshold, with vertical G of +1.6G and longitudinal G of -0.7G. Touchdown on runway (30m past threshold) at 1.86G, one main gear separated, the other collapsed. Runway condition noted as 2mm frost, friction factor 0.38.

Captain did not immediately recognize gear had been damaged.
pattern_is_full is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.