Dancing on Ice - Yakutia
Thread Starter
Dancing on Ice - Yakutia
Two Yakutia Superjets overran same icy runway within two hourshttps://www.flightglobal.com/safety/...140565.article
whoops
whoops
One can only marvel at the airmanship prevalent in a company when one crew fails to report such a serious lack of braking and loss of control, and another chooses to land with a tailwind on a runway as slippery as that.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two hours elapsed between the two incidents. Were the crew of the second aircraft informed about the earlier incident? The given wind and reported braking action were both within company limits. So perhaps an unfair conclusion.
meleagertoo
I don't understand, crew fails to report to who?
Surely the timely communication needs to involve the tower and they also have their own eyes to see a plane off a runway
I don't understand, crew fails to report to who?
Surely the timely communication needs to involve the tower and they also have their own eyes to see a plane off a runway
lomapaseo
It's perfectly clear in the article...
"Despite the overrun the crew chose not to report the incident, and started to taxi back along the runway."
AS we all lnow the tower often doesn't see incidents, and can't see loss of braking and steering control except in the mpst extreme cases.
They didn't tell the tower so the tower was unable to tell subsequent landing aircraft that the runway was in fact seriously contaminated with much less mu than reported.
Company limits notwithstanding I'd have thought that landing with a tailwind component on a runway as close to contaminated as that is pretty ill advised to say the least.
is there a reason they didn't ask for a runway change?
It's perfectly clear in the article...
"Despite the overrun the crew chose not to report the incident, and started to taxi back along the runway."
AS we all lnow the tower often doesn't see incidents, and can't see loss of braking and steering control except in the mpst extreme cases.
They didn't tell the tower so the tower was unable to tell subsequent landing aircraft that the runway was in fact seriously contaminated with much less mu than reported.
Company limits notwithstanding I'd have thought that landing with a tailwind component on a runway as close to contaminated as that is pretty ill advised to say the least.
is there a reason they didn't ask for a runway change?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
meleagertoo, what is also perfectly clear is that they (the first aircraft) eventually asked for a tow. So I would imagine that they must have had a chat with ATC as to why, otherwise the article would not have been able to mention the first incident. Then, I repeat, two hours elapsed between the two arrivals and, I repeat again, were the crew informed of the earlier incident? As for choice of runway, could the same not have happened in the other direction? A slippery runway will be slippery in both directions won't it? As for the wind, it was all of four knots. Last, but not least, there might be a valid reason to favour a particular runway at that airport if within company limits.
Runway condition reporting - new Global Reporting Format (GRP), required by the end of year.
Slides 23 - https://www.icao.int/EURNAT/Other%20...FR%20PPT01.pdf
Human weaknesses remain; contaminant measurement, communication, and use by aircrew. So add more than the minimum distance margin.
Slides 23 - https://www.icao.int/EURNAT/Other%20...FR%20PPT01.pdf
Human weaknesses remain; contaminant measurement, communication, and use by aircrew. So add more than the minimum distance margin.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: NV USA
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
usedtobeATC
Runway friction reports have been proven to have almost zero correlation to aircraft stopping effectiveness. They are to be used only as an additional resource to help the crew make a runway evaluation.
Runway friction reports have been proven to have almost zero correlation to aircraft stopping effectiveness. They are to be used only as an additional resource to help the crew make a runway evaluation.
SFT equipment is almost useless, except for a general idea of how a 4WD vehicle would handle on a test track. The best assessment of Braking Action I ever had was from RTM ATC one icy morning in the ‘80’s. I ‘phoned in advance to ask about the 24 runway state before departure in my BAe146 from NWI, the answer was “Don’t even try it, Sir. We can’t even skate on it, without falling over”.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Darkness mostly
Age: 52
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cappt
Indeed, the transmitted figures whether it be by ATIS or ATC can be hours old. More recent can and will be totally different.
Some wind can nicely polish ice patches with resulting braking action figures at zero within a short period of time.
Tailwind and contaminated runways are a big no no in my opinion. There should be a thorough evaluation of the weather situation together with braking action and aircraft performance.
Personally I would like to see the aircraft being able to perform within the limits one category below the reported braking action. The PIC is responsible for the ship after all. This is emphasized by ATC reporting estimated figures since a few years.
There is some excellent guidance material from the Nordic countries.
Indeed, the transmitted figures whether it be by ATIS or ATC can be hours old. More recent can and will be totally different.
Some wind can nicely polish ice patches with resulting braking action figures at zero within a short period of time.
Tailwind and contaminated runways are a big no no in my opinion. There should be a thorough evaluation of the weather situation together with braking action and aircraft performance.
Personally I would like to see the aircraft being able to perform within the limits one category below the reported braking action. The PIC is responsible for the ship after all. This is emphasized by ATC reporting estimated figures since a few years.
There is some excellent guidance material from the Nordic countries.
Pistonprop
You seem to base a lot on speculation where I was solely referring to the reports we have.
"all of four knots". I expect that's what they said too - famous last words. Do you land jets on slippery runways by any chance? It certainly doesn't sound like it.
You seem to base a lot on speculation where I was solely referring to the reports we have.
"all of four knots". I expect that's what they said too - famous last words. Do you land jets on slippery runways by any chance? It certainly doesn't sound like it.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
meleagertoo
What reports are those? I re-read your above posts and nowhere do you suggest that your comments emanate from any official reports. In fact, your comments condemning the crew are as speculative as you accuse me of being. I made mine, as mentioned, based on what I read in the article quoted by the OP and nothing more. I asked two pertinent questions: Were the crew of the 2nd aircraft informed about the earlier incident? Was there a specific reason behind the choice of runway? My thoughts are simply that considering the environment and climate they regularly operate in, I imagine those guys are not inexperienced at landing in those conditions.
What reports are those? I re-read your above posts and nowhere do you suggest that your comments emanate from any official reports. In fact, your comments condemning the crew are as speculative as you accuse me of being. I made mine, as mentioned, based on what I read in the article quoted by the OP and nothing more. I asked two pertinent questions: Were the crew of the 2nd aircraft informed about the earlier incident? Was there a specific reason behind the choice of runway? My thoughts are simply that considering the environment and climate they regularly operate in, I imagine those guys are not inexperienced at landing in those conditions.
