BA Connect EMB145 - Ouch... what happened here?
 

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1042025/M/

Tea and biscuits for the boys after this one?

hmmm not yet heard anything about this,but will try and find out ;)

Seems there was another ouch this morning, Jungle Jet taking a bolt of electricity outbound from SOU-GLA. Diverted to BOH following "burning smells".

Certainly pretty nasty wx in my part of Berks at 7am this morning. School friend of my kids house was struck, roof set on fire.

Oh dear! Of course, since the rebrand, naughty boys and girls now have to pay for their own tea and biscuits. Would never have happened Norman's day.

TXL is at the moment (dunno if they changed it today) restricted to the southern runway (08R/26L) and 08R was in use. On taxi for departure they apparently missed the taxiway to 08R and tried a 180 to return to 08R. Unfortunately the taxyway isn't very big.

EGHH selected due to landing weight and heavy rain at EGHI after a very strong whiff of "fricasee d'electrique". No panic, no drama and well done to those involved. Pity the media turned up to report on a complete non-event.

BBC news story here in between other Dorset ripping yarns concerning bus routes and fish tanks.

I seem to recall that Luxair ended up in a similar situation in Luxembourg with the same type not too long ago. They left the runway completely though!

Luxair's 145 stayed on the taxiway all right. They ran off the runway after landing.

Just an unfortunate incident - no damage I'm sure just a couple of red faces. Shame for the crew involved though.

FREEWAY - nowt wrong with BA Connect very professional people there.

Freeway,

Dont show your ignorance. Nigels at BA have left the rwy as much as anyone else. It's just unfortunate for the crew involved.:(

pathetic
 

Freeway,
Pretty poor dig at the crew who were trying to save time and money like any other crew, and for the others who mention reverse thrust on the 145, they don't need it if you have good piloting skills!
Face it, it was an error, we all make them some day.
Find something interesting to talk about, leave the flying to grown up's.

Yes OK, on reflection, probably a bit inflammatory on my behalf initially.
Yes, I do agree, eire757, most unfortunate for all involved.:(
Have thrashed myself with a damp edition of CHIRP as recompense.!!

I'm glad that wasn't me! Despite my ID, I now do taxi the 145 and can vouch for the fact that it requires concentration- especially the self-centring action of the nosewheel steering if you release the tiller.
Please note I am not suggesting that is what happened here. Whatever the cause, once the excursion had happened, they stopped- there are operators who would have tried to taxi off the grass and cover up their mistake. Even professionals have bad days- the fact that we are able to look at this picture is in fact proof of the professionalism of their operation- even if they are the competition!

If you click on the relevant text below the picture it leads to........

It was deemed unnecessary to provide thrust reversers on the 145 fleet that the BA CON boys and girls operate. Draw your own conclusions.

Glad to see you have pulled your original post Freeway. Subject closed !

The reality of it all is that the dreadful management in MAN will have a field day and without doubt humiliate the crew for what is just an unfortunate event.They relish a Witchhunt at BACON.

Suspended, called to head office for tea and bacon rolls along with the BALPA reps so that DD,CP & his Highness can all have thier say!

Number one uniforms and don't forget to wear your hats chaps! good luck.

Are you referring to pilot skills there or the cost saving process of ordering the 145 without reversers?

The idea of replacing the reversers seemed a good one until someone realised that the A/C is that crap and nose heavy that it needs ballast to stay in trim.........So why take the reversers out? Oh yeah, it must be the amazing piloting skills of the BACON crew!:=

Longchop-

EMB reversers cost you 1000Kg and god knows how many $$$$ and you can not schedule landing perf to take into account you have them, so for once, I can agree that Brymon and the Hat wearing Manx/Regional lot did the right thing not to specify them when ordering the 145 for Uk/NW Europe ops.

the aircraft dug its way down to the axle so a quick taxy out was not an option. but I fail to see how a thrust reverser would have helped

Witch hunt I hear you say !! Not at all - as long as you follow company SOP , that is to say - put the orange tabard on, place hat firmly on head, dive into the cabin and scream to the punters "follow me chaps !" before diving out the main door.

jobs a good one !!!

(you can just imagine the changes to SOP's which will follow :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: )

As a mere layman in this part of the site, it is by no means the first time the EMB has overun at a number of EU locations in addition to similar incidents worldwide for the reasons stated. My concern that with the law of averages this could or will lead to a fatal accident.

HLZ

Except this is not an overrun, therefore you should not include it in your average calculation as you attempt to stirr this slightly embarrasing but in terms of risk, non event.

well said Kirkwall,this was obviously a silly accident and wrists will be slapped,but are the management going to turn around and tell us they are perfect?i think not!!still dont see how reversers would help seeing as it was a slip off a taxiway not a runway overrun

mmmmmmh, the proximity of the aircraft to the turning area in the foreground (left) suggests to me that the crew may have started the turn correctly but quickly discovered that the steering deflection on this aircraft was limited to 50 degrees (i.e. pre-mod SB 145-32-0002) instead of the normally available 76 degrees.

TXL
 

The aircraft is on the taxiway at Tegel, not on the runway, for what its worth.

Just to correct, it is partially on the taxiway at TXL. :}

And to give the whole picture, it is partially off the taxiway at TXL.

:ooh: :ugh: :yuk:

No surprise they went off looking at the width of the taxiway.

Error? Better stated as "what they heck were they thinking?" It's hard enough doing a 180 on a taxiway with a small single engine a/c. Don't even think about it with a wheelbase that long.

EMB145 Turning radius = 69 ft. 7 in (very impressive when sat upfront)!!

Pre mod - (A/C 1 to 23) = 95 ft .10 in :(

W-S:8

This is a post mod aircraft.

Perhaps the crew thought so too ? As the company manuals draw attention to the mod, this suggests that not all ac have been modded otherwise, why mention it ? There is no list of modded airframes in the manual

So if the turning radius is 69ft. 7in. what is the minimum pavement width for a 180?
TP

Hmm, don't know about the EMB145 since i dont fly it, but i am impressed with the large turning radius. My good old 733 is listed with a turning radius of 43.3 ft (nose gear radius, wingtip and tail is a bit more of course) and needs a minimum pavement width of 64.6 ft for a 180.

Chaps,

I've got to say that this is a total balls up on the crews part. Looking at the picture, the nosewheel on the 145 sits in front of the pilot. For it to have left the taxiway by such a distance is simply incredible!! They should have realised they were going to leave the paved surface long before they stopped.

zzz

When I read this thread got me thinking
Our company minimum is 30m but had to look up the actual the min pavement required on my current type (DHC8 400) and its 84ft 5in (25.7m)

I reckon the biggest telling off the crew will get is for not writing anything in the Tech Log.......

Glad to see so many AAIB personnel in this forum

CVR transcript ........

F/O... phew that runway was short.

Capt.... yeh but look how wide it was!!

Let's lighten up folks.:cool: