Comair CRJ crash in Kentucky
 

Just breaking.......apparently a "medium" sized passenger plane has crashed in Lexington Kentucky airport. Anyone have any further info????

Apparently 80 people on board.

flyerire.

Comair (Delta feeder) flight from Lexington to Atlanta, GA. Canadair RJ. Delta flight 5191.

Crashed one mile from departure end or runway. Weather VFR.

Reports of over 50 fatalities.

My prayers are with them.

Local TV coverage....

http://www.wkyt.com/

http://www.wlextv.com/

http://www.wtvq.com/

Weather wasn't remarkable:

KLEX 271054Z 22008KT 8SM FEW047 BKN060 OVC090 23/20 A3002 RMK AO2 RAB12E51 SLP154 P0001 T02330200

KLEX 270954Z 20007KT 8SM FEW090 SCT120 24/19 A3000 RMK AO2 SLP147 T02390194

Airport diagram here:

http://download.aopa.org/ustprocs/20...ms/00697AD.PDF

There is initial media speculation that the aircraft may have done the takeoff roll on runway 26, only 3500 feet long.

The crash scene appears to be west of the airport and TV feeds show emergency vehicles on Versailles (VER-SAILS) Road next to horse fencing typical of the area.

Sole survivor is said to be a man now in critical condition at a local hospital. Comair will give a press conference at 10:00 EDT.

This has been mentioned on another forum - Shouldn't take too long to establish whether or not that was the case.

Survivor reported to be in critical condition. I hope he/she pulls through.

http://lexington.airporthotelguide.com/map.html

Just seen footage of emergency vehicles on SKy - at intersection of Rice and Versailles. Also reports that a/c intact at point of crash which suggests it didn't get airborne. Does begin to support the 26 departure theory.

The aircraft took off around 6:07am, while it was still dark. The weather information is somewhat confusing at this point. Some information says the conditions were mostly clear with some clounds. Others indicate that there were light showers (with fog and haze) in the vicinity with small thunderstorms developing southwest of Lexington. One archived weather radar image from a local TV station showed a small thunderstorm southwest of the airport, in the general direction of the extended runway centerline for 22, however the storm looked several miles out from the airport. The crash occurred about mile from the runway. I undestand the takeoff was to the west, but I don't know if they used 22 or 26, however 26 is only 3500 feet long, so my guess would be they used 22, which is 7000 feet long.

One survivor is being reported, a male in critical condition.

Yep, that would be the field right off the end of runway 26.

MSNBC is reporting that the survivor may be one of the pilots or the jumpseat rider.

Boy you guys are fast. Yes, Rice and Versailles is off the end of 26. A crash off the end of 22 would has put them near Parkers Mill Rd and Dedman Rd. Can this aircraft takeoff of 26? It was fully loaded with 47 passengers and 3 crew.

Someone will know the exact distance required for a CRJ 200, but Comair are under FAR Part 121, and the good book says Runway 26 was probably not a conscious option:

Sec. 121.189 - Airplanes: Turbine engine powered: Takeoff limitations.

(a) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual for the elevation of the airport and for the ambient temperature existing at takeoff.

(b) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane certificated after August 26, 1957, but before August 30, 1959 (SR422, 422A), may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual for the minimum distances required for takeoff. In the case of an airplane certificated after September 30, 1958 (SR422A, 422B), the takeoff distance may include a clearway distance but the clearway distance included may not be greater than 1/2 of the takeoff run.

(c) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane certificated after August 29, 1959 (SR422B), may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual at which compliance with the following may be shown:

(1) The accelerate-stop distance must not exceed the length of the runway plus the length of any stopway.

(2) The takeoff distance must not exceed the length of the runway plus the length of any clearway except that the length of any clearway included must not be greater than one-half the length of the runway.

(3) The takeoff run must not be greater than the length of the runway.

(d) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual --

(1) In the case of an airplane certificated after August 26, 1957, but before October 1, 1958 (SR422), that allows a takeoff path that clears all obstacles either by at least (35+0.01D) feet vertically (D is the distance along the intended flight path from the end of the runway in feet), or by at least 200 feet horizontally within the airport boundaries and by at least 300 feet horizontally after passing the boundaries; or

(2) In the case of an airplane certificated after September 30, 1958 (SR 422A, 422B), that allows a net takeoff flight path that clears all obstacles either by a height of at least 35 feet vertically, or by at least 200 feet horizontally within the airport boundaries and by at least 300 feet horizontally after passing the boundaries.

(e) In determining maximum weights, minimum distances, and flight paths under paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, correction must be made for the runway to be used, the elevation of the airport, the effective runway gradient, the ambient temperature and wind component at the time of takeoff, and, if operating limitations exist for the minimum distances required for takeoff from wet runways, the runway surface condition (dry or wet). Wet runway distances associated with grooved or porous friction course runways, if provided in the Airplane Flight Manual, may be used only for runways that are grooved or treated with a porous friction course (PFC) overlay, and that the operator determines are designed, constructed, and maintained in a manner acceptable to the Administrator.

(f) For the purposes of this section, it is assumed that the airplane is not banked before reaching a height of 50 feet, as shown by the takeoff path or net takeoff flight path data (as appropriate) in the Airplane Flight Manual, and thereafter that the maximum bank is not more than 15 degrees.

(g) For the purposes of this section the terms, takeoff distance, takeoff run, net takeoff flight path and takeoff path have the same meanings as set forth in the rules under which the airplane was certificated.

[Doc. No. 6258, 29 FR 19198, Dec. 31, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 121-268, 63 FR 8321, Feb. 18, 1998]

Assume the aircraft is a CRJ-200. According to Bombarier, the CRJ-200ER in SL ISA conditions, requires 5800 feet at MTOW. This aircraft had to be near MTOW with 47 passengers and 3 crew on board.

Well apparently FDR and CVR recovered. Images I'm seeing on TV show a sparsely-wooded area some distance off the end of the runway, with some trees between the runway and the crash site with their *tops* lopped-off. So they evidently got into the air.

R1

04 departure would be unlikely as winds were from the SW at the time at about 10 kts.

A CRJ at this sort of weight would require 4000-5000ft (less if it was a -700 but I don't think it was).

Just for local background, there was another fatal jet crash on Versailles Road four years ago:

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/200...es_at_end.html

the sole surviour is the first officer he is in critical condition the next press conference is at 5pm est so let us be patient here and stop slagging any one off

no one is trying to place blame...

if a takeoff was made on the short runway, questions about pilot fatigue, procedures (checking compass on runway lineup) airport markings, signage and so forth come to mind.

no one wanted this crash, but we must prevent another with speaking out about things like fatigue/crew rest/ stand up over nights etc

jon

The local NBC television station in Lexington (and several other news sources) are reporting that the aircraft definitely took off from runway 26. The crash site is located less than a mile from the end of runway 26, south of Versailles Rd. The lcation of the crash site indicates that the takeoff could not have been from either 4 or 22, without large turns back to the airport being made prior to the crash.

Other information:

There was a local rain storm right over Fort Spring at 6:08am, just west of the airport on Versailles Rd (also named HWY 60). There is speculation of a microburst from this storm.

Other reports indicate the aircraft was cleared for takeoff on runway 22, not 26. A takeoff from 22 would have avoided the storm (going well south of it), but not a takeoff from 26. Again, runway 26 is only 3500 feet long.

From the Naval Observatory for Lexington KY on Aug 27th: civil twilight - 6:36am, sunrise - 7:03am. There have been some reports of fog in the area at the time of the accident, which was at 6:08am.

CNN now reporting from 2 independent sources that "the wrong runway was used."

LEXINGTON, Ky...........Three police officers, two at the airport and one from the city police, were “instrumental” in saving the life of the copilot, the only survivor, Scott Lanter, chief of airport security. He said the three officers observed movement in the front of the aircraft and extricated the first officer from the nose. The three officers did not have to enter the plane, he said.

Lexington Herald Leader - Farm owner: Plane “used wrong runway”

The owner of the farm where Comair Flight 5191 crashed said.... the plane hit an 8-foot fence between his property and the airport, and clipped several trees......

He said the crash location is a “straight line” from the start of the smaller runway to where the airplane landed on his farm.

According to CBS News, crew acknowledged clearance for 22. Orr (referred to below) is a CBS Correspondent.

Link to full story

For those of you yapping about low time FO's, the guy was hired in 2002. So he should have had lots of time in the A/C. What they should really be looking for is distractions caused by management that is threating these guys carreers.

must be all of a couple of hours since the accident and already everybody racing to speculate the cause and where/who the possible blame lies with, how sad.

At least have some respect and wait for the FACTS to emerge!!. And as for feeding CNN or any other news channel with speculation, im sure the media are well capable of creating whatever glorified story they feel fit with the limited information they have!!.

Thoughts go out to the families of the passengers and crew, and fingers crossed for the recovery of the remaining survivor.

Im sure we can all agree on that one.

The aircraft described in the Press Conference this morning by the President of Comair was reported to have been delivered in 2001. That means it is a 200 series aircraft as Bombardier did not manufacture the 100 series at that time.
The 100 was discontinued in the mid 90s.

Nothing seems to be outstanding in this accident at least up to the point where it was reported that the aircraft departed on the shorter runway.
If true, I can't imagine anyone with the CRJ operational experience this crew is reported to have had, operating into and out of Lexington on a regular basis would have ever entertained the idea of departing off the shorter runway at or near gross weight. The performance margin just isn't there. This aircraft, which does NOT have high lift leading edge slats, uses an incredible amount of runway to achieve V1 at high gross weights.
Using manufacture’s data, the ASD req’d for both 51,000 and 53,000 lbs is 5,900 feet.
:confused:

The declared distance for Rwy 26 is 3500 feet of runway.
V1 at Flap 8 is approximately 148 KIAS and with F20 it is 137 KIAS. (I believe Comair has the 4 flap settings option, which means F20 is the first flap setting and the setting Comair are most likely to use for takeoff) It should also be mentioned that at 25 Celcius and 947' ASL the aircraft weight is limited to approximately 49,800 pounds on a 6,000 ft runway. What would the weight limit and V1 speed be for a 3500 ft runway?

It should also be pointed out that all AFM data is based on a 6000 ft runway. That's the kind of takeoff run this regional jet uses.

Willie

MONTREAL, Aug 27 (Reuters) - Canadian plane and train maker Bombardier Inc. said the 50-seat CRJ-100 regional jet in Sunday's deadly crash in Lexington, Kentucky, was delivered new to Comair in 2001. Bombardier, the world's third-largest civil aircraft maker and No. 1 manufacturer of trains, said the jet was delivered Jan. 30 of that year.

Just a thought...and that's it is...would the crew normally accept a T/O from the intersection? My thinking is this.

Looking at the layout of the taxiways, they would have made a far greater miscalculation, if they had muddled the runways while taxiing to the end. If they had gone for the intersection, it would have been far easier to make this error.

Runway Width
 

The airport diagram posted earlier shows runway 26 to be only 75 ft wide versus 150 for runway 22. Wouldnt you think the crew would have noticed this?

This is the accident aircraft, a CRJ-200ER. N431CA, S/N 7472. The registration number and S/N came from the President of Comair.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0889583/M/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0803068/M/

These are the basic specs for this aircraft, including the takeoff field length for the CRJ-200ER.

http://www.crj.bombardier.com/CRJ/en...d=en&crjId=200

From CNN.com :



The Bombardier Canadian Regional Jet (CRJ)-200 was cleared to take off from runway 22, which is more than 7,000 feet long, the sources said.
Instead, it took off from runway 26, which is 3,500 feet long, the sources said.


That length is "pretty short for that type of aircraft," former National Transportation Safety Board Vice Chairman Bob Francis told CNN.
Lanter confirmed that the crash site was at the end of runway 26 but would not speculate from which runway the flight took off.


"Part of the investigation will establish what runway they were using," Lanter said. "Based on the information we received for the incident, we don't know what runway they were using."


Asked about the possibility that the wrong runway was used, Bornhorst told reporters, "I think that is a rumor and speculation that would be not good for any of us to go down right now."


NTSB investigators could take up to a year before formally ruling on the cause of the crash.

Correct!! This is what I was trying to say earlier!! To hear someone who claims to be ex airline employee chasing a "story" is really, really sad....

Not sure of the accuracy, but the local news guy was saying that the taxiway going to the end of RW22 is closed, access to RW22 is now via the taxiway that cuts across the approach end of RW26 due to a new displaced threshold for RW22.

Surely this is unlikely, since no taxiway leads directly to the intersection, allowing a choice of runway.

Isn't it more likely that the pilot turned three-quarters left at the earlier junction with the shorter runway, instead of pressing on to the next junction at end of the longer one, when precisely the same three-quarters left turn would have been needed.

Dream Land, right, the taxiway to 22 now crosses right over the end of 26.

Various news agencies are now reporting airport parameter fence damage and treetop damage just past the end of 26.

(3) The takeoff run must not be greater than the length of the runway.

A salutory FAR reminder that the bleeding obvious may not always be obvious.

Can anyone confirm if this was the longest period in US jet transport history without a passenger fatality - some 4.5+ years?
R.I.P.

Another issue that comes to mind is the jumpseat rider. Assuming it was a pilot, it should have given another set of eyes to catch any mistakes.

Was it possibly an offline rider who needed assistance with his or her shoulder harness just as the plane took the runway for takeoff? I needed help figuring out the jumpseat last time I rode in an RJ cockpit. Not even sure if Comair allows offline cockpit riders under the post 9/11 CASS system.

A cockpit jumpseat rider can be a help, but the rider can also be a distraction. An online rider coming off of days off can be very chatty trying to catch up on managment's latest move to cut costs and reign in the unions.

I remember Avianca had a 727 crash in South America years ago where the captain was chatting with the jumpseat rider as the FO flew the aircraft into rising terrain. When the GPWS alert sounded, the captain famously announced 'Shutup Gringo!' and the CVR recording ended a few seconds later.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/...0317-0&lang=en

why?
 

Why didn't anybody notice that the heading was wrong?
Not 262! but 223 .ILS 110.5 ?

'Assuming' that speculation that 22 was used and not 26 is correct, then yes why indeed, however I am not at all convinced that there are not more contributing factors, only time will tell, and until then, endless and possibly unfounded speculation may just be a rather unpleasant blight against the crew. Our thoughts must go to the deceased.

Regards

DA1-11