EMB-145 hydroplanes off rwy in Ottawa...
 

Has anyone heard any news regarding the Waterski (literally) EMB-145 that skid off of rwy 7-25 in Ottowa earlier today?
I understand that the rwy is ungrooved and that it lost its nose gear after skidding off the rwy.

CTV Toronto - United Express airplane skids off Ottawa runway - CTV News


Way to go Hulas... That's what happens when you try to save money on jets with no thurst reversers!!

Global, its the sort of thing which will happen at our nations main airport, no groveing, no over run retardation systems, only two front course ILS, no cat 2, no cat 3, BUT, we do have a million dollar waterfall in the terminal and our ex PMs canoe on show, kinda sums up Ottawa, AKA Fort Fumble!

CBC Ottawa reports that he landed long and simply ran out of runway. Can anyone confirm this?
Rockhound

not enough information yet. I flew into Ottawa all the time and enjoyed it immensely. Beautiful city. Proud to have Canada as a neighbor and friend to the USA.

AS with any over run, stablized approaches, on target speed, firm touchdown, on target touchdown zone are all required. thrust reversers very helpful...don't know if this one had them or not.

wondering which runway in use? which way runway sloped? actual wx at the time...etc.

An account from CBC (Candian Broadcasting), with photo, is here:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/06/16/ott-plan-off-runway.html

Landing long not confirmed, just suggested as a possibility.

Quote:

---

The CBC's Cory O'Kelly reported from the scene that the plane came to rest nose down, just inside the fence at the airport perimeter. Debris from some of its parts was strewn behind it, and dozens of emergency vehicles were parked nearby.

---

We had a lot of rain in the region last night and earlier today. Local news (Toronto) reported "skidded off wet runway".

BTW it is Ottawa. Mods, can you correct the title.

AFAIK, it doesn't.

Metars:
CYOW 162000Z 07008KT 3SM -RA BR SCT010 OVC022 15/15 A2981 RMK SF3SC5 SLP097
CYOW 161947Z 07008KT 3SM -RA BR BKN009 OVC020 15/ RMK SF5SC3
CYOW 161900Z 10010KT 6SM -RA BR SCT015 OVC025 16/16 A2983 RMK SF4SC4 SLP102
CYOW 161855Z 10009KT 6SM -RA BR SCT015 OVC025 16/16 RMK SF4SC4
CYOW 161818Z 14012KT 10SM -RA OVC023 16/ RMK SC8
CYOW 161800Z 09009KT 15SM BKN027 OVC050 18/13 A2986 RMK SC6SC2 SLP114
CYOW 161736Z 09008KT 15SM BKN028 OVC050 18/ RMK SC5SC3
CYOW 161700Z 09008G15KT 8SM -RA SCT026 BKN050 OVC100 18/13 A2990 RMK SC3SC3AC2 SLP127
CYOW 161600Z 10008KT 15SM -RA FEW040 BKN085 BKN140 19/12 A2993 RMK SC1AC6AC1 VRY LGT RA SLP135


This is TSA's second overrun in YOW. The first one was due to a strange BCU failure. Knowing the captain, I doubt he landed long or allowed to. The airplane was also tech earlier, I wonder if it was anything related?

Blame Bloomer, too. He signed it off!

Hope the pilots get well soon! :sad:

So far we had 43 runway excursions this year with commercial and executive operations (about 2 per week). There were 16 landing overruns, with 3 of them involving an EMB145.

For some more general background info on runway excursions (including landing overruns) checkout:
NLR-ATSI: Runway excursions
and
NLR-ATSI: Causal factors

hey!

I agree. He's been around for a while. You'll also notice in the photo that he was going for flaps 45.

Hope all is well!
Any chance you'll be in Nice, FR in the next few days?

Shefer.

‘The nation’s main runway’ not grooved ?

‘Slippery When Wet’.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...rrun-cyqm.html

http://www.flightsafety.org/files/managing_threat.ppt

Unfortunately not, Shef. Should you be around DUS or AMS let me know.

Re: Air Canada Pilot’s Association call (restatement) for the need of EMAS or similar overrun protection.

These safety devices are last chance (reactive); there may be better value in proactive safety aspects which address some of the contributions to this type of incident. They are available now and apply to all runways.
Although runway grooving is part reactive, its absence should trigger crews to consider the landing performance with extra care, similarly the actual landing, – speed, height over threshold, touchdown position, and use of brakes. The type of runway surface is also important – (smooth) wet concrete is particularly poor, rubber contamination even worse. What considerations are made for crosswinds – crosswind wind can affect braking distance, particularly with poor braking technique.
How about the condition of the tyres (before flight check); an old NASA report on Wet Runways, indicates that tread designs tend to lose their drainage capability when the tread is approximately 80 percent worn.
There are also differences in hydroplaning speed with modern tyre designs. Hydroplaning of modern aircraft tires.

If operators require reactive safety barriers then why not reduce the landing distance available by a suitable margin, i.e. each crew provides their own RESA. At least the performance calculation might get crews to take more notice of the conditions, fly an accurate approach and landing, and use max braking.

Aircraft performance on slippery runways in crosswinds. This link may change; select "+ back to results" to see the link.
See the chart of tire-ground friction coefficient; the friction at high speed on a flooded or puddled runway, is no better than the friction on wet ice.

I've done aquaplaning in the 145.

Braking? Hell no! It seemed like we'd speeded up!
Just had time to say to my oppo.....Waaaaaaaaaay!

Then the thing bit and stopped.

It was a runway surface issue.

I never filed but I should have done.:suspect:

Bristol shut to all traffic two days later.

(btw it was off a CAT 2 approach, which in the Barbie usually puts you over the left hand edge lights, so it was 'visual'- at 80'- swerve to plunk it on the c/l, land.................. and then, internally, "wtf!":uhoh:

The CBC had a bit on the lack of over run protection and lack of grooving at CYOW, pity they didnt go further into lack of Cat2/3 ILS / TDZ lighting and the money pissed away on a waterfall in the terminal at this "third world airport" at our nations government location. With the drop offs at the end of two runways Ottawa has been very lucky so far, knowing this town as I do it will take some body bags before things are rectified and some technically qualified are apointed to the airport board to make decisions bassed on safety, not image, and by the way, the ramp slopes the wrong way, fuel spills run into the buildings, not away! Its time to review the whole privitization of our airports, it aint working folks!

I seem to remember a 145 going off the end a few years back.

Just my faded memory and the below is possibly rubbish or pure conjecture so take with a pinch of salt.....

If they squeezed the brakes before the antiskid was up and active the wheels could possibly lock, fooling the aircraft into thinking it's stopped and closing the spoilers as well.....most unhelpful. If the anti ice had been on in flight the flight idle might have been raised as well, though it might drop back in the flare if it gets a rad alt signal??.... Wonder if either of these factors turn out to have played a part. Glad I never flew the things to be honest.

So, just as a matter of interest, where does your practical knowledge of the type come from?

Not from a 145 thats for sure.

Right speed and right place and it's fine. Have also done the no surface friction thing, but let the anti skid system do its job and it stops fine.

Icing condition doesn't cause an N1 rump up at this phase of flight(gear down logic) and brake system looks for spin up on landing(50kts wheel speed or three seconds after last touchdown).

As for reverse thrust, I never had the privilege.

D and F :8