TURKISH A340 SKID OF RWY AT VABB
 

This morning a Turkish Airlines A340 skidded of RWY 27 trying to vacate on TWY N8.
Everyone is safe no injuries.

Bit of a shock.
 

Surprising. The runway and taxiway conditions at Bombay are of the highest standard, as indeed are the skills of my colleagues from the land of Kemel. Such things do happen. Let us wait for the official report, assuming one is duly issued by the objective and unbiased local authorities.

Hudd, Do you honestly think we are "going to wait for the offical report"

This is a disscussion board. Get with it man !

Cochin , Mumbai , and..............?
No doubt the tower 'ordered' Turkish to vacate at N8 , they normally do this after you have configured for your landing , no time to increase flap or autobrake settings .
Tis the season to be skiddy , take care in the monsoon chaps . Don't try the impossible .

If so, I wonder if there is a word in Turkish for 'Unable' (or 'Standby' and then 'Say again' as you pass NB:O)?

I think Roy was being sarcastic / ironic.

I hope Roy was being sarcastic................

The A340 has come to rest between N7 and N8.The nose gear of the A340 is about 20 feet into the grass and looks like there is no damage to the engines.
The lighting is there for both N7 and N8 showing them as HST.Mumbai has been experiencing heavy showers with visibility dropping to about 700RVR with heavy showers.
Only Runway 14 was in use(Minima 1.4) and visibility being reported as 1100 with RVR of 1600M.Medium to poor braking was also reported for this runway and led to a few diversions including Speedbird 199 to VOHS.

Here is a video of the stranded aircraft

Apologies for the size and quality:O

Heres the shot of "Izmir", operating as TK-720 from IST, that veered off the Runway after landing on VABB/BOM's Primary Rwy 27

http://images3.jetphotos.net/img/3/4...4977734_tb.jpg

The location of the Aircraft Recovery Kit that was shipped by AI to COK is not known. Till I was there, they were using L&T Earth Movers / Excavators to excavate nearby ground (wheel tracks), and lay down the Metal planks/plates to bring the Aircraft back on the Rwy.

UPDATE: Heavy Rains ON for the past half an hour or so. I hope the rescue ops don't get delayed, as 14-32 is already thought to be challenging by many folks here, and an AIX captain friend of mine. And its short! :(

Is it grooved & how long afore the landing was a friction test done ????

Friction test in India!?!?!?:} HAHAHAH... damn gotta wipe the coffee of my keyboard:{.

@captjns: Dear captain, GVK - CSIA, the operators of BOM Airport, had acquired the Saab Friction Test Vehicle about 2 years back. Things are not the same as when AAI used to handle the Airport.

captjns....and I wasted a good dry martini trying to wipe the tears off my eyes.

The fact remains that considering the amount and type of traffic and ATC, BOM is still one of the most challenging (read: dangerous) airports around. Only if you operate there on daily basis you get num to that fact.

To make the challenge even more interesting, BOM has devised minimum runway occupancy time procedures, requesting widebodys to exit at RET N8.
AIP declared distance from displaced THR RWY 27 : 2.052 m.

Regularly, when we land our widebody on 27, ATC will order us during rollout to exit via N7 (1.574m).

Then add a little - or a lot of - rain, the usual unreported tailwind and the common fuel-saving reduced landing flaps, and you will be in the soup.

If at any place in the world, BOM is where you have to exercise your captaincy. Forget fuel saving, forget the wx report, forget ATC and MROTP, forget soft landings and idle reverse; just stay on the tarmac and give the pax, what they paid for - a flight where they exit via the aerobridge and not via the slides.

Roy: I like your dark sense of humour....
VT-RST: Good to hear that they have a SAAB, then nothing can go wrong now, right? (When do they start revealing the results, you think?)

You all stay safe you there..

T.

I hate it when we have to increase the a/b setting. That involves so much effort sometimes I think it's safer to go-around, rebrief the landing, and then start the approach all over again.

In my 36 years, I've never taken extraordinary means to vacate a runway to accomodate a following aircraft in rainy low visibility conditions. The safety of my operation comes before anything else. By the way... isn't that why god invented TCAS to govern distance for following aircraft.

I politely have the FO tell ATC to $hit in their hats when requested vacate the runway when I deem to be unsafe after configured for landing.

I've never subscribed to the "Blind Obedience" doctine.

Perhaps it's a matter of perception? In my book when ATC states something along the lines of "if able, vacate at XX - traffic 3 miles behind", it is not a command but a request with the reason appended. If you're unable then so be it. Just remember that major airports have a lot of tin to move around and, guess what, pilots and airlines don't like delays! ATC do their best to keep the traffic moving but do not expect you to blindly comply and compromise safety in the process.

Once in the flare it's a little late for ATC ask for specific exit points in my opinion. "unable" is often the appropriate response. I don't want to make the following traffic go around either, so why not a nice "plan minimum time on the runway" while still far enough out to be helpful?

misd-agin

Love that! You beat me to it. More than once I've at 500 feet suggested to copilots to increase or decrease autobrake setting due to a change in conditions. Some seems totally perplexed...

If you can't fly an approach and ask the other pilot to turn a switch at the same time you're probably in the wrong profession.