UPS contract plane off runway - KCRW
 

Now reporting two killed. This is a hilltop runway at a joint civil-military field.

Cargo plane goes off runway at West Virginia airport - Cincinnati News, FOX19-WXIX TV

background on KCRW
 

Eight years ago - remember the depressurized 733?

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...ger+charleston

Air Cargo Carriers Short SD-330

From LiveATC.net, SNC 1260 was cleared for the VOR-A runway 5 at CRW. Wind check 200/5.

Metar from the AvHerald article:

KCRW 051054Z 23003KT 10SM FEW001 OVC005 14/13 A2941 RMK AO2 SLP952 VLY FG T01440133=

VOR-A chart here:

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1705/00852VA.PDF

From news photos of the recovery activity it appears that the plane departed the runway to the left near the touchdown zone for runway 5 and the fuselage went down the side of the hill.

From local news report:

More: WV MetroNews | Plane Crash at Yaeger Airport; Yeager Airport closed

Charlie West
 

First time i went in there was at 2am with an engine fire in a twin cessna. (Red sky at night engine's alight..)
Seeing the approach the following morning i'd have just let out burn...
The FAA installed EMAS there a while back; it caught a CRJ 2 aborting due to a takeoff config warning Accident: PSA Airlines CRJ2 at Charleston on Jan 19th 2010, overran runway on takeoff
I believe there was a landslide more recently and the overrun slipped into coal country.
Given the state of the job market here i'm surprised the operators could staff a service like this...

There was a recent thread in Freight Dogs about this carrier, which is basically a feeder from smaller cities to the larger freight hubs. I suppose the predictability of the operation might appeal to some. RIP to the crew.

http://www.pprune.org/freight-dogs/5...ml#post9743582

Press release on company website

N334AC/SH3029 which started its life with Loganair in Glasgow as G-BGNA in 1979.

Also known as "Charlie West."

Here is Bill English's NTSB briefing from Friday evening. He says that two AAIB investigators will come from the UK as parties to the investigation.



It looks like the minimum descent height on the VOR-A is 619 feet above the field with DME to identify FOGAG. The reported 500 foot ceiling would make this approach challenging, to say the least, in my experience.

Bill English gives his second and final onsite briefing about the accident investigation. I am surprised that a large (over 12,500 lbs.) turbine powered aircraft in a scheduled operation is not required to have a CVR or FDR. Is this one of those cargo cutouts in the FAA regs?



Here's the customary NTSB b-roll video that the media splice into their news reports about the crash:



Some pictures of the runway damage and drone mapping of the accident site:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ntsb/s...7680389042423/

The crew names have been released:

Names of pilot, co-pilot killed in Yeager Airport plane crash released | WVAH

Probably totally fatigued, awful time of morning and a difficult approach in a far from sophisticated aircraft.

I will make this observation, at the risk of over generalizing.... This flight was operated under FAR part 135, (I think), and therefore not subject to the ATP requirement for passenger Part 121 operations in the US.

Here is a positing from Air Cargo Carriers on AirlinePilotCentral.com regarding pilot hiring.
Is Hiring?: Yes Next Estimated FO Hiring Event: July 2017

First Officer Requirements: Commercial MEL Rated/500 TT (preferred)

Starting May 1st, 2017-

If you take a low time pilot, minimal experience and add to that minimal training at the carrier, then we are likely to see more of these accidents. The available pilot pool is very dry now and if have a pulse and license you get hired somewhere. It's great experience, if you don't have an accident like this one. I think airfreight pilots make some of the best pilots out there. It is a very unforgiving type of operation and requires constant vigilance to stay safe. The learning curve is very steep, especially for the inexperienced.

I think we need to get used to seeing more of these, unfortunately.

Looking at the VOR A chart given in post #4 it is indeed a challenging approach. Was it daylight or just dawn, but the low cloud would have made it darker and there are no approach lights. It is 29 degrees off the centreline and a strange profile. There is no published DME/ALT table for the final descent, only MINS at 6nm and MPA at 8nm = threshold. Height loss is 1280' in 6nm. (Normally a 3degree slope would be 1920'.) This is very flat as a CDA, so suggests a dive & drive with a level segment. There you are, level, full landing flap, higher power, nose up, 800/700'AGL, searching for only threshold lights at 2nm (min vis required is also 1-2nm depending on category.) The ROD from 700' to 50' TCHT is about 3 degrees, but from 800' steeper. You see the runways lights late, off to the left; there is a slight delay in transiting to final descent from level flight and end up with high ROD and turning to gain the centre line, all with a tailwind. Someone was giving OVC 005. Good game. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen, to me.
And how can you have a min vis of 1nm with DH 700' if there are no approach lights? Am missing something?

Perhaps there was an issue with the airplane's DME. Otherwise the LOC Rwy 5 would have been a far better choice. Or, with that slight wind, the ILS 23 would have been an even better choice, no DME required.

It's an MDA not a DA (or DH if you prefer). And, the 1 mile is for Approach Categories A and B only. The HAA of an MDA is geometrically permissive for A and B.

Also, these are circle-to-land-only minimums (that's why it's VOR-A, not VOR Rwy 05), which have their own set of traps for the unwary. And, the final approach course radial is 31 degrees different than the runway center-line.

All in all, quite the non-precision IAP.

FWIW, attached are the TERPs CTL minima. These apply when either alignment or descent gradient don't permit straight-in minimums.

The wind, light though it may be, was favoring the ILS 23. Would have been a slight tailwind for landing 05

Correct. The other weather factors favored Runway 23 even more.

We don't know where the flight came on to the TRACON's radar. Perhaps the position favored least remaining track miles to Runway 5. Presumably, we will find that out, or perhaps someone already has.

EDIT: Note the ILS 23 and LOC 05 have a common frequency. Odds are ATC had the ILS 23 configured, which would have made the LOC 05 not readily available.

A couple key questions at this point:

1. There's a report that the aircraft struck trees on final approach. Has this been substantiated?

2. There are witness statements and apparently more than one surveillance video showing the aircraft landing at a "very strange angle". What could be the cause? Sudden gust / windshear? Last minute side-slip? Mechanical trouble?