Comair 5191...

"My only question for those on here who fly with an FMS ... is there some alert about being on the wrong runway ? "

There is no alert, really. You are supposed to scale down your moving map and check that the airplane symbol is on the runway. This is to verify that your nav system is accurate. I would think you would notice an incorrect runway alignment but that's not the reason for the check.
 
Bog,


While you raise a decent enough point for an engine failure situation, this wouldn't help with being on the wrong runway. I dunno about you, but I don't put the runway head into my bug when I set it to runway heading, I just get myself on the centerline, center my bug, finish my runway items checklist and launch.
 
"My only question for those on here who fly with an FMS ... is there some alert about being on the wrong runway ? "
Click to expand...

Not on the MD-88/90 either.

Have the 10-9 page out and as an FO, do not presume that the captain is on the right taxiway or going to the correct runway. Do not assume that ATC is going to hold your hand and alert you to your error.

I think people can become complacent because of airports with configurations like ATL, SLC, LAX where it's pretty hard to screw up the taxi. But if you look at an airport like MKE or BOS, you'd better pay close attention.
 
jtrain609 said:
Bog,
While you raise a decent enough point for an engine failure situation, this wouldn't help with being on the wrong runway. I dunno about you, but I don't put the runway head into my bug when I set it to runway heading, I just get myself on the centerline, center my bug, finish my runway items checklist and launch.
Click to expand...

Well, if we are trained to bug the heading of the runway before we taxi to that runway, how could it NOT help? What you do is what 99% of us do and what I used to do (and occasionally still do), and that is one of the links that leads to using the wrong runway.

If you bug the heading of your desired runway before you taxi, you'll know if you have the correct runway or not. If you have 033 bugged because you're expecting runway 3, you'll know when you've incorrectly lined up on runway 5 or 17.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ZMiller: nothing changed at the ex-employer. Nothing.
 
Fair enough. Personally, I set my first turn. I think, for what I'm doing, the the chances of me forgetting my initial heading are much higher than forgetting which runway to go to. And if I lose an engine while the gear is still down we're shutting down straight ahead; there's no way my airplane will climb out at gross weight from a single engine if we lose it at Vr. Different operations I guess, though.

But about breaking the links in this chain; the same thing could be said for ANYTHING. Name it; how do you prevent from doing a gear up landing? Putting the gear down. How do you prevent from having an engine failure on takeoff? Maybe try putting the fuel selectors in the right position before takeoff. How do you not crash and burn at the end of a runway? Try taking off on the right one.

Couldn't it be said very simply that there are some things that, if you do them, you will pay dearly for it. Sure we want to try to prevent against these things, but how often does taking off on the wrong runway and impacting tree's at the departure end happen?
 
I'll bug RWY heading during my whole pre-flight setup at the gate in absence of something else. If ATC tells us to fly a specific heading in the clearance or if it's a heading off a departure, I'll bug that instead. However, I do (and always have) completed a "sanity check" when taking the runway. If the big white numbers don't match up with the runway I'm supposed to be on, I don't take off. This was beat into my head during PPL days, and it's saved my butt (in an FAA sense, not a survival sense) on some night flights with a really dim landing/taxi light. Those of you that have taken off to the north out of Waco, TX know what I mean. Another thing I do is hitting the TOGAs after I'm lined up on the runway. That way, if I DO lose an engine, I've got a bug to help me before I go into HDG mode on the FCP. I see CAs all the time either hitting the TOGAs at the gate, on a taxiway or not at all. That's their call, but I always ask if they want them when I'm setting the thrust.
 
We bug the heading of the anticipated runway before we taxi, the flight director is put into heading mode, and we activate the go-around button to command the desired climb attitude. We can tell real quick if we are on an incorrect runway when the flight director is commanding a turn when lined up for takeoff. We want the flight director to be guiding the pilot if there is an engine loss on takeoff. If we have an assigned departure heading we will dial that on the backup HSI as a reminder, then the pilot-not-flying will adjust the main heading bug after reaching a safe altitude for the turn.


.
 
We bug the heading of the anticipated runway before we taxi, the flight director is put into heading mode, and we activate the go-around button to command the desired climb attitude. We can tell real quick if we are on an incorrect runway when the flight director is commanding a turn when lined up for takeoff. We want the flight director to be guiding the pilot if there is an engine loss on takeoff. If we have an assigned departure heading we will dial that on the backup HSI as a reminder, then the pilot-not-flying will adjust the main heading bug after reaching a safe altitude for the turn.
Click to expand...

Exactly SteveC, this is what we do sitting on the ramp wherever we are at. After getting atis I look at the anticipated runway on the Jepp airport page and dial in the exact heading. Then if are departure requires a heading change after take off we just verbalize it during the before take off brief. And if we have a speed restriction it's the same, I don't bug it, I bug the V2+25 speed.
 
Generally, we'll set the heading bug to the mag heading of the runway.

If there's a turn on the SID or anticipated turn, we'll dial that in. EX 260 in SLC when departing to the west.
 
At my company they teach us to bug the heading for the departure runway on the Before Start/Pushback flow. It is not specifically included on the checklist, but there is an item that reads "Flight Guidance....Set".

I find that typing in the inital heading, if assigned, on the FMS scratch pad and leaving the heading bug on runway heading is the best way for me operate, just my technique.
 
DE727UPS said:
"My only question for those on here who fly with an FMS ... is there some alert about being on the wrong runway ? "

There is no alert, really. You are supposed to scale down your moving map and check that the airplane symbol is on the runway. This is to verify that your nav system is accurate. I would think you would notice an incorrect runway alignment but that's not the reason for the check.
Click to expand...

The RAAS (Runway Alert Advisory System) we are adding to the fleet is a great thing. Uses the EGPWS database and tells you if the runway is too short, how much runway is remaining, when you are approaching a runway, and a whole lot more.
 
My question is:

Is there anything they could have done (once rolling at a high speed) to prevent the accident?
 
Not after they passed their accelerate stop speed for the amount of runway remaining, though to be honest I'm not sure how accelerate stop distances are used in transport category aircraft because they have different speeds than light aircraft, and different performance requirements.
 
PGT said:
My question is:

Is there anything they could have done (once rolling at a high speed) to prevent the accident?
Click to expand...

Yes, but . . .


Based on the fact that they did achieve Rotate speed, they came close to being able to fly. If they had rotated earlier, or perhaps more agressively, they might have cleared the fence at the end of the runway and continued to climb to a safe altitude. No, they would not have cleared the theoretical 35 foot obstacle, and they would not have been climbing out at V2, but they could have been airborne without hitting stuff, and they could have accelerated and climbed without hitting stuff. They could have even advanced the Thrust Levers to Max Power or Firewall Power and gained even more advantage. (I haven't looked at the Flight Data Recorder to see if they did that after the "whoa.")

On the other hand, had they begun a reject at some point, they might have stopped the airplane within the confines of the runway, or they might have had a low-speed excursion into the dirt, mud, and fence. The speed of impact with the fence and mud would have certainly changed the outcome that actually resulted.


However, there's the "but" part. In order to have taken either course of action (reject, or rotate early), they would have had to first recognize there was a problem. They didn't. It wasn't until they had already called "rotate" that they realized something serious was wrong. Yes, they were curious about the lighting, but not curious enough to do anything about it.



You asked about "high speed," which leaves room for interpretation. Up until the point where they rotated, they had options, but they just didn't know they needed to use one. After they rotated, their oprions were all gone.






.
 
jtrain609 said:
Not after they passed their accelerate stop speed for the amount of runway remaining, though to be honest I'm not sure how accelerate stop distances are used in transport category aircraft because they have different speeds than light aircraft, and different performance requirements.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how they receive their takeoff data, but we do know that it was planned for the intended runway, and not the runway they used. Even so, let's assume that they got the engineers out there and calculated an accelerate-stop speed for the runway they were on. Could they have done something beyond that speed? Yes.

The speeds are calculated using assumptions. Stall speeds. 35 foot obstacle over the end of the runway, 2nd segment climb, etc., etc., etc. Could they fly at less than 1.3VS? Yes. Could they clear the end of the runway at less than 35 feet? Yes. Could they have pushed the throttles up (they were using reduced thrust)? Yes.

Should they PLAN to fly slow and low? Why, of course not. But COULD they have? What if God had suddenly turned on their lights that morning and they saw themselves rapidly approaching the end of the runway and a chain-link fence. Could they have lived? I think so. They came so close anyway, I think they could have limped the airplane into the sky early and suffered nothing more than soiled britches. The trouble is, they didn't know they needed to do that until the first impact.


Perhaps this question highlights a good reason to know what those speeds mean, and how they're calculated. When that proverbial bus-load of nuns rolls onto the end of the runway after V1, what can you do? :)








.
 
Couldn't really tell you, I'm going off of numbers for FAR part 23 aircraft certification, not 25. My aircraft doesn't have a V1 or a V2 speed and my knowledge of those numbers are limited. Further I've never done anything BUT a full power takeoff, so when I'm dealing with this stuff I've got no room to get any more performance out of the aircraft. So take what I have to say with that in mind.
 
jtrain609 said:
Couldn't really tell you, I'm going off of numbers for FAR part 23 aircraft certification, not 25. My aircraft doesn't have a V1 or a V2 speed and my knowledge of those numbers are limited. Further I've never done anything BUT a full power takeoff, so when I'm dealing with this stuff I've got no room to get any more performance out of the aircraft. So take what I have to say with that in mind.
Click to expand...

Both certification standards include margins of safety. Those margins could have been exercised to get the airplane off the runway that day. V2 is a multiple of the stall speed, and is the planned climb speed. They could have flown at the stall speed and gotten ariborne earlier. The takeoff obstacle (35') wasn't there, so they didn't have to climb as high. The reduced power takeoff is usually done to prolong engine life and reduce the probability of engine failure on takeoff -- there was extra thrust available if they had only known they needed it. Those explanations aren't very technical, but I think they suffice to explain that there were options available.







.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top