JA Yawd Bwoy
Well-Known Member
Sad! RIP to those onboard 
Corporate Jet down in Minnesota
- Thread starter n57flyguy
- Start date
dc3flyer
Well-Known Member
This is a strange crash, since it appears they broke out on the approach and possibly touched down, then crashed pretty far off the departure end of the runway. I fly a Hawker 800, so it will be interesting to hear the cockpit recorder to see if they were attempting a go around, or if something crazy just happened.
Just glad no one is trying to specultate about what the crew did wrong yet. It looks like they did a good job of going around the weather and attempting a landing on the back side of it.
Just glad no one is trying to specultate about what the crew did wrong yet. It looks like they did a good job of going around the weather and attempting a landing on the back side of it.
video of eyewitness depiction:
http://www.startribune.com/video/26206754.html?location_refer=Local + Metro
he was one of the mechanics that saw the landing.
http://www.startribune.com/video/26206754.html?location_refer=Local + Metro
he was one of the mechanics that saw the landing.
TXaviator
Well-Known Member
sounds like either
a) came in too fast / wet runway, attempted go-around after touching down, not enough energy, stall/spin
or
b) correct approach -> brake malfunction? -> go-around/stall/spin
or
c) correct approach -> reversers malfunction? -> go-around/stall/spin
none of the three would be very fun to deal with. :-\
actually, let me ask you jet drivers, what WOULD be the course of action say you touched down on a short-ish runway, then engage the reversers and power...but say for some reason the reversers didnt deploy and all a sudden youre powering down the runway you just touched down on..... what now???
IPad (10)
Well-Known Member
A lot of 800s don't have reversers, I don't think this one did. They have a lift dump system which takes the flaps from 45* to 75* and large spoilers. At 120kts you would eat up a lot of runway trying to go around after they were activated and once you got back out of lift dumb you would still have 45* of flaps to get rid of.
Alex.
zmiller4
Well-Known Member
Unless you floated the crap out of it or are trying to land on a runway that's too short for the conditions, you should still be able to stop without the reversers.
By the tme you've determined that the reversers aren't coming out, a go-around is probaly a *really* bad idea. I'd rather hit the fence at the end of the runway at 10kts than 110kts.
JDE
Well-Known Member
Get on the brakes and hope the anti-skid does its job.
True, since generally the landing performance numbers published in the book does not include the thrust reversers.
JoelT
Well-Known Member
Incorrect. In most airliners anyway, if the reversers have not been deployed a go around is always possible.
Also, I don't think you understand how reversers work. When using the reverser levers, if they don't deploy thrust will not be increased. Just won't happen. The reverse levers are generally separate from the throttles or, the throttles are moved over an aft gate to engage them and increase power.
Now, for my theory, this looks very similar to the AA Super-80 crash in Little Rock back in 1999. Wind shear could be a contributing factor but, I have no clue as to what the conditions at the field were. Here is an example of a possibility: Encounter WS on short final, attempt go-around, during GA wheels touch runway (no big deal, it happens even in a CAT II or III GA), still has decreasing performance and A/C is forced down again. There is nothing the crew could do.
zmiller4
Well-Known Member
A suggestion: let's leave the Monday-morning QB'ing for the NTSB. A flightaware track and 20-second blurb from an eyewitness isn't going to cover the specifics of the incident...so out of respect for the crew it might be a good idea to leave it at "man, this is pretty tragic".
dc3flyer
Well-Known Member
TXaviator
Well-Known Member
while i understand being a jerk and saying "WOW THEY SUCK" would be way out of line, i dont think trying to expand my knowledge a bit (by soliciting information from those more experienced than myself) is disrespectful.
((and i did learn more about reverse, et al, from you guys. thanks))
((and i did learn more about reverse, et al, from you guys. thanks))
I think it's more along the lines of the accident probably wasn't your A, B, or C.
It takes a lot to cause an airplane to crash with an experienced crew in the cockpit. Usually a one liner won't cover it.
JDE
Well-Known Member
I still don't think I'd attempt a go-around on a 5500' runway in a jet airplane after I touch down - but it all depends on the situation & conditions. As far as the reversers, it seems like in our Falcon, you can unlock the reversers and spool the engines, but still not have the reversers deployed (obviously that would be a malfunction).
As far as the QB'ing, I don't think there is anything wrong discussing the possibilities of what could have gone wrong - as long as it's done in a professional manner. Discussing these things challenges your thinking. This accident hits a little closer to home since this is the type of flying we do all the time - therefore I'm very anxious to learn the NTSB findings when they come out - but until then, running different scenarios in my head and discussing them with other professionals can still teach everyone involved.
E6BAV8R
Well-Known Member
Very. We had to deviate around that storm just about 2 hours before they went down.
TXaviator
Well-Known Member
right, exactly. i wasnt trying to point fingers, and yes i know its probably not a one-line solution, but things like this get your brain turning, and discussing tragedy and learning from it is in my opinion one of the best ways to deal with it. while i can be cold and cynical sometimes, im not taking any amusement in someone's death, so please dont take anything I have said that way.
