TEB crash 5/15/17

AAPalmTree said:
Is this the circle they were doing?
Doesn't seem all that bad.

Click to expand...


The video that you see here is an example of the same approach where the right turn required to enter a "left base" for runway 1 is started at TORBY (FAF approximately 4 DME.).

If you take a look at the preliminary NTSB report (see below), you'll find that the accident aircraft did not commence the turn for the circle to runway 1 until they were less than 1 NM from the airport, despite being told to enter the circle at TORBY (prev stated by NovemberEcho). With being so close to the field at this point, throw in a strong north westerly wind direction/speed with all sorts of gusts, the sharp left turn to final while flying at VREF could be particularly challenging.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...D=20170515X80533&AKey=1&RType=Prelim&IType=FA
 
Maybe a bit of "get-there-itis"? Maybe I don't want to look stupid for messing up? Who knows.

Just my $.02, but when they figured out they were on short final for 6, they should have gone around. RIP and prayers for the families.
 
NovemberEcho said:
Yeah I hate when y'all do that cause usually if TEB has a program it's caused we're swamped with volume, and you guys going to MMU doesn't alleviate anything for us. In fact it makes it more complicated because MMU and CDW are 1 in 1 out.
Click to expand...


Why are they 1 in, 1 out? I assume protecting for a missed approach? Haven't looked at the procedures but I am familiar with the area.
 
greg1016 said:
Why are they 1 in, 1 out? I assume protecting for a missed approach? Haven't looked at the procedures but I am familiar with the area.
Click to expand...

Yes to protect for the missed. The jacked up part is that because MMU and CDW both have approaches through the others class D and missed approaches into the others final, we have to treat both airports as one. Basically if we have arrivals to both, we can't send in the MMU until we have landing assured for the CDW arrival and vice versa. When we have multiple arrivals to both plus TEB hopping and VFR 1200's skirting under the bravo or climbing as soon as they hit the edge it gets interesting to say the least. MMU, CDW, and TEB are all getting ran by the same controller.
 
NovemberEcho said:
Yes to protect for the missed. The jacked up part is that because MMU and CDW both have approaches through the others class D and missed approaches into the others final, we have to treat both airports as one. Basically if we have arrivals to both, we can't send in the MMU until we have landing assured for the CDW arrival and vice versa. When we have multiple arrivals to both plus TEB hopping and VFR 1200's skirting under the bravo or climbing as soon as they hit the edge it gets interesting to say the least. MMU, CDW, and TEB are all getting ran by the same controller.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I thought. You can run multiple into MMU or CDW as long as it's one and not the other?
 
NovemberEcho said:
No, still need landing assured before you can run the next one.
Click to expand...
I think I'd go crazy working in the tower in that case.

Edit: It doesn't get interesting until approach dumps 2 jets and a kingair on the visual with 2 bouncers in the pattern and an inbound helicopter :D.
 
NovemberEcho said:
Yes to protect for the missed. The jacked up part is that because MMU and CDW both have approaches through the others class D and missed approaches into the others final, we have to treat both airports as one. Basically if we have arrivals to both, we can't send in the MMU until we have landing assured for the CDW arrival and vice versa. When we have multiple arrivals to both plus TEB hopping and VFR 1200's skirting under the bravo or climbing as soon as they hit the edge it gets interesting to say the least. MMU, CDW, and TEB are all getting ran by the same controller.
Click to expand...
Do you work MMU?

I was based there for the last four years I will attest to how crazy it can get there. Most of their flying starts and ends with a repo leg MMU-HPN/LGA-MMU. Good VFR days were the worst to go to HPN over ESJAY because of all the VFR stuff up there.

I definitely do not miss that at all.
 
NovemberEcho said:
Unfortunately yes. If you've been on 27.6, 32.8, 28.55, 20.15, or 19.2 we've probably talked
Click to expand...

I've been meaning to ask you if you were the guy that continues to call the aircraft I'm flying this month "2VeeeJay" instead of "2VictorJuliet" haha
 
KLB said:
I've been meaning to ask you if you were the guy that continues to call the aircraft I'm flying this month "2VeeeJay" instead of "2VictorJuliet" haha
Click to expand...

Hahaha I know that plane! I think I've called you that a couple times but not on the reg
 
  • Like
Reactions: KLB
NovemberEcho said:
Unfortunately yes. If you've been on 27.6, 32.8, 28.55, 20.15, or 19.2 we've probably talked
Click to expand...

It's bad that I've got most of those numbers permanently burned into my brain.

(GamaProp driver. I'm sure we've talked)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So just for giggles, with some extra Sim time at recurrent this week, I asked to try the circle with the conditions from the time of the crash.

Long story short, that wind is a b****. Even making the turn right at TORBY, it was no gimme of an approach, and that's in a straight wing turboprop that is far more benign on a circling approach that I can imagine a Lear 35 being. The tailwind component on the base leg absolutely destroys your timing on the turn inbound as well as your ability to descend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top