Breaking News on CNN - Sad Story

[MarkLawrence]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/27/plane.crash/index.html

Comair RJ down at Blue Grass Airport - Lexington, KY....

[mirrodie]

And the US was having a good year thus far too. watching cnn now :(

[T-Bird76]

Very sad news indeed, Mario is right the U.S was on such a good safety run lately.

[Matt Molnar]

And the US was having a good year thus far too.

We've been in an unprecedented era of safety in US airline flight over the past several years. This is the worst crash since Flight 587 in 2001, which was quite a bit worse than this.

[PhilDernerJr]

Look like Josh has a shot of the crashed plane in better days.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5640604

Thoughts are with the families of those lost.

[T-Bird76]

Some reports are saying the plane may have taken off from the wrong runway.

[Midnight Mike]

The crash marks the end of what has been called the "safest period in aviation history" in the United States. There has not been a major crash since Nov. 12, 2001, when American Airlines Flight 587 plunged into a residential neighborhood in Queens, N.Y., killing 265 people, including five on the ground.

On Jan. 8, 2003, an Air Midwest commuter plane crashed on takeoff at Charlotte/Douglas International Airport, killing all 21 aboard.

Last December, a seaplane operated by Chalk's Ocean Airways crashed off Miami Beach when its right wing separated from the fuselage shortly after takeoff, killing the 18 passengers and two crew members. That plane, a Grumman G-73 Turbo Mallard, was built in 1947 and modified significantly in 1979.

The NTSB's last record of a CRJ crash was on November 21, 2004, when a China Eastern-Yunnan Airlines Bombardier crashed shortly after takeoff. The 6 crew members and 47 passengers on the CRJ-200 were killed, and there were two fatalities on the ground.

[SengaB]

Runway 26/8 is 3501ft
Runway 4/22 is 7002ft
They are now leaning to this is a strong possibility the plane took off on the shorter runway RWY26. After looking at my charts I can see how this could easily happen if you are not paying attention.
Senga

[Alex T]

Mike-

What defines a major crash? Because the commuter ones are just as bad and people died in those too.

But, looking back it is true we have not had a huge incident since the Airbus crash on United States Soil.

Thats 5 yrs of flying safety, extremely remarkable one must admit!

Also, it seems everyone survived the impact of the crash but later died in the fire, that has to be horrible to know if it is true.

Heard reports two of the passengers had just gotten married and were on their way to a honeymoon.

Rest in Peace to all the victims.

Alex

[fly.mcs]

Just woke up to hear the news; it's very sad.

Rest In Peace all of those lost onboard. Hopefully we'll be able to find out some news from the First Officer... And as Senga did, I checked the KLEX chart and it's pretty sad how the mistake could be made :(

[Midnight Mike]

[quote]

Mike-

What defines a major crash? Because the commuter ones are just as bad and people died in those too.

But, looking back it is true we have not had a huge incident since the Airbus crash on United States Soil.


Alex[/quote:82c59]

I am not sure? I would think that a major crash would result in a loss of life & equipment, I will ask the FAA if they have any answers.

[hiss srq]

I got off my flight in Houston and Idle told me, my jaw dropped, god bless and rest in peace to all of those involved. It is weird how they happen in groups though.

[Derf]

The plane did in-fact take off from the wrong runway and there have been
complaints in the past about confusing the two runways on takeoffs. In
the past pilot have had clearance for departure and takeoff and were on
the wrong runway. One pilot wrote a report that I am aware of saying
that there should be a special advisory as in some other airports to check
compass upon lineup to make sure this exact thing does not
happen.....because it almost happened to them!

Cut an dry, pilots were up early.....probably the only aircraft moving at
the airport at the time and probably had clearance as they were taxing on
the ramp! Only a year will tell us how right the comments are when the
final report Finlay comes out. (LOTS OF SPECULATION fed By LOTS of
alcohol from a man that has not had a drink since a great night out with
my good friend Nick(amongst others))

[moose135]

The plane did in-fact take off from the wrong runway and there have been complaints in the past about confusing the two runways on takeoffs. In the past pilot have had clearance for departure and takeoff and were on the wrong runway. One pilot wrote a report that I am aware of saying that there should be a special advisory as in some other airports to check compass upon lineup to make sure this exact thing does not happen.....because it almost happened to them!

Cut an dry, pilots were up early.....probably the only aircraft moving at
the airport at the time and probably had clearance as they were taxing on
the ramp! Only a year will tell us how right the comments are when the
final report Finlay comes out. (LOTS OF SPECULATION fed By LOTS of
alcohol from a man that has not had a drink since a great night out with
my good friend Nick(amongst others))

I came across that same report today, Fred. Looking at the chart, I can see where they could line up on the wrong runway. One report I saw said 2 RJs departed shortly before this one.

I'm wondering about the runway lights. The reports all said it was an unlighted runway. Looking at the AirNav page for LEX, it shows runway lights on 8/26, but says they are out of service indefinitely. If so, how do these guys continue take off down a dark runway?

It's been a hundred years since I've flown, but I still remember that one of the things you do before pushing up the throttles is to check your compass/HSI to see that it matches runway heading - not so much to see if you are on the correct runway, but to see that your instruments are correct. If my HSI was 40 degrees off Rwy heading, I might think twice before launching into the darkness.

[T-Bird76]

I'm sure there's more to the story regarding the runway. There might have been enough light that runway lights weren't needed. Besides the victims families I truly feel bad for the surviving FO who if in-fact did take off from the wrong runway will have to live with the fact he did. This just really goes to show you how in just a blink of an eye your life can be cut short. I travel over 100,000 miles a year and hardly think that this stuff can happen, today's event was a sobering moment for me.

[FlyingColors]

Wanna see more evidence how sick and twisted this country's priorities are.

Just punch up yahoo.com
Top headline:

"Plunging necklines and halter tops popular among female Emmy attendees.» View photos"

Shallow disrespectful bastards!

[Alex T]

I learned an AirTran First Officer was one of the dead on the flight, he was commuting to ATL to work on an afetrnoon flight for AirTran.:(

Alex

[moose135]

Wanna see more evidence how sick and twisted this country's priorities are.

Just punch up yahoo.com
Top headline:

"Plunging necklines and halter tops popular among female Emmy attendees.» View photos"

Shallow disrespectful bastards!

The problem is since we're aviation fanatics, this is big news to us. For most people, this is one more news item - if it doesn't effect them personally, most likely when they heard the news reports they thought "That's terrible!" and went on about their business.

[SengaB]

Just looking at this diagram from my jepp charts shows that those 2 runways could easily be confused. It doesn't help that there is one Taxiway- only (A) that leas to the top of both runways. Not A-1 B-2 etc.
http://www.nycaviation.com/hosting/lex.jpg

Senga

[PhilDernerJr]

Fayette County Coroner Gary Ginn said “Most of the injuries are going to be due to fire-related deaths.”

Injuries due to fire-related deaths? I can imagine the doctor's diagnosis now:

Patient: So what's wrong with me doc?

Doctor: Well it appears you died in a fire.

Patient: That sucks. That would explain how I got injured.



I think it's very sad that this accident happened. It sounds like some people involved with being a little lax and not paying attention. The rwy lights should have been operable, too.

[USAF Pilot 07]

I'm no pilot, but looking at the Jepp chart posted, how does one confuse RWY26 with 22. If you're taxiing to 22, don't you say to yourself "OK, I'm going to cross the threashold of one runway before I reach my assigned one". And what was the towers role in all of this? Shouldn't they have noticed that the RJ was rolling on the wrong RWY?

To me it just seems like these lives were "unecessarily" lost because of a stupid mistake made by one or two people who weren't on top of their game.

There should be some sort of "checklist" in place to ensure that a plane is using the proper runway, especially in smaller airports where these RJs are sometimes the only planes that fly in and out...

When I was flying down at the airfield here this summer for a pre-UPT, UPT style screening program, even though we used the exact same runway every time, under VFR conditions, we'd still make sure our nose was pointed in the right compass direction before taking-off. In fact we'd do a ton of things before takeoff to ensure that just about every instrument was working properly.
My IP, who's a civilian dude, who used to do some flying for Continental Express said that a lot of the stuff they made us do here was because we were all pretty much new to flying, and because we were flying in the military. He was saying that we have some of the most strict checklists, and that when he was flying commercially they didn't do half the stuff that both we (and active duty military pilots) were required to do...
So Moose, maybe there's a gap in between military and civilian procedures?

Anyway, I hope the F/O makes it out of this ok, and may the people who died on the plane RIP.

[PhilDernerJr]

I dont know if he'd want me to mention his name, but a well known Anet photographer was supposed to be on that plane.

[hiss srq]

You always do a compass check upon geting her lined up on the runway or at least I do. Let us not be too fast to bash the flight crew because many factors are involved. No one crash is attirbuted to a single thing though the NTSB and FAA like to make you and themselves think it. It is a series of events that caused it, low crew rest time, trying to make the off time, maybe a missprint in NOTAM's there are soooooo many factors involved in this stuff. The NTSB will print up a crash report that says PILOT ERROR soo fast but in that there is always a few factors that actually led to the incident but the final one was pilot error.

[RDU-JFK]

So what actually CAUSED the crash? I assume the plane got airborne and the engines failed/stalled due to the shortness of the runway? I'm not technically savvy, but what led to the crash if an aircraft takes off on too short of a runway?

[PhilDernerJr]

Yeah, I assume a stall based on not enough runway to gain sufficient speed.

[hiss srq]

So what actually CAUSED the crash? I assume the plane got airborne and the engines failed/stalled due to the shortness of the runway? I'm not technically savvy, but what led to the crash if an aircraft takes off on too short of a runway?

Engins would not have stalled, it would be an aerodynamic stall otherwise known as a loss of lift. It is entirely possible that the plane never even made it off the runway or did just barely and clipped somthing that brought her back down namely a tree maybe. It reminded me immediately of the NW MD-80 many years ago when I heard about it. I really feel for all those involved. On a side note Scarey Mary is already at it on the Communist News Network. (CNN)

[moose135]

So what actually CAUSED the crash? I assume the plane got airborne and the engines failed/stalled due to the shortness of the runway? I'm not technically savvy, but what led to the crash if an aircraft takes off on too short of a runway?

That's a common misconception - the engines "stalled", when in fact the wing stalled. Most likely scenario, they go charging off into the darkness, and suddenly realize the end of the runway is coming up a lot sooner then they expected. It's too late to try to stop, so you pull it off, hoping it will fly. It does for a short time, probably in ground effect, but the slow speed and little or no climb rate doesn't allow you to clear the fence at the end of the runway, and trying to pull the nose up further causes the wing to stall, losing lift and making a sudden return to Earth. Remember, gravity wins every time.

This may sound way too geeky, (or maybe a little strange) but last night I downloaded a CRJ-200 for MS Flight Sim 2004 and tried taking off from Rwy 26. No matter what I did, when using a normal takeoff (brake-release, push up the power, and make a normal rotation & climbout) I hit the trees at the end of the runway. Rotating early caused me to mush along in ground effect, skip across the grass & hit the trees. Only when I tried a "short field" takeoff - hold the brakes, let the power spool up before moving, and make a steeper climb at lower airspeed, was I able to get airborne safely.

[Derf]

[..............Only when I tried a "short field" takeoff - hold the brakes, let the power spool up before moving, and make a steeper climb at lower airspeed, was I able to get airborne safely.

Question, were you firewalled when you released the brakes?? did you drop the flaps at 80KTS and how far off were the throttles from the calculated powersetting for the normal runway.

[moose135]

Question, were you firewalled when you released the brakes?? did you drop the flaps at 80KTS and how far off were the throttles from the calculated powersetting for the normal runway.

Well, it was around midnight when I was doing this, so I didn't get into figuring out power settings and all. I did let the engines spool up to 100+% before releasing brakes, but I had flaps down throughout the run - that's what I remember of short field procedures back in the day. On my normal takeoff attempts, I did push the power up to 100%, although I did that as I started the roll, so they were still spooling up as I was moving.

[FlyingColors]

Question, were you firewalled when you released the brakes?? did you drop the flaps at 80KTS and how far off were the throttles from the calculated powersetting for the normal runway.

Well, it was around midnight when I was doing this, so I didn't get into figuring out power settings and all. I did let the engines spool up to 100+% before releasing brakes, but I had flaps down throughout the run - that's what I remember of short field procedures back in the day. On my normal takeoff attempts, I did push the power up to 100%, although I did that as I started the roll, so they were still spooling up as I was moving.

Very cool!

[MORS-AB-ALTO]

That's way cool Moose!

[SengaB]

AAH another flight simmer.
John....GO into the aircraft.cfg config file for your CRJ and change the following (similar) parameters. "Search for static thrust" and increase it to 120000
This one is for a EMB-145
[TurbineEngineData]
fuel_flow_gain=0.002
inlet_area=6.415
rated_N2_rpm=29920.000
static_thrust=7612.735
afterburner_available=0
reverser_available=1
You shouldn't have a problem on Runway 26 anymore......
Flaps? Who needs them? Breaks? You will!
Don't forget to copy your cfg file

Senga

[Derf]

When I would spend time in the old Eastern 727, we would take off from general aviation airports and when we were very marginal as in....stick shaker screaming like crazy to get clear of the runway on the very last inch of overrun....I would get some extra leeway and a good 10-20knots if I were to wait on the flaps....I found that I could go from 0-25 flaps in the same time I would be rotating if I did it on the crosscheck call...80knots, Slam them down and be ready to pull..... Check it out, it works well..... but all of this is when you know you are on a smaller runway than you should be.

I sure feel bad for the F/O.....if he does survive, he will wish he was dead for a very long time. He is going to need Lots of help and lots of support.

so sad

[Derf]

AAH another flight simmer.
John....GO into the aircraft.cfg config file for your CRJ and change the following (similar) parameters. "Search for static thrust" and increase it to 120000
This one is for a EMB-145
[TurbineEngineData]
fuel_flow_gain=0.002
inlet_area=6.415
rated_N2_rpm=29920.000
static_thrust=7612.735
afterburner_available=0
reverser_available=1
You shouldn't have a problem on Runway 26 anymore......
Flaps? Who needs them? Breaks? You will!
Don't forget to copy your cfg file

Senga

If those engines could really do that, Rutan would have lost the X-prize in a hearbeat! ;)

[hiss srq]

I feel bad for the F/O as well, if he was the PF well than he will more than likely wish that he was dead. My philosphy is that if he was the PNF and he pulls through enough to be able to return to flight status he will actually become much more hireable in a sense because most pilots that have an accident and walk away from it etc............ become much more aware pilots, they learn alot more and become super super observant in the longrun. That is someone you want in your flight department for sure. Humans make mistakes in life and that is that. Unfortuneately this mistake cost many lives that should not have been but though he would be an accountable party in this incident he is alive and I am sure that it will always remain a fresh thought in his head for next time. I know this accident has taught me a valueable lesson .

[LGA777]

If the FO does in fact survive I think this guy must be being saved for something very Important. I read this morning a few years ago he was having a blow out fight with his then wife (now ex-wife) at their Margate, Florida home when she pulled out a gun and shot him in the stomach at point blank range. She was arrested for attempted murder. I personally believe to survive these two events only a few years apart is more than co-incidence. He his still on this earth for a reason. BTW don't know if some of you saw this but the FO and FA where JFK based, although the Captain was CVG based.

Regards

LGA777

[Mellyrose]

Wow Ron, that's amazing. Lucky sonofabitch.

[Nonstop2AUH]

I keep seeing news reports that these pilots were "experienced," yet no details have been released about what they did before their employment at Comair or how many hours they actually had in type. I know that the commuters have taken alot of people with low times and who come from "pilot factory" sort of academies where the emphasis is more on systems than old-fashioned pilotage skills, and taking off on the wrong runway is obviously a mistake in pilotage. i.e. situational awareness, not in systems. Anyone know more on the backgrounds of these guys? Were either of them career-changer types from the Comair Academy (which I once visited and considered attending)? While of course it's very sad all around, as a consumer of airline services, a/k/a a paying passenger, I find it appallingly fascinating that 2 qualified professionals could make such a catastrophic error.

[T-Bird76]

They released some info on both pilots yesterday, both had many years behind the stick of the CRJ and proper training. Sadly the pilots will more then likely get blamed for being on the wrong runway.

[Mateo]

Couple of things here - after the AF Concorde crash, I tried to fly it losing engines 1 and 2 at rotation. It mushed around at a very high AOA for a while before going down.

It's a fairly well-known performance characteristic of the CRJ that it has great second-segment climb performance thanks to the powerful engines, but takes forever to get off the ground because there are no slats. CRJs depart off of 5200' runway 33 at DCA all the time - I'll have to pay attention the next time I go out to see rotation points.

Even if the FO was the PNF, it's still his responsibility to point out to the PF that they're on the wrong runway. Not to mention that runway 26 was 1.) unlit, 2.) not ILS marked, and 3.) you can tell when you look down the thing if a runway is 3500' or 7000'! I suppose it's redundant to mention the 60' high numbers....

Does Comair do the "both pilots push the throttles together" thing?

Every accident is always the result of a number of failures linked together, but the final link in this chain does appear to be pilot error. Every accident, though, provides an opportunity to learn and change procedures. Out of this one, we'll probably see more improvements to CRM, possibly with a verification between the PF and the PNF that they're on the correct runway, and maybe even an ATC restriction as to when airplanes can be cleared for takeoff. I'm wondering if this was one of those situations where, on an empty field, the aircraft was cleared for takeoff pretty much upon leaving the apron area.

[USAF Pilot 07]

Sadly the pilots will more then likely get blamed for being on the wrong runway.

Not to be critical or anything, but it kinda was their fault...

That being said I think this could have happened to anyone, from an experienced lifetime pilot to a newbie.
I'm sure this situation happens a lot, especially at smaller airports, or in GA flying. THe only difference is that they end up making it airborne and climb out with no/little issue. Unfortunately in this case, the plane just couldn't handle it.

[PhilDernerJr]

Yes, sorry to armchair it, but checking their heading once they turned onto the "active" before gunning the throttle would have solved it.

[T-Bird76]

Yes, sorry to armchair it, but checking their heading once they turned onto the "active" before gunning the throttle would have solved it.

Is it a normal procedure though to check your compass? I've seen at some airports there are signs near the runways to check your compass heading. They mentioned this runway didn't have those signs.

I heard this morning that when the plane was on the runway they radioed to the tower the runway lights were not on. You would think the tower would have realized at that point they were on the wrong runway, and why did they begin to roll is another question. This is sounding more and more like an unfortunate breakdown in procedures and communication.

[hiss srq]

[quote="Phil D.":bb829]Yes, sorry to armchair it, but checking their heading once they turned onto the "active" before gunning the throttle would have solved it.[/quote:bb829]


It is one of the first things you learn in flight school normally. It is the last thing I do before my hand goes to the throttles personally. If I am doing a rolling departure I verify it as I am pushing them up so there is enough time to abort if need be. Whether it is IMC or VMC you should always do that. This is a very unfortuneate example of pilots who got too complaicent or just simply slacked off slightly and assumed so it seems.

[hiss srq]

I just heard that the First Officer and long survivor was in fact the PF on that flight. Wow is he going to wish he was dead if he does not die. Sad story, now the intresting thing will be why the PNF did not call this irregularity out as he punched them up to go.

[lijk604]

This has obviously been a hot topic here in my office. A quick poll of pilots I have spoken to reflect hiss's statement. They all check the compass heading before gunning the throttles.

Again to reinforce the crew's COMPLACENCY, Hmmm Runway lights are not on! HELLO! Maybe you want to recheck some things????

[USAF Pilot 07]

I'm also a member of an air force forum, more specifically an Air Force Academy current cadets and graduates forum. Many, if not most, of the graduates on the forum, are pilots, some who are even retired with thousands of hours.

The general consensus among all of them, especially the cargo guys who fly into non-familiar and smaller airports, and do a lot of night and NVG flying, is that everytime you line up, you double check your compass with the runway heading, and if the two don't match up you knock-off the takeoff. Not to also mention the fact that as a pilot you should have enough situational awareness to realize that you were on the wrong runway, especially given the fact that the runway lights were off at that hour of the morning...

There's also a controller on there, who said that the controller should have observed the aircraft on the wrong runway, and alerted the crew to that fact...

So while ultimately, it appears the crash was the result of poor crew management and decisions, it may have been prevented if the controller had been more alert of the situation...

It's just a shame that all those on board could still be alive if it wasn't for some poor decisions made that morning...

[Nonstop2AUH]

As a fan of aviation, who believes most aircrew are overworked and underappreciated, I feel bad for the people of Comair and Delta about this. But as a consumer of airline services, a/k/a a paying passenger, this is very scary stuff and makes me hopping mad. For whatever reason, distraction, overconfidence, confusion, etc., these guys made a preventable mistake that cost innocent people their lives. The controller cleared them to the correct runway, the crew acknowledged it, and then they barreled down the wrong one with tragic consequences. This is the sort of thing I wouldn't be too surprised to hear about in the 3rd world, where training and airport maintenence can be lax, but in America it's inexcusable. Human factors were to blame for this, and it further advances the argument of those who believe that flying should be more computerized. In fact, there is apparently a device that can warm cockpit crews that they are on the wrong runway but only a few airlines have it, was mentioned in the paper today. Many don't have it because it is "too expensive." I'm sure the families of the victims would have a different opinion.

[T-Bird76]

As a fan of aviation, who believes most aircrew are overworked and underappreciated, I feel bad for the people of Comair and Delta about this. But as a consumer of airline services, a/k/a a paying passenger, this is very scary stuff and makes me hopping mad. For whatever reason, distraction, overconfidence, confusion, etc., these guys made a preventable mistake that cost innocent people their lives. The controller cleared them to the correct runway, the crew acknowledged it, and then they barreled down the wrong one with tragic consequences. This is the sort of thing I wouldn't be too surprised to hear about in the 3rd world, where training and airport maintenence can be lax, but in America it's inexcusable. Human factors were to blame for this, and it further advances the argument of those who believe that flying should be more computerized. In fact, there is apparently a device that can warm cockpit crews that they are on the wrong runway but only a few airlines have it, was mentioned in the paper today. Many don't have it because it is "too expensive." I'm sure the families of the victims would have a different opinion.

As long as a human is in the mix accidents like this will happen. I wouldn't say it’s inexcusable. The flight crew made a fatal mistake, I'm sure they didn't say "ah who cares we can take off on the shorter runway." As for detection devices don't blame the airlines the fault can be blamed on the FAA who has delayed the rollout. Below is description of the technology to avoid these accidents.


The Airport Surface Detection Equipment, model X is an important system developed after a fatal accident at LAX, providing affordable surface radar at airports so that controllers don't have to rely solely on visual observance. The program was originally slated for completion in 2007, but due to FAA budget cuts, only 15 of the scheduled 34 sites will have received the essential system by then. Ten medium sized airports still have absolutely no radar. During this delay, many controllers simply cannot "see" areas of an airport's surface due to obstructions and low visibility.

[Nonstop2AUH]

Thanks for that explanation, am I right in thinking that is the Honeywell-produced system described in the Times today?

What's sad is the government pushes budget cuts at the FAA which transfers more safety responsibility to the industry. But the airlines are pushing cost cutting themselves as many are in bankruptcy and even those that aren't need to improve profitability. So, the operator is in cost cutting mode, the regulator is in cost cutting mode, and the public incorrectly assumes that everything possible is being done to make their flight safe.

But, the public is also to blame for demanding ever-lower airfares and believing that commercial aviation has somehow been 'perfected.' If I had written the above prior to this weekend I would be met by a chorus of people telling me how safe things have been since AA587 with the unspoken implication being there will never be another accident. Funny how the public thinks the pilot is a glorified bus driver and the FAs are flying waitresses until bad stuff happens and then they expect the very same people to come save their lives.

[Nonstop2AUH]

FYI CNN Breaking News:

"FAA acknowledges it violated staffing policies with only one air traffic controller on duty at airport when Comair jet crashed Sunday, killing 49 people. "

Any thoughts?

[hiss srq]

I am no big fan of the tombstone agency but at least they are admitting the wrong in the situation, now how much of a contributing factor they will play is up to question though not much still as the pilot has the ultimate responsibility of safety of operations so the neglegence unfortuneately will still lay on the crew :(

[KLM777]

When I would spend time in the old Eastern 727, we would take off from general aviation airports and when we were very marginal as in....stick shaker screaming like crazy to get clear of the runway on the very last inch of overrun....I would get some extra leeway and a good 10-20knots if I were to wait on the flaps....I found that I could go from 0-25 flaps in the same time I would be rotating if I did it on the crosscheck call...80knots, Slam them down and be ready to pull..... Check it out, it works well..... but all of this is when you know you are on a smaller runway than you should be.

What????? that's BS what do you know about the 727?
Weren't you the one who said the super 27 had 2 different engine types . please how can u expect someone to take this seriously, let alone believe it!

p.s the stick shaker only went off as a stall warning and proceeded through the stall
And this Comair captain was a 7 yr vet. tell me how he could confuse runways as if he didn't see the big 22 at the threshhold. Something else had to be a factor!

[PhilDernerJr]

I want to note that CNN had a video recreating the crash from "the pilot's perspective".

They used a "special program" which was nothing more than Microsoft Flight sImulator. Merely copying Moose's original recreation!


And this Comair captain was a 7 yr vet. tell me how he could confuse runways as if he didn't see the big 22 at the threshhold. Something else had to be a factor!

Um, isn't it kind of obvious that he DIDN'T see the big 22 on the rwy, or else he wouldn't have taken off? Aside from human error, what are you implying it could be? The pilot covering the F/O's eyes saying "Guess who?"?

There were obviously several factors that led to the pilots and ATC missing the fact that this palne was on the wrong runway. A little bit of fault can be placed in several places, much of it on those in control of the aircraft.

[hiss srq]

What????? that's BS what do you know about the 727?
Weren't you the one who said the super 27 had 2 different engine types . please how can u expect someone to take this seriously, let alone believe it!

p.s the stick shaker only went off as a stall warning and proceeded through the stall
And this Comair captain was a 7 yr vet. tell me how he could confuse runways as if he didn't see the big 22 at the threshhold. Something else had to be a factor!


shall we consider the fact that the PF was the F/O not the Capt. and with CRM and such we do things diffrently than they did it 20 or more years ago up front, that and the fact that when you turn onto a runway espesially in the dark and considering the CRJ's taxi lamps are not on the nose gear maybe the illumination is not there to be able to see that and usually when you turn onto a runway that does not have a displaced threshold etc..... So again we as pilots are not perfect and we do make mistakes. There may well have been a factor such as the fact that the only one person was in the towe, maybe that airport has no ground radar as well. Soooooooo many factors play into it but the crew was at fault bottom line still unfortuneately.

The stick shaker is a device that warns you of impending stall condition meaning that you can fly with the stick shaker rattleing away. And by the way the super 27 does have two diffrent engine types the JT-8D-17 and JT-8D-219's so yes it is two diffrent engines on a 727. Please do not critisize the man he knows what he is taking about. There is even a 727 captain in these forums whom could answer this better than I could as i do not fly the 27. But let us return to topic at hand here.

[USAF Pilot 07]

And this Comair captain was a 7 yr vet. tell me how he could confuse runways as if he didn't see the big 22 at the threshhold. Something else had to be a factor!

Sure, who knows maybe he was up late because he couldn't sleep... Or maybe he had gotten in a fight with his wife the night before, and had that weighing in on his mind...

Obviously the pilot wasn't like "Well we're on RWY 22, let's takeoff"... Something happened in the flight deck that either distracted the crew from realizing they were on the runway, or the crew just wasn't all that alert to realize it..

The blackboxes, more specifically the CVRs, will shed a lot more light on what was going on in that flight deck just before takeoff.

Does anyone know when they may be realeased?

[Midnight Mike]

FYI CNN Breaking News:

"FAA acknowledges it violated staffing policies with only one air traffic controller on duty at airport when Comair jet crashed Sunday, killing 49 people. "

Any thoughts?

Still would have been pilot error, the crew was cleared to the correct runway.....

[Midnight Mike]

The blackboxes, more specifically the CVRs, will shed a lot more light on what was going on in that flight deck just before takeoff.

Does anyone know when they may be realeased?

It all depends what they find on the tape. You will have the FAA, NTSB, company Reps, Union officials, that will all have a chance to listen to the tape. More than likely, the aircraft manufacturer will send somebody to listen to the tapes as well.

By the time the tapes are released, the media will forget about the crash & bury the story on page 40 of the newspaper.....

[Derf]

When I would spend time in the old Eastern 727, we would take off from general aviation airports and when we were very marginal as in....stick shaker screaming like crazy to get clear of the runway on the very last inch of overrun....I would get some extra leeway and a good 10-20knots if I were to wait on the flaps....I found that I could go from 0-25 flaps in the same time I would be rotating if I did it on the crosscheck call...80knots, Slam them down and be ready to pull..... Check it out, it works well..... but all of this is when you know you are on a smaller runway than you should be.

What????? that's BS what do you know about the 727?
Weren't you the one who said the super 27 had 2 different engine types . please how can u expect someone to take this seriously, let alone believe it!

p.s the stick shaker only went off as a stall warning and proceeded through the stall
And this Comair captain was a 7 yr vet. tell me how he could confuse runways as if he didn't see the big 22 at the threshhold. Something else had to be a factor!

The super 27 DOES have 2 engine types....they do not remove the #2 engine and they do not have room for a bigger engine...what the hell are you talking about? can you enlighten me here???

[Derf]

Here is some more info from the guy who should not be taken
seriously.....

The super 27 has JT8D-200's at Nos. 1 and 3. No. 2 (center) is the original
engine with modifications and deletion of thrust reverser.

I know of two Valsan Partners converted 727-100 aircraft. The rest (that I
know of) are -200.

The JT8-217 engines have just almost 2 times the thrust of the JT9-7's or -
9's on the original aircraft.

I believe there was talk of just removing the #2 engine when the Super27
first hit the drawing board, but the 727 is a certified as a 3 enigne aircraft.
Removing the the 2nd engine would be a whole slew of red tape not worth
messing with.

In other words, re-certing an aircraft for a different engine usually has
benifits that far outweigh, the process/cost of the recert. Recerting a 3
engine to a 2 engine aircraft, isn't worth the time/effort.
The -217 can be stage 4 qualified but with the #2 engine running at rated
thrust the total package is very low in the stage 3 range.

So now I will leave it to you to correct the man that nobody should take
seriously.....we can now nitpic the FACTS!!!!

What equipment do you fly?
How much time do you have in it?

On a side note...this should really piss you off, The Super 27 has a
slower rated cruise than the original engines....yep, Engines are more
powerful yet the cruise is slower!!! but I do not really want to open that
can of worms now.

[T-Bird76]

FYI CNN Breaking News:

"FAA acknowledges it violated staffing policies with only one air traffic controller on duty at airport when Comair jet crashed Sunday, killing 49 people. "

Any thoughts?

Still would have been pilot error, the crew was cleared to the correct runway.....

Mike I don't think we can squarely blame the crew on this. Blue Grass isn't a very busy airport why wasn't the controller in visual contact with the plane? Did he assume the pilot knew where he was going? Perhaps its just my opinion but without much going on he should have been watching his aircraft.

[PhilDernerJr]

The news is saying that the controller became busy with "administrative duties".

As I said earlier, I think blame can be placed in a couple of places, but mostly on that of the pilots who should have seen a couple telltale signs (numbers on rwy, rwy lights, heading, etc.).

[Midnight Mike]

[quote=Nonstop2AUH]FYI CNN Breaking News:

"FAA acknowledges it violated staffing policies with only one air traffic controller on duty at airport when Comair jet crashed Sunday, killing 49 people. "

Any thoughts?

Still would have been pilot error, the crew was cleared to the correct runway.....

Mike I don't think we can squarely blame the crew on this. Blue Grass isn't a very busy airport why wasn't the controller in visual contact with the plane? Did he assume the pilot knew where he was going? Perhaps its just my opinion but without much going on he should have been watching his aircraft.[/quote:0894e]

Tommy

Well, it was quite simply pilot error, but, until the NTSB issues it findings, we will not know the complete story.

If you are saying that if there were two people in the Tower, that they may have caught the pilots error? That is certainly as possibility.

Now, let's see what the Professionals have to say about this accident....


Controlers Union Rep:


Andrew Cantwell, regional vice president of the controller's union, had a mixed reaction to the announcement.....Cantwell said controllers are not required to watch planes depart, and he does not think controller error contributed to the crash.

FAA Rep:



In a written statement released Tuesday evening, the FAA suggested that a second controller would not have prevented the accident.

"Had there been a second controller present on Sunday, that controller would have been responsible for separating airborne traffic with radar, not aircraft on the airport's runways," the statement said.

[PhilDernerJr]

Wouldn't someone have been controlling ground to see where the planes were rolling to?

[Midnight Mike]

Wouldn't someone have been controlling ground to see where the planes were rolling to?

That would be a good question to ask somebody from the Tower, I know somebody that works in the LAX Tower, maybe I can ask some questions.....

Phil, don't you know somebody from the Tower as well?

[PhilDernerJr]

Not LAX, but a couple guys. We even have a few tower guys here on the boards.

[Derf]

Talking out my butt...you do not need ground controllers at an airport
when there is no traffic....at KFRG... the tower completely closes at night,
that does not mean that the airport is closed...it just becomes an
Uncontrolled airport. If you do not have traffic, why would you need a
traffic cop or ground controller? An airport like LAX or JFK I would
assume always have ground controllers on duty but many smaller airports
do not have a ground controller and in airports like Brookhaven...there
are no controllers at all and the airport is an uncontrolled airport 24/7.

At that time of the morning...there would never be a need to be a
controller at that airport because that CRJ was the only thing moving....

Like I said....No facts here, just my beliefs

[FlyingColors]

The news is saying that the controller became busy with "administrative duties".

So thats what they call her :)

(sorry, bad taste)

[Derf]

So thats what they call her :)

(sorry, bad taste)

BRAVO!!!!! :lol:

[KLM777]

This {JT-8D-219's} is a derivative of this{JT-8D-217} They are still JT8D's

And you made it seem like in your post that you flew the 727.Oh yea I'm a multi engine, private pilot with about 83 hours, and i have taken my instrument written already.And I'm only 18.

[moose135]

Oh yea I'm a multi engine, private pilot with about 83 hours, and i have taken my instrument written already.And I'm only 18.

83 hours and you have a multi-engine rating? That's pretty good, I didn't know anyone would check you out with such little time.

Oh, and by the way, we never talk trash about Fred on these boards, or Johnnie the Moose will come over and whack your dog!

[Derf]

This {JT-8D-219's} is a derivative of this{JT-8D-217} They are still JT8D's

And you made it seem like in your post that you flew the 727.Oh yea I'm a multi engine, private pilot with about 83 hours, and i have taken my instrument written already.And I'm only 18.

Well, If we want to go there, I did fly the 727, but do not have any
license's and do not wish to discuss this with you any further....I also flew
in the sim a bit but never imply ed that I am a pilot.
I know the correct info and it seems you were not correct...two different
engines were used on the 727 and are different in size and are the same
engines that are used on the MD-80....

Outboard Engines: New P&W JT8D-217C or JT8D-219 engines (as fitted to
more than 1,200 MD- 80s); new composite nacelles; new strut and engine
mounts; new hydraulic reverser's

The engine will not physically fit into the #2 section of any 727....

There was the 727 QF for re-engine UPS's B727-100 freighter fleet with
68.5kN (15,400lbt) Tay 651-54 engines and that did include the redesign
of the #2 inlet and all engines are the same type.

I would appreciate it if you can do your research before calling my
credibility into account....I will always say..."I believe" or "I think" if I do
not have the facts.

[KLM777]

83 hours and you have a multi-engine rating?

Does that surprise you? And what does this mean?

That's pretty good, I didn't know anyone would check you out with such little time.
I got my private with about 67 hours even though the mins are 40, got my multi after that at about 73.5 hours. what are you a spotter that moonlights as a pilot too?

[T-Bird76]

[quote]83 hours and you have a multi-engine rating?

Does that surprise you? And what does this mean?

That's pretty good, I didn't know anyone would check you out with such little time.
I got my private with about 67 hours even though the mins are 40, got my multi after that at about 73.5 hours. what are you a spotter that moonlights as a pilot too?[/quote:e3d99]

Dude I think you need to bring it down a few notches. Moose was KC135 pilot who served our country so I think some respect is in order. Fred was pointing out you were accusing him of not being creditable without posting your own facts.

[PhilDernerJr]

This topic is intended to be about the plane crash the other day. Although side conversations happen, we're way off-topic and I think you guys should take it to PM at this point, or start a new thread about the Super 727. Up to you guys.

All off-topic posts from here on in this thread will be deleted...unless anybody feels the need to apologize to anyone else.

[moose135]

I got my private with about 67 hours even though the mins are 40, got my multi after that at about 73.5 hours. what are you a spotter that moonlights as a pilot too?

I know the min time for a PPL is 40 hours - I got my PPL with about 70 hours, just surprised you could get a multi with only 6 more hours, that's all.

And by the way, in addition to my PPL, which I earned in 1980, I have the following:

Commercial Pilot
Airplane Single Engine Land
Airplane Multiengine Land
Instrument Airplane
Passed the 727 Flight Engineer and CFI Writtens as well, but they're probably expired by now.

Haven't flown in a number of years, but I have about 1,200 hours, including about 85 in the T-37, 110 or so in the T-38, and about 700 in the KC-135 (That's that little airplane in my avatar, BTW.)

I've flown single engine Pipers and Cessnas, multi-engine jets, in rain, snow, fog, transatlantic, in formation, supersonic, tanker and receiver air refueling...I think I have more time in the KC-135 simulator then you have total time...

So no, I'm not a "spotter that moonlights as a pilot too" thank you very much.


All off-topic posts from here on in this thread will be deleted...unless anybody feels the need to apologize to anyone else.

OK, Phil, I'll apologize, I was in the middle of writing this reply when you posted, so I didn't see your post, I'll try better next time. :)

[PhilDernerJr]

I'm going to lock this so we can start fresh.