Search

Notices
Hangar Talk For non-aviation-related discussion and aviation threads that don't belong elsewhere

learjet crash

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-04-2006 | 05:49 PM
  #1  
ERJ135's Avatar
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
From: CR7 Capt
Default learjet crash

Too, bad wonder what happened


http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/02/pla....ap/index.html
Reply
Old 06-04-2006 | 06:51 PM
  #2  
Cass
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sad to say,
better not to be Monday Quarterback, had to be there to know....
Unfortunately, looks like classic CFIT
Reply
Old 06-04-2006 | 07:06 PM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
From: Telecom Company, President
Default

I used to fly in there on a regular basis. Groton is surrounded on three sides by water. The fog there is the absolute thickest most dense soup i have seen anywhere. It may be legal for a Cat 1 approach but you can bet it will look and feel more like a Cat 2. This combined with a crappy approach light system leading to a short runway for a jet makes it a challenge. A citation would handle that runway much easier than a Lear.

Then you combine this with two guys who may not have been in there before, and might be high and fast and you have the recipe for trouble.
Reply
Old 06-04-2006 | 08:51 PM
  #4  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by IronWalt
The fog there is the absolute thickest most dense soup i have seen anywhere. It may be legal for a Cat 1 approach but you can bet it will look and feel more like a Cat 2.
I grew up outside New London, and I used to run boats in that part of the Sound... Not only does visibility get really nasty there, conditions will worsen startlingly quickly, due to the evaporation-promoting characteristics of the surrounding marshes and inlets, potentially becoming disorenting and unmanageable within a matter of minutes.

RIP to the crew.
Reply
Old 06-05-2006 | 05:35 AM
  #5  
HeavyDriver's Avatar
Just Plane Stupid
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 465
Likes: 2
From: Captain
Default

Even if the visibility is Zero...You don't crash short of the runway...You go around when your at the minimums with no runway environment in sight.....Period! And if you have the environment in sight the Glidesope must be maintained.
Reply
Old 06-05-2006 | 08:30 AM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by HeavyDriver
Even if the visibility is Zero...You don't crash short of the runway...You go around when your at the minimums with no runway environment in sight.....Period! And if you have the environment in sight the Glidesope must be maintained.

Just shut your mouth until the report comes out.
Reply
Old 06-05-2006 | 08:38 AM
  #7  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by HeavyDriver
Even if the visibility is Zero...You go around when your at the minimums with no runway environment in sight.....Period!

Absolutely right.

"If there is any doubt, there can be no doubt."

Cass and dhc8fo have a point. We weren't there, and should wait for the report. Based on the frequency with which CFIT incidents continue to occur, however, it never hurts to take a moment to reflect that respect for environment begins with respect for procedure...

Last edited by lagavulin; 06-05-2006 at 08:45 AM.
Reply
Old 06-05-2006 | 08:57 AM
  #8  
HSLD's Avatar
APC co-founder
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,853
Likes: 0
From: B777
Default

Our thoughts and prayers are with the family and friends of the pilots lost in this accident. May they rest in peace.

The NTSB process is slow and methodical but yields good data to help reconstruct the event. IMO, it does no good to guess what happened, wait for the NTSB to do their job.
Reply
Old 06-05-2006 | 11:43 AM
  #9  
2dotslow's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by HSLD
Our thoughts and prayers are with the family and friends of the pilots lost in this accident. May they rest in peace.

The NTSB process is slow and methodical but yields good data to help reconstruct the event. IMO, it does no good to guess what happened, wait for the NTSB to do their job.
Concur. This sounds tragically like the G-2(?) duck-under accident down at Hobby a couple of years ago. Short, into the lights...the earmarks are all there, so far...
Reply
Old 06-05-2006 | 02:16 PM
  #10  
HeavyDriver's Avatar
Just Plane Stupid
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 465
Likes: 2
From: Captain
Default

Originally Posted by dhc8fo
Just shut your mouth until the report comes out.
If my FO goes below glideslope I DO NOT shut my mouth until he/she corrects it...PERIOD!

I didn't say that's what caused this crash...But the previuos posts indicated the local weather conditions for this airport...Europe in the winter time is the lowest RVR's on earth for weeks at a time...Low visibility should never be an issue if the airplane, pilots, and ground equipment are working properly. The minimum Runway crossing altitude AGL for my aircraft is 48'...That gives my main landing gear 11' of clearence over the runway end on glideslope...Based on a 3 degree slope....And if my airplane equipment is standard in G/S positioning.

Last edited by HeavyDriver; 06-05-2006 at 02:24 PM.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bfwatkins
Hangar Talk
16
05-22-2022 08:13 AM
RockBottom
Cargo
9
10-28-2005 12:56 AM
Gordon C
Hangar Talk
2
08-03-2005 05:35 PM
Flea Bite
Major
0
07-24-2005 09:26 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices