PSA CRJ 200 Skids off Runway at CRW
01-23-2010, 02:37 PM
#91
Inverted
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: CL65 CA
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by SrfNFly227
Well I have been reading this thread since it started, but I hadn't really felt the need to comment till now. Three things I would like add to this.
First, while it is difficult to clearly present intent in a post on a forum, the post you quoted to make this comment was very obviously sarcasm. Please learn to take a joke and laugh once in a while with the rest us.
Second, a few people have questioned aborting a take off for anti-skid. I would like to honestly ask why a person would feel safe continuing a T/O roll with that system now malfunctioned. Braking distance for the abort would be based on the anti-skid working. Now take this scenario. You start your T/O roll on a short runway while right at your runway limited weight. At 90 knots, anti-skid goes out but you decide to continue because that isn't a "loss of control/power". At 90 knots, the RJ can sometimes have 50 knots to go before rotation. Now lets say you are still rolling down the runway and something happens at 130 knots that you do need to abort for. Not likely, but could happen. Do you really think you could stop from that close to V1 with the anti-skid not working???
Now I want to say before someone points it out, that this caution may be inhibited. I would have to dig up my systems book to verify that, but the question still stands for those of you who have said that anti-skid failure wouldn't necessitate a rejected T/O. Just trying to understand the reasoning.
First, while it is difficult to clearly present intent in a post on a forum, the post you quoted to make this comment was very obviously sarcasm. Please learn to take a joke and laugh once in a while with the rest us.
Second, a few people have questioned aborting a take off for anti-skid. I would like to honestly ask why a person would feel safe continuing a T/O roll with that system now malfunctioned. Braking distance for the abort would be based on the anti-skid working. Now take this scenario. You start your T/O roll on a short runway while right at your runway limited weight. At 90 knots, anti-skid goes out but you decide to continue because that isn't a "loss of control/power". At 90 knots, the RJ can sometimes have 50 knots to go before rotation. Now lets say you are still rolling down the runway and something happens at 130 knots that you do need to abort for. Not likely, but could happen. Do you really think you could stop from that close to V1 with the anti-skid not working???
Now I want to say before someone points it out, that this caution may be inhibited. I would have to dig up my systems book to verify that, but the question still stands for those of you who have said that anti-skid failure wouldn't necessitate a rejected T/O. Just trying to understand the reasoning.
Second, the situation you describe sounds plausible, but about as plausible as a double engine failure at 3000 ft in the middle of new york city. if the situation developed as you described, i would say a prayer while i used max reverse thrust and pumped my brakes hoping the big guy is looking out for me.
01-23-2010, 03:47 PM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 467
Pilot Guide to Takeoff Safety
Perhaps it is time for some review:
FAA: Pilot Guide to Takeoff Safety
Boeing: Rejected Takeoff Studies
Videos:
Ilyushin IL-18 Rejected takeoff
Tradewinds Boeing 747 Rejected Takeoff
Tu-134 Rejected Takeoff
winglet
FAA: Pilot Guide to Takeoff Safety
Boeing: Rejected Takeoff Studies
Videos:
Ilyushin IL-18 Rejected takeoff
Tradewinds Boeing 747 Rejected Takeoff
Tu-134 Rejected Takeoff
winglet
01-23-2010, 05:14 PM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: retired
Posts: 645
Originally Posted by winglet
Thanks for the video links...
01-24-2010, 04:26 AM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 467
Originally Posted by GauleyPilot
Picture of area with aircraft removed.
Yeager Airport save 6th in U.S. for emergency-stop ... - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports
Yeager Airport save 6th in U.S. for emergency-stop ... - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports
Yeager Airport Projects
34 People on US Airways Express Jet in West Virginia Love EMAS
ESCO company video on EMAS:
ESCO EMAS
Send your appreciation to these forward thinking people:
Yeager Airport Contacts
winglet
Last edited by winglet; 01-24-2010 at 07:31 AM.
01-24-2010, 08:54 AM
#96
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: Missionary
Posts: 309
Some very interesting points here, and it's heartening to see this thread not turning into a p%#$ing contest.
There are always "gotcha's" out there like the EFIS CompMon being a nuisance message (i.e. at KLGA), except when it's not.
High speed aborts are likely to be more dangerous than taking the problem in the air...except when you make the quick determination she won't fly (i.e. TWA L-1011(?) at KJFK).
So, food for thought here. Another poster hinted at transferring controls during an abort to the Capt., which eats up valuable runway while the a/c accelerates and your making a positive transfer, eroding your options further. If the Capt. is the NFP, he's "inside", while the F/O's outside and on the controls. Although many reasons have been given for changing duties at this critical phase of flight (Captains authority, tiller on his side, the left seat makes you smarter
, etc.) it's one of those procedures that seems incongruous.
There are always "gotcha's" out there like the EFIS CompMon being a nuisance message (i.e. at KLGA), except when it's not.
High speed aborts are likely to be more dangerous than taking the problem in the air...except when you make the quick determination she won't fly (i.e. TWA L-1011(?) at KJFK).
So, food for thought here. Another poster hinted at transferring controls during an abort to the Capt., which eats up valuable runway while the a/c accelerates and your making a positive transfer, eroding your options further. If the Capt. is the NFP, he's "inside", while the F/O's outside and on the controls. Although many reasons have been given for changing duties at this critical phase of flight (Captains authority, tiller on his side, the left seat makes you smarter
, etc.) it's one of those procedures that seems incongruous.
01-24-2010, 09:15 AM
#97
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 176
Originally Posted by xj200capt
I have to admit that aborting after V1 would be a cluster.
And while I have to verify the language or just admit I'm wrong, I think in our POM it says the Captain will call, initiate, and complete the abort. I always thought if the FO was doing a good job (keeping it straight, braking correctly, etc...) that a transfer of controls would be bad in a high workload environment. I was corrected during a PC or RFT. I do not agree.
01-24-2010, 09:23 AM
#98
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,096
Originally Posted by NoStep
Some very interesting points here, and it's heartening to see this thread not turning into a p%#$ing contest.
There are always "gotcha's" out there like the EFIS CompMon being a nuisance message (i.e. at KLGA), except when it's not.
High speed aborts are likely to be more dangerous than taking the problem in the air...except when you make the quick determination she won't fly (i.e. TWA L-1011(?) at KJFK).
So, food for thought here. Another poster hinted at transferring controls during an abort to the Capt., which eats up valuable runway while the a/c accelerates and your making a positive transfer, eroding your options further. If the Capt. is the NFP, he's "inside", while the F/O's outside and on the controls. Although many reasons have been given for changing duties at this critical phase of flight (Captains authority, tiller on his side, the left seat makes you smarter, etc.) it's one of those procedures that seems incongruous.
There are always "gotcha's" out there like the EFIS CompMon being a nuisance message (i.e. at KLGA), except when it's not.
High speed aborts are likely to be more dangerous than taking the problem in the air...except when you make the quick determination she won't fly (i.e. TWA L-1011(?) at KJFK).
So, food for thought here. Another poster hinted at transferring controls during an abort to the Capt., which eats up valuable runway while the a/c accelerates and your making a positive transfer, eroding your options further. If the Capt. is the NFP, he's "inside", while the F/O's outside and on the controls. Although many reasons have been given for changing duties at this critical phase of flight (Captains authority, tiller on his side, the left seat makes you smarter
, etc.) it's one of those procedures that seems incongruous.Heck, a major number of DC-10 hull losses (I think around 20) are attributed to pilots aborting at high-speeds for nusance problems or aborting past V1.
Here's a FAA finding on RTOs published back in 1990s...
More than half the RTO accidents and incidents reported in the past 30 years were initiated from a speed in excess of V1.
About one-third were reported as occurring on runways that were wet or contaminated with snow or ice.
Only slightly more than one-fourth of the accidents and incidents actually involved any loss of engine thrust.
Nearly one-fourth of the accidents and incidents were the result of wheel or tire failures.
Approximately 80 percent of the overrun events were potentially avoidable by following appropriate operational practices.
01-24-2010, 10:33 AM
#99
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: awkward
Posts: 239
Originally Posted by NoStep
So, food for thought here. Another poster hinted at transferring controls during an abort to the Capt., which eats up valuable runway while the a/c accelerates and your making a positive transfer, eroding your options further. If the Capt. is the NFP, he's "inside", while the F/O's outside and on the controls. Although many reasons have been given for changing duties at this critical phase of flight (Captains authority, tiller on his side, the left seat makes you smarter, etc.) it's one of those procedures that seems incongruous.
, etc.) it's one of those procedures that seems incongruous.
01-24-2010, 11:33 AM
#100
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 593
Back in my hometown Skywest has slid off the ramp twice in PIA in the last 13 months alone...be careful folks
Peoria airport briefly closes after jet slides off runway - Peoria, IL - pjstar.com
Sky West Airlines passenger plane skids of runway (December 23, 2008)
Peoria airport briefly closes after jet slides off runway - Peoria, IL - pjstar.com
Sky West Airlines passenger plane skids of runway (December 23, 2008)
Last edited by djrogs03; 01-24-2010 at 12:38 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
