PDA

View Full Version : OT-Simulated Comair air disaster using civilian simulator



mortoma1958
08-29-2006, 11:29 PM
I was very curious about the recent tragic crash of that Comair flight 5191 at the Blue Grass airport in Lexington Kentucky, so I decided to simulate it using my copy of X-plane flight simulator. I happened to have simulated copy of the Bombardier CRJ-100 aircraft. In the accident, the pilots tried to take off on the wrong runway, number 26 instead of 22. Runway 26 is only 3,500 feet while runway 22 is 7,000 feet.

Didn't know what the weight of the ill-fated flight was so I went with about 90% of MTOW. Didn't know the flap setting so I guessed and dialed in one notch of flaps. One notch seemed liked a logical setting for an early morning with a low density altitude, for an aircraft like that. Assuming you are taking off on a runway that is more than long enough, which they probably thought they were on, but weren't. Also didn't know what N1 ( or EPR setting ) they used for takeoff so I guessed 95% N1 fan speed. I set the X-plane weather to light rain and about 75 degrees F.

Sure enough, trying to takeoff on the simulated runway 26 at Lexington, I had to really jerk up the stick to get airborn right at the end of the runway, even going full N1 when I saw that I was getting near the end. About 200 feet beyond the threshold I was still really low, had there been trees at that point ( in the simulated world of X-plane ) of any height much over 30 feet high, I would have no doubt hit them. Now I fully understand what happened to the plane. I also saw how easy it must have been to accidentally turn onto the wrong runway if you are inattentive at this particular airport.

mortoma1958
08-29-2006, 11:29 PM
I was very curious about the recent tragic crash of that Comair flight 5191 at the Blue Grass airport in Lexington Kentucky, so I decided to simulate it using my copy of X-plane flight simulator. I happened to have simulated copy of the Bombardier CRJ-100 aircraft. In the accident, the pilots tried to take off on the wrong runway, number 26 instead of 22. Runway 26 is only 3,500 feet while runway 22 is 7,000 feet.

Didn't know what the weight of the ill-fated flight was so I went with about 90% of MTOW. Didn't know the flap setting so I guessed and dialed in one notch of flaps. One notch seemed liked a logical setting for an early morning with a low density altitude, for an aircraft like that. Assuming you are taking off on a runway that is more than long enough, which they probably thought they were on, but weren't. Also didn't know what N1 ( or EPR setting ) they used for takeoff so I guessed 95% N1 fan speed. I set the X-plane weather to light rain and about 75 degrees F.

Sure enough, trying to takeoff on the simulated runway 26 at Lexington, I had to really jerk up the stick to get airborn right at the end of the runway, even going full N1 when I saw that I was getting near the end. About 200 feet beyond the threshold I was still really low, had there been trees at that point ( in the simulated world of X-plane ) of any height much over 30 feet high, I would have no doubt hit them. Now I fully understand what happened to the plane. I also saw how easy it must have been to accidentally turn onto the wrong runway if you are inattentive at this particular airport.

heywooood
08-29-2006, 11:46 PM
I recently flew back east on a commercial carrier.

shortly after we attained our cruising altitude and were on our heading - I saw another airliner at our altitude exactly - pass us in the opposite direction at less than 200 yards! only a few other passengers saw it and only one or two of us gasped with the realisation of how wrong that was.

One of us was in the wrong place to say the least.

After 911 I wondered how this could happen - and was also wondering what would happen next....fighter jets?...an escort?

We landed at Chicago O'hare and our pilot taxied off the runway and then proceeded to turn onto the wrong taxiway - we were nose to nose with another airliner that was departing its gate.

We had to be towed to ours....now atleast I knew which pilot had made the inflight altitude error.

As I walked toward the cockpit to exit the plane, I wondered if the door would open...usually the flight crew will stand there in the open 'pit doorway as the passengers deplane....but not today.

Accidents happen all the time - only sometimes do events conspire to result in loss of life.

Breeze147
08-30-2006, 06:19 AM
I was recently on an American Airlines Umbraerer (sp?) virtually the same type of aircraft as the CRJ-100, flying from St. Louis to Baltimore. About a half hour or so out of St. Louis, the pilot came on the intercom and announced that the flight deck was experiencing bad vibrations and that neither he or the co-pilot could pinpoint the problem. He said we were over Louisville, KY and that we would set down there to have the problem checked out. You could sense the concern in his voice.

We made it down okay (I said more than a few Hail Mary's). It turns out the ground crew in St. Louis had left an access panel door open. After all of this time and previous accidents caused by the same thing....

Well, we made it to Baltimore and would you believe it, on the same shuttle to the hotel where my truck was parked was the same aircrew!!! I told them they did a great job. They thanked me but did not want to talk about it beyond that.

Ruy Horta
08-30-2006, 07:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by heywooood:
I recently flew back east on a commercial carrier.

shortly after we attained our cruising altitude and were on our heading - I saw another airliner at our altitude exactly - pass us in the opposite direction at less than 200 yards! only a few other passengers saw it and only one or two of us gasped with the realisation of how wrong that was.

One of us was in the wrong place to say the least. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Same more or less happened on my flight last monday evening (19:50 gmt near Paris on a TAP flight to Amsterdam).

Don't think many people noticed, if any, but what looked like a strange cloud shape on our 10 o'clock very rapidly became a 737 at approx the same height, I'd guess only a couple of hundred meters or so lower. It diagonally passed just behind us (relative bearing of c. 135 dgr).

From spotting the a/c to losing her under the wing, seeing her reemerge and drop out of my sight went by in a few seconds at most.

Only a few minutes before I was looking to take some pictures only to be told by the flight crew that I wasn't allowed. If that hadn't happened, I would certainly have had my camera ready to capture this event.

Although I didn't have the best lens for the situation (Canon 5D + 24-105/IS) it would certainly have made for some interesting material!

Wanted to make some comment to the flight crew while getting out in Amsterdam, but there were too many cabin crew standing in the way.

Still that 737 looked much too close for my liking!

VonKlugermon
08-30-2006, 09:25 AM
As to the original post, perhaps your weight/balance/weather settings were slightly off from actual. Early reports from the investigation indicate the pilot(s) over-rotated (tail-dragging) trying to get airborne. A real shame, sure hope the co-pilot survives and can shed more light.

As to the close encounters mentioned, this occurs all the time. IFR vs IFR aircraft are supposed to maintain 1,000 feet vertical and or 3-5 miles lateral distance. HOWEVER, visual separation can be used below 18,000 feet. Additionally, it is not uncommon for VFR aircraft to pass within the "500 feet" legal minimum of other aircraft. Also, as a pilot, I've noted that it's interesting that airplanes and other objects often appear closer than they really are!

Willy

mortoma1958
08-30-2006, 09:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VonKlugermon:
As to the original post, perhaps your weight/balance/weather settings were slightly off from actual. Early reports from the investigation indicate the pilot(s) over-rotated (tail-dragging) trying to get airborne. A real shame, sure hope the co-pilot survives and can shed more light.

As to the close encounters mentioned, this occurs all the time. IFR vs IFR aircraft are supposed to maintain 1,000 feet vertical and or 3-5 miles lateral distance. HOWEVER, visual separation can be used below 18,000 feet. Additionally, it is not uncommon for VFR aircraft to pass within the "500 feet" legal minimum of other aircraft. Also, as a pilot, I've noted that it's interesting that airplanes and other objects often appear closer than they really are!

Willy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yea, I had no way of knowing how close I got to the real power setting, the weight and all that. It was only an experiment but I did nearly get a tail strike. I did and instant replay of the whole takeoff right after I did it and watched it in external view, which they have in X-plane. I think I got pretty close to recreating it. As close as one could by making assumptions about things. No sim does a perfect job recreating things. I had to rotate and force the plane into the air when it was not ready to fly, pretty close to what happened.

Oh, and I know what you mean about VFR separation!! I was on a joy flight in a Skyhawk and flying over a small town near where I lived at that time in Indiana. I suddenly saw a Piper Warrior only about 100 feet below and 500 feet in front of me at my 12:30 position!! And he was flying right toward me. My quick decision was to do nothing. A sudden jerking push or pull on the yoke in a GA aircraft can break off the wings. A sudden roll to the right or left is usually harmless and not too stressful on the airframe.
But too much pitch, especially negative Gs, can easily break off one or both wings in a Cessna.
They are only designed to handle about 1.4 negative Gs!! He passed below me safely. I have since thought he had just completed a turn to his left. My wife had not seen him either, the visibility was about 4 miles and marginal. So I flew VFR in clearer weather from then on.

erco415
08-30-2006, 09:46 AM
Interesting posts!

mortoma1958, would you mind doing your test a few more times? On one, try dropping another notch of flaps just before you rotate. Also, please try rejecting the takeoff from varying points in the takeoff roll. Also, did you do your takeoff holding the brakes until full power was developed or did you roll as you brought the power up? Thanks!

A couple of thoughts on airplanes getting too close. Recently in the states, RVSM (reduced vertical separation minimums) has been implemented (I'm not sure about Europe). This allows for 1,000' vertical separation between aircaft above FL290 to FL410. This is a bit of a surprise to passengers who aren't used to seeing another aircraft so close. Nearly all turbojet aircraft are equipped with TCAS (Traffic Alert/Collision Avoidance System), a device that uses transponder returns from nearby aircraft to determine if any will pose a threat of collision. When an aircraft closes to within a certain distance of you, you recieve a TA (traffic alert). If that aircraft is on a course that will result in a chance of collision, you recieve an RA (Resolution Advisory) which advises you to, and how to, maneuver the aircraft to avoid the collision. All TCAS's give you TA's, but not all will give you RA's. Heywooood, in your situation, I'd bet that both aircraft were responding to RA's, if in fact they were that close. (Not that I don't believe you, but it can be hard to judge distance if you're not used to doing it. Did your aircraft turn or climb/descend?)

Lots of things can go wrong, controllers can give you bad instructions, pilots can misunderstand what they're supposed to do. A few months ago, my chief pilot and I were flying out of Baltimore when we were involved in a 'loss of separation' incident. In our case, the controller countermanded the altitude he had just assigned us while the CP was reading back the clearance, thus blocking the controller. We climbed into the vicinity of a Southwest 737, we both got TCAS alerts (us a TA, them a RA), and both flight crews took action to avoid each other. It's hard to say how close we were, I'd estimate a mile or so. While we were all doing this, the controller came back on and did his part to straighten things out. Like I told the FAA, we were where we were told to be, but not where we were supposed to be.

Oh, don't take getting snarled up at O'Hare for too much. It can be a real pain to get around there, and you never know, maybe ground control got it wrong! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

erco

mortoma1958
08-30-2006, 10:13 AM
Wow, you sound like a pilot of bigger birds than I fly erco. I have never flown a real turbine powered plane, let alone multi. I have only PPL-SEL. I didn't even complete my instrument training because 9/11/2001 occured on about my tenth lesson!! By the time I would have been allowed to start flying again, I decided I could not afford to continue anyway. Plus I did not like my instructor all that much, we clashed.

As far as the sim I did, I just taxied onto the runway and smoothly powered up to N1 95%, which was a guess for power. I have never been on a commercial flight where the pilots did a short field takeoff by holding the brakes. Do they ever actually do that??

I used to fly the Skyhawk out of a 2,000 foot grass runway with high tension power lines at the north end of the runway. We only had that one grass runway 36/18. If I was departing 36 on a wet day, I used to do a short field, full power with the brakes held. Landings on 18 were interesting, Once over the power lines, I'd fully cut the throttle and nose down before the flare to get as much runway as possible. I'd let the thing drop like a rock. Doing this at night was even scarier!!! We had crappy runway lights too!! But it made me a better pilot. At night it was like flying into a black hole. If I ever would have had a burned out landing light, I would have opted to land at a bigger airport with better lighting. Fortunately that never happened.

FoolTrottel
08-30-2006, 11:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have never been on a commercial flight where the pilots did a short field takeoff by holding the brakes. Do they ever actually do that?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have, 1988, Vienna, take-off of a 747-400...
Pilot throttling up, engines revving up, holding the brakes...
then he let go.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Breeze147
08-30-2006, 12:24 PM
Gee, my story really sucked.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

RAF74_Poker
08-30-2006, 12:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have never been on a commercial flight where the pilots did a short field takeoff by holding the brakes. Do they ever actually do that??

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Flew some charter plane to Cayman Islands for my honeymoon in the early 90's .. Grand Cayman appears not to have a taxiway, anyway, we taxied up the runway, ran of the end onto the grass, and as we were swinging around back towards the runway the pilot was powering up.
We were already at a fairly good clip by the time the plane was back on the runway.
IIRC, the plane was a 727.
A couple seconds after we lifted off, there went the beach and we were over the bay.
Ah, pucker time over !! LOL

S!

triad773
08-30-2006, 12:38 PM
Interesting thread!

Yes I remember flying a DC-8 stretch to Paris years back out of O'Hare. The plane was fully loaded, and I remember the guy holding brakes and letting go. A thrill being pushed back into the seat and watching the ground slip away.

Also remember seeing a DC-10 zip by in the other direction at 35,000 feet as we were heading east (they, west). It was about a half mile away, but at that altitude it looked closer. I'm sure as has been mentioned before that they were on the beam just like us going the other direction. Still a chilling thought considering the closure rate was about 800 mph!

Warrington_Wolf
08-30-2006, 12:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by heywooood:
I recently flew back east on a commercial carrier.

shortly after we attained our cruising altitude and were on our heading - I saw another airliner at our altitude exactly - pass us in the opposite direction at less than 200 yards! only a few other passengers saw it and only one or two of us gasped with the realisation of how wrong that was.

One of us was in the wrong place to say the least.

After 911 I wondered how this could happen - and was also wondering what would happen next....fighter jets?...an escort?

We landed at Chicago O'hare and our pilot taxied off the runway and then proceeded to turn onto the wrong taxiway - we were nose to nose with another airliner that was departing its gate.

We had to be towed to ours....now atleast I knew which pilot had made the inflight altitude error.

As I walked toward the cockpit to exit the plane, I wondered if the door would open...usually the flight crew will stand there in the open 'pit doorway as the passengers deplane....but not today.

Accidents happen all the time - only sometimes do events conspire to result in loss of life. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That incident reminds me of one that happened to me about 10 years ago.
Myself and my family were flying to the Lanzarote and I was looking out of the window, next minute I saw another airliner pass past us. I don't know to this day whether anyone else (apart from the pilots) saw it or if anyone on the other flight saw us.
It was so close that I could see what airline it was flying with, it was Monarch airlines.

Doolittle81
08-30-2006, 01:09 PM
This came across my EMail account....Author unknown, but sounds knowledgeable. I've heard other comments on TV about the compressor stall possibility.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I live in Lexington and have thirty years of airline experience flying inand out of LEX. I was also the station liason for Lexington for ten years .

Here is what I think happened:

The two runways in question share the same common run-up area. The extended taxiway to the correct runway, runway 28 was closed due to construction. It has always been difficult to tell between the two runways when you are taxiing out. The natural thing to do is to take the wrong one. It is just there and you are always tempted to take it. When I flew out of LEX we always checked each other at least three times to make sure we were taking
the correct runway. We checked the chart, we checked to make sure the
correct runway number was at the end and we always double checked the FMS generated moving map.

Most FMS systems will have a warning called "runway dissimularity" pop up in magenta when your position at takeoff doesn't match the runway you programmed into the computer. This would not happen at LEX since you are virtually in the same spot when you take either runway.

It was also raining at the time of takeoff and dark. The control tower opens at 6am (because we are, after all, all about saving money) and only has one controller on duty at that time. He or she has to: run ground control, clearance delivery, approach control and departure control. The one controller also has to program the ATIS and make the coffee. He or she probably cleared comair to take off and then put their head back down to do a chore or work another airplane.

Taking the runway, the comair guy would put the power up and wouldn't realize they were on the wrone runway until they were about 70% down the pike. Too late to safely abort so he probaby decided to try and continue the takeoff.

his is when the eye witnesses heard a series of explosions and though the plane blew up in the air. Didn't happen -- what they heard and saw were compressor stalls of probably both engines. The pilot no doubt pushed the throttles all the way up and that demand to the engines combined with the steep pitch attitude cut off enough air to the intakes to cause the compressor stalls -- which, by the way, made them even more doomed. Less power.

They stalled or simply hit one of the large hills to the west of the airport and came to a stop. Everybody on board was probably injured but alive. Then, a second or two later the post-crash fire began.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doolittle81
08-30-2006, 01:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VonKlugermon:
... Early reports from the investigation indicate the pilot(s) over-rotated (tail-dragging) trying to get airborne. A real shame, sure hope the co-pilot survives and can shed more light....
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The surviving Co-Pilot was at the controls for the take-off. He'll know exactly what he did/what happened.

Zeus-cat
08-30-2006, 05:31 PM
Breeze147 said <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I was recently on an American Airlines Umbraerer (sp?) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I presume you mean Embraer. This is a company in Brazil and they make regional jets: the 135, 145, 170 and 190. I have been to there manufacturing facility twice and they make very nice aircraft.

Rjel
08-30-2006, 08:46 PM
All in all, I'd feel pretty creepy trying to replicate an event where so many just died. It's one thing having to do it in a professional manner as part of an investigation, but to do it as recreation isn't my cup of tea. Just my opinion.

mortoma1958
08-31-2006, 09:53 AM
You fly this game and replicate ( although not exactly ) many air battles in WWII. You simulate killing enemy pilots all the time. If you shoot down a B-17 in this game you could be replicating killing ten men all at the same time. Why don't you feel creepy about that?? So get off your high horse please!! Far more people died in WWII flying 109s against Yaks and such than died in hundreds of commercial air disasters. My simulation did not replicate that disaster "exactly" or perfectly either. What I did is no more disrepectful than what we do in the game all the time, so get over it. If you are in a dogfight with a LaGG and shoot it down, it may not have happened that way exactly in the war but LaGGs did get shot down by German pilots. Thank you........

Rjel
08-31-2006, 10:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma1958:
You fly this game and replicate ( although not exactly ) many air battles in WWII. You simulate killing enemy pilots all the time. If you shoot down a B-17 in this game you could be replicating killing ten men all at the same time. Why don't you feel creepy about that?? So get off your high horse please!! Far more people died in WWII flying 109s against Yaks and such than died in hundreds of commercial air disasters. My simulation did not replicate that disaster "exactly" or perfectly either. What I did is no more disrepectful than what we do in the game all the time, so get over it. If you are in a dogfight with a LaGG and shoot it down, it may not have happened that way exactly in the war but LaGGs did get shot down by German pilots. Thank you........ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like I said, it's my opinion. No high horse. And no, I don't see replicating an event that occurred just days ago as the same. Again, just my opinion. Kinda touchy, aren't you?

Breeze147
08-31-2006, 11:20 AM
My 2 cents: We all watch with keen interest shows like "Seconds From Disaster", which reenact in the finest detail airline crashes. Can you imagine the ungodly panic and hysteria the real people felt. People just like you and me on their way to business, holiday, personal affairs, whatever. And yet we watch with intent interest to find out how and why these disasters occur and how they can be prevented in the future. I believe the gentleman was using his software to find out how experienced pilots could end up on the wrong runway, and through this and anectodal accounts which are in this thread, we can see just how frail human judgement can be.

Remember, it is never any one event, but a chain of minor, seemingly unrelated events, that lead to catastrophe.

I found the demonstration very instructive. Yes, real people died, but massive steps are now being undertaken to prevent it from happening again.

leitmotiv
08-31-2006, 11:23 AM
I simulate disasters quite frequently.

Breeze147
08-31-2006, 11:28 AM
You ARE a simulated disaster. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

leitmotiv
08-31-2006, 11:37 AM
Unfortunately, the simulations were not scheduled.

p-11.cAce
08-31-2006, 02:22 PM
I tried this on MSFS9 - only made it out on a few tries doing stuff you'd never do in RL (dropping flaps half way down the runway, holding the brakes until n1's are all the way spooled, leaving out most of the fuel, etc.). It seems that this, like almost every aviation accident, was the result of a string of minor events - recent changes to the taxiway config, darkness and possibly fog, only one controller who was also busy vectoring other a/c around weather (and had finished his previous shift only 9 hours earlier), and the cumulative effects of deferred mtx on the airport (unlit runways, possible illegible ground signs, etc). I fly (private single engine and glider) and can only imagine that those last moments were terrifying - they certainly were even just in the sim http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif I can understand how all of these things came together - I have always made a point of checking my HSI to verify I'm on the proper runway heading before takeoff and when lining up to land; I will do so doubly from now on.

Targ
08-31-2006, 06:34 PM
Poor CRM and pilot error, no mystery here.
I feel for the family's of everyone involved though as accidents happen and in aviation mistakes can cause huge losses in life and property.
RIP.

drdoyo
08-31-2006, 08:15 PM
quote ---"Poor CRM and pilot error, no mystery here."---

POOR opinion in my professional opinion as an airline pilot. Wait for the NTSB's conclusion before judging the crew. there are so many factors to consider. For instance do you know anything about work/rest rules for crews? Have you ever heard the aeronautical term "fatigue"?

Being an early morning flight, obviously the first of the day for the crew and the airplane there are many factors beyond the crew's control that could have contributed. I have a very hard time waking up at 4:00 AM in a hotel room to make a 6:00 AM departure.....especially if I just got in to the departure airport from a long day at 9:00 PM the night before.

"We" the public have NO facts. That is what the NTSB is trying to determin to include a detailed look at the 72 hours of the crew's lives prior to the accident.

I'm not saying that it was not error. I'm only suggesting a more open view towards what may have contributed to any errors, no matter how trivial the factors seem.

mortoma1958
08-31-2006, 10:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rjel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma1958:
You fly this game and replicate ( although not exactly ) many air battles in WWII. You simulate killing enemy pilots all the time. If you shoot down a B-17 in this game you could be replicating killing ten men all at the same time. Why don't you feel creepy about that?? So get off your high horse please!! Far more people died in WWII flying 109s against Yaks and such than died in hundreds of commercial air disasters. My simulation did not replicate that disaster "exactly" or perfectly either. What I did is no more disrepectful than what we do in the game all the time, so get over it. If you are in a dogfight with a LaGG and shoot it down, it may not have happened that way exactly in the war but LaGGs did get shot down by German pilots. Thank you........ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like I said, it's my opinion. No high horse. And no, I don't see replicating an event that occurred just days ago as the same. Again, just my opinion. Kinda touchy, aren't you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Well maybe I was a tad touchy but I have not been in a such a great mood lately. Sorry if I came after you, but at the time it just seemed like you were trying to denigrate me while at the same time elevating yourself as though you are on a higher moral or ethical ground than I am. I can see now I exaggerated.
I feel that it's ok to do what I did because it's nice to learn from such mistakes and also to satisfy my curiosity regarding the accuracy of X-plane flight sim. Seems to be more accurate than MSFS in these types of things. Especially in the area of airfoil lift simulation and movement of lifting surfaces through the air.

I felt no guilt about doing what I did nor do I feel it's disrespectful to the unfortunate victims of that flight. And I am not passing judgement as to the ability of the flight crew or the tower controller. It was truly a tragedy and I'm not making light of it, but what's done is done. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif As a real life pilot ( as many of us are here ) I feel we should learn from such things.

mortoma1958
08-31-2006, 10:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p-11.cAce:
I tried this on MSFS9 - only made it out on a few tries doing stuff you'd never do in RL (dropping flaps half way down the runway, holding the brakes until n1's are all the way spooled, leaving out most of the fuel, etc.). It seems that this, like almost every aviation accident, was the result of a string of minor events - recent changes to the taxiway config, darkness and possibly fog, only one controller who was also busy vectoring other a/c around weather (and had finished his previous shift only 9 hours earlier), and the cumulative effects of deferred mtx on the airport (unlit runways, possible illegible ground signs, etc). I fly (private single engine and glider) and can only imagine that those last moments were terrifying - they certainly were even just in the sim http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif I can understand how all of these things came together - I have always made a point of checking my HSI to verify I'm on the proper runway heading before takeoff and when lining up to land; I will do so doubly from now on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree with checking the heading indicator to verify correct runway. For us small plane pilots in Cessnas this would not likely be a fatal mistake but we could get a yell from the FAA for such a mistake. The closest call I ever had was taking off in a Skyhawk with the elevator trim really trimmed up. It was part of the checklist to set the trim properly but somehow I missed it. When I rotated and got airborn, the plane really shot up and I had to react quickly to get the nose back down. The stall horn was screaming like a banshee!! Thankfully my plane was STOL equipped so it tolerated such misques better than a normal one.

mortoma1958
08-31-2006, 10:30 PM
I just got am email from one of my old instructors back in Indiana. He was instructor for a student trying to get his tail dragger signoff in an old Cassna 180. They ended up in a soybean field and the plane flipped on it's back but nobody was hurt. I have no idea what happend but it was no doubt something to do with engine failure. He didn't say but he said more info will be forthcoming!!! This just happened three days ago......

mortoma1958
08-31-2006, 10:45 PM
Update: The email Steve sent me said it was a 180, he must have typoed because it was a 150 and it was not a taildragger like I assumed. He does instruct for tail draggers a lot and they do have a 180 taildragger they instuct with.

But this link to an Indiana newspaper clearly shows a 150 on it's back. They also say it's a 150 in the article. But here's a link to the story to those who are interested:
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060831/NEWS01/60831008

erco415
09-01-2006, 07:13 AM
p-11.cAce wrote; <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I tried this on MSFS9 - only made it out on a few tries doing stuff you'd never do in RL (dropping flaps half way down the runway, holding the brakes until n1's are all the way spooled, leaving out most of the fuel, etc.). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We often hold our brakes til the power spools up in the Lears (20, 30, 40 and 50 series) that I fly. It all depends on the circumstances. If we've got at least 1000' of runway beyond what we need, we'll roll the takeoff. This is more comfortable for everyone. And even though the Lear 55 is one of the best flying airplanes ever, it's also a ground-loving pig, especially if it's hot out or you're at a high elevation. If this Comair crew thought they were on the correct runway, I'll bet they rolled the takeoff. Dropping another notch of flaps would have been the thing I would have tried, faced with the prospect of needing to go fly before I wanted to. (In fact, I did just that once upon a time. In a 172, but that's another story.)

drdoyo, who do you fly for? I ustabe a 1900 Captain for Skyway before I started the corporate/charter thing.

Professional curiosity, Rjel, is what trying to see what might of happened to this flight is about. All of our pilots, independently, checked airport diagrams, weather and other conditions upon hearing of this. (You can bet the CRJ sims were humming too, wherever Bombardier keeps them.) Trying to answer: What did those guys do? How can I keep it from happening to me? What might I do if in the same situation?

I've never flown the CRJ series nor the Challengers from which they were developed. But I have the impression that neither of them is at all tolerant of being flown outside of the envelope compared to other jets.

Anyone know if the ER-190 is called the Jungle Jet, like the rest of the ERJ's?

erco

carguy_
09-01-2006, 09:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by drdoyo:
Being an early morning flight, obviously the first of the day for the crew and the airplane there are many factors beyond the crew's control that could have contributed. I have a very hard time waking up at 4:00 AM in a hotel room to make a 6:00 AM departure.....especially if I just got in to the departure airport from a long day at 9:00 PM the night before. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

WHAT?!
Those things really happen?Back home 9PM,the next day departure @6PM?!

I ain`t flyin airlines unless they MAKE ME!

Dash_8
09-01-2006, 09:46 AM
As an airline pilot, I can see how fatigue can cause you to make errors.

I heard, not confirmed, that this Comair flight crew was on a 'stand-up overnight'. A stand up overnight is a trip in which you start in the evening and go until morning with a few hours in the hotel (NOT normal rest). It is perfectly legal by Federal Aviation Regulations since the total duty time is less than 16 hours. For Example, you start at 7:00PM for an 8:00 Departure. Work a few legs until midnight and go to the hotel. Wake up at 4:30AM, back to the airport at 5:30, and depart at 6:30. Arive at the destination by 8 o'clock. Only 13 hour duty day from 7 pm until 8 am so its legal to have your pilots who are working that morning flight to only have a few hours of sleep. Legal, not always safe!

I know, they were supposed to sleep all day until they showed up at 7 pm for work, but the truth is, a lot of pilots commute to work and would have spent the day flying to their base on their own time to start the trip; not resting.

At least at my company we don't do stand-up overnights. Our union contract protects us from the company assigning them.

Even if this Comair accident was not a stand up overnight as I had heard, it could be just plain old fatigue do to the horrible duty time regulations that fee FAA allows. Normal rest is 9 hours. That doesn't include travel time to or from home or a hotel on overnights trips. It means you have to have 9 hours off duty from the time you park the plane until you have to be back at the airport the next day. That means 15 hours are left in the day to work (on for 15, off for 9 in a 24 hour period). We also have to have one 24 hour period free from duty in a 7 day stretch. Therefore, it is legal to be on duty for 15 hours, off nine hours, and back again for another 15 hours for six days in a row!!! Do you want yourself or your familly on that plane on day six of this 15 on 9 off deal? And with 9 off you usuall only get 6 hours of sleep since you had to ride the van to the hotel, get something to eat, wind down and finally fall asleep to get up an hour and a half before show time to be ready and ride to the airport.

Sorry for the VERY long post, but duty time rules in aviation are TERRIBLE! They need redone for safety's sake, but that would mean the airlines would have to hire more pilots if we worked less and that would cost money. I guess there is a price on the value of the travelling public's life.

mortoma1958
09-01-2006, 10:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
p-11.cAce wrote; <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I tried this on MSFS9 - only made it out on a few tries doing stuff you'd never do in RL (dropping flaps half way down the runway, holding the brakes until n1's are all the way spooled, leaving out most of the fuel, etc.). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We often hold our brakes til the power spools up in the Lears (20, 30, 40 and 50 series) that I fly. It all depends on the circumstances. If we've got at least 1000' of runway beyond what we need, we'll roll the takeoff. This is more comfortable for everyone. And even though the Lear 55 is one of the best flying airplanes ever, it's also a ground-loving pig, especially if it's hot out or you're at a high elevation. If this Comair crew thought they were on the correct runway, I'll bet they rolled the takeoff. Dropping another notch of flaps would have been the thing I would have tried, faced with the prospect of needing to go fly before I wanted to. (In fact, I did just that once upon a time. In a 172, but that's another story.)

drdoyo, who do you fly for? I ustabe a 1900 Captain for Skyway before I started the corporate/charter thing.

Professional curiosity, Rjel, is what trying to see what might of happened to this flight is about. All of our pilots, independently, checked airport diagrams, weather and other conditions upon hearing of this. (You can bet the CRJ sims were humming too, wherever Bombardier keeps them.) Trying to answer: What did those guys do? How can I keep it from happening to me? What might I do if in the same situation?

I've never flown the CRJ series nor the Challengers from which they were developed. But I have the impression that neither of them is at all tolerant of being flown outside of the envelope compared to other jets.

Anyone know if the ER-190 is called the Jungle Jet, like the rest of the ERJ's?

erco </div></BLOCKQUOTE>When did you ever do that in a 172, and why?? Is there a runway in God's creation that is too short for a 172??? The grass strip I learned to fly at was only 2,000 feet with tall power lines at the north end. I rarely used more than half of that runway for takeoffs, even on the hottest summer days. My home airport was 900ASL and the highest density altitudes you'd ever see were 3,500 or so. And the grass extended takeoff distance a tad over hard surfaces. I'm just curious.

P.S.- As far as ERJs, I was familiar with the nickname "pencil jet" but not jungle jet. They are long and thin for sure. This is why Bombardier has a bigger market share, ( more space for passengers. )

mortoma1958
09-01-2006, 10:21 AM
I remember working odd shifts at the factory I used to work at and it's effect on my performance. One time I was so tired upon leaving for work that as I got to the first intersection with a red light, the light turned green and I stopped. Then when the light turned yellow/red I went on!! I realized my mistake after I drove a hundred feet or so. I had just changed from graveyard shift back to days. Imagine a pilot making that kind of mistake. We don't have to imagine, we already know.

drdoyo
09-01-2006, 03:31 PM
Erco, I'm a somewhat senior FO at Gulfstream on the 1900.

Carguy, lol I didn't say home....I said hotel. The first day of duty may start at 6:00 AM for a 7:00 AM departure for us, or anytime afterwards. Some of our last flights are schedualed to arrive around 9:00PM for the overnight at a hotel with a 6:15 AM showtime and a 6:45 AM departure.

Dash Thank you, well said. I've heard different stories as to wether they were on a standup or not. We don't do standups, but they love to give us 9 hour schedualed overnights.

Mortoma, I usually hold the brakes to max power on the first flight of the day, unless there is someone on close final, and on the short runways to make sure the engine readings are all normal.

I just have to wonder, as I've been thinking about it a bunch since I started reading this thread if the situation for the crew wasn't similar to one that happened to me about a year ago. The runway layout was similar. My Captain and I were in Miami about mid-day taxing out to 27 behind other traffic. After the airplane in front of us was cleared to takeoff on 27, we were told to position and hold 27 for landing traffic on 30. I went head down, did my flow and grabbed the checklist and ran the challange-response while the Captain lined up. As soon as I stowed the checklist the Captain asks me "what runway are we on?" I quickly looked outside-everything normal, then looked at the HSI- 270ish. I said 27, where we are supposed to be.....why? The Captain proceeds to point to a nice big red sign off to the 10 oclock area and says "why does that say 30!!"

We were clearly seeing the right side runway identification sign for the intersecting runway. it is placed in the crotch of grass between the two strips of pavement. It was momentarily quite disorienting even in daylight.

I wonder what the Comair crew saw as they lined up when the question was asked (as reported in news articals that I've read) "why are the runway lights not on?" I'm curious to know if in the dark they saw a big lighted red sign with the white numbers 22 to their immediate left. In the dark, with a heavy workload on a very short taxi different than the path they were accostomed to do to construction, early in the morning.

BiscuitKnight
09-01-2006, 03:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by drdoyo:
quote ---"Poor CRM and pilot error, no mystery here."---

POOR opinion in my professional opinion as an airline pilot. Wait for the NTSB's conclusion before judging the crew. there are so many factors to consider. For instance do you know anything about work/rest rules for crews? Have you ever heard the aeronautical term "fatigue"?

Being an early morning flight, obviously the first of the day for the crew and the airplane there are many factors beyond the crew's control that could have contributed. I have a very hard time waking up at 4:00 AM in a hotel room to make a 6:00 AM departure.....especially if I just got in to the departure airport from a long day at 9:00 PM the night before.

"We" the public have NO facts. That is what the NTSB is trying to determin to include a detailed look at the 72 hours of the crew's lives prior to the accident.

I'm not saying that it was not error. I'm only suggesting a more open view towards what may have contributed to any errors, no matter how trivial the factors seem. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Look at the Manchester United crash: that got blamed on the pilot, but it was the ground crew's fault.

Targ
09-01-2006, 07:28 PM
In my professional opinion it is an obvious opinion to have.
Fact of the matter is the crew mistakenly took of from the wrong runway.
It matters not how tired they were or that there was construction going on or only one ATC in the tower.
Short of the runway being mismarked this will be pilot error and you and I both know this. Hopefully change will come about that helps prevent another accident like it.
The airline biz is not glamerous nor is it high paying in many situations.
How much do you think the guy in the right seat who was at the controls gets paid? 35,000 a year? Less?
In regards to hours worked only half of the story is being told. How many flight hours are you allowed to work in a month? I have never seen a pilot with more than 100 hours and that is a bunch of flight hours.
The problem is that you can work a 15 hour day and only fly 5 hours http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Hanging out checking the weather or if there is ice on the runway's or will the weather lift or shooting the breeze or eating lunch /dinner do not count as hours worked.
The flight crews are the final say in regards to safety and every pilot knows this. If you are on the ground and the marshels are motioning you forward and you crash into the jetway who's fault is it?

msalama
09-02-2006, 12:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This allows for 1,000' vertical separation between aircaft above FL290 to FL410. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm pretty sure it's been implemented here as well, or at least so it looked like when I flew from BCN to HEL last spring - an MD-83 made a (seemingly) very close pass of our Bus @ FL330. Or maybe it was just another proximity incident, dunno... but TBH I don't think so http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

erco415
09-02-2006, 04:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have never seen a pilot with more than 100 hours and that is a bunch of flight hours </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You never flew for Skyway then. My first year there I racked up over 1000 hours. We had lines that went up to 115 hours of flying as we were allowed to use part135 flight time restrictions vice 121. We had stand-up overnights too. It was great fun! On the plus side, I think we were the first to get 'legal to start, legal to finish' changed from daily to leg by leg, thanks to ALPA on that one.

dr.doyo, how's things with the spar inspections for you guys? The 1900 was the best flying I ever did commercially (so far), I love that plane!

mortoma, all I'll say is this:72 gallons usable and a cruise prop...

BiscuitKnight
09-02-2006, 05:14 AM
IRT Targ

Anything could have happened: look at Tenerife, they ordered one 747 to take off down the runway, without confirming that another had taxiied off it. Wham.

For all we know, the were ordered onto one runway but told to turn the wrong direction, or vise versa.

p-11.cAce
09-02-2006, 06:33 AM
Actually the NTSB has already reviewed the ATC tapes and the controller had cleared the flight onto the proper runway. Anyway the controllers role in this is almost moot as it is the PIC responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight.

mortoma1958
09-02-2006, 11:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Targ:
In my professional opinion it is an obvious opinion to have.
Fact of the matter is the crew mistakenly took of from the wrong runway.
It matters not how tired they were or that there was construction going on or only one ATC in the tower.
Short of the runway being mismarked this will be pilot error and you and I both know this. Hopefully change will come about that helps prevent another accident like it.
The airline biz is not glamerous nor is it high paying in many situations.
How much do you think the guy in the right seat who was at the controls gets paid? 35,000 a year? Less?
In regards to hours worked only half of the story is being told. How many flight hours are you allowed to work in a month? I have never seen a pilot with more than 100 hours and that is a bunch of flight hours.
The problem is that you can work a 15 hour day and only fly 5 hours http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Hanging out checking the weather or if there is ice on the runway's or will the weather lift or shooting the breeze or eating lunch /dinner do not count as hours worked.
The flight crews are the final say in regards to safety and every pilot knows this. If you are on the ground and the marshels are motioning you forward and you crash into the jetway who's fault is it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>What are you talking about as far as this "100 hours is a bunch of hours" stuff?? I have about 100 hours, most of it racked up between 2000 and 2003, and all of it only single engine prop. I still consider myself
more or less a student pilot!! 100 hours is nothing, you can't even be an airline pilot without at least 250 hours of multi time and hopefully 100 of that turbine. They wouldn't hire you!!! In aviation 100 hours is nothing. You are still a "noob" at that level. In my case
I'm trying to start flying again after 3 years on the ground. Almost like starting all over again.

ploughman
09-02-2006, 11:40 AM
100 hours a MONTH.

VonKlugermon
09-02-2006, 11:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BiscuitKnight:
IRT Targ

Anything could have happened: look at Tenerife, they ordered one 747 to take off down the runway, without confirming that another had taxiied off it. Wham.

For all we know, the were ordered onto one runway but told to turn the wrong direction, or vise versa. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The pilot at Tenerife was NOT cleared for take-off, he only THOUGHT he was. (mis-communication and flight deck disipline was a factor there)

We don't have all of the facts, but yes, controllers do make mistakes, but they don't fly the plane! The pilot is the final authority for the safety of his aircraft, and this was drilled into me throughout my pilot training and flight experiences.

Willy

Targ
09-02-2006, 01:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by erco415:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have never seen a pilot with more than 100 hours and that is a bunch of flight hours </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You never flew for Skyway then. My first year there I racked up over 1000 hours. We had lines that went up to 115 hours of flying as we were allowed to use part135 flight time restrictions vice 121. We had stand-up overnights too. It was great fun! On the plus side, I think we were the first to get 'legal to start, legal to finish' changed from daily to leg by leg, thanks to ALPA on that one.

dr.doyo, how's things with the spar inspections for you guys? The 1900 was the best flying I ever did commercially (so far), I love that plane!

mortoma, all I'll say is this:72 gallons usable and a cruise prop... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100 hours in a month http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Alpa blows chunks as well, usless union..
Talk to all of those A&P's from Alaska and NWA what they think of ALPA.