SWA runway overrun at Burbank

bflynn

bflynn

Final Approach
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
9,594
Location
KTTA
Display Name
Display name:
Brian Flynn
anyone have additional information?
 
Looks like the overrun was frangible concrete.
 
kyleb said:
Looks like the overrun was frangible concrete.
Click to expand...
It appears to be EMASMAX, crushable cellular cement blocks. Doing what it was designed to do.

Yep, checking the FAA website it is EMASMAX and it already caught a Citation back in April 2017.
ProductLarge327.jpg
 
Last edited:
Haven't been to BUR in awhile. Is runway 8 still the only one with EMAS? Some METARs from the time of the incident and a little earlier:

KBUR 061715Z 29008KT 1SM +RA BR FEW005 BKN013 OVC031 08/08 A2993 RMK AO2 AIRCRAFT MISHAP P0026 T00830078
KBUR 061653Z 28011KT 1 1/2SM +RA BR FEW004 OVC013 08/08 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP122 P0033 T00830083
KBUR 061641Z 26011KT 2 1/2SM RA BR FEW004 BKN013 OVC019 09/09 A2989 RMK AO2 P0023 T00890089
KBUR 061553Z 29005KT 1 1/4SM +RA BR BKN011 BKN017 OVC047 09/09 A2986 RMK AO2 SLP106 P0021 T00940089
KBUR 061547Z 29005KT 1 3/4SM +RA BR SCT011 BKN047 OVC060 09/09 A2986 RMK AO2 P0017
KBUR 061453Z 32003KT 4SM RA BR FEW003 SCT026 OVC049 09/09 A2985 RMK AO2 SLP103 P0020 60063 T00940094 58002
 
Yes, Burbank only has one installation (running off 8). Runway 8 is the only one with an approach, which accounts probably while he was landing with such a tailwind.
 
flyingron said:
Yes, Burbank only has one installation (running off 8). Runway 8 is the only one with an approach, which accounts probably while he was landing with such a tailwind.
Click to expand...

Ah, that’s right - only 8 had an approach.

Interesting decision. I’ll leave it at that.
 
Wow, I've never looked at the Burbank airport before. I can't believe how close the terminal is to the runway. Talk about a non standard safety area! Aircraft parked at the gate are barely clear of what would be a standard safety area - 250 feet from runway centerline. Aircraft taxiing are barely even off the runway! :eek:
 
midwestpa24 said:
Wow, I've never looked at the Burbank airport before. I can't believe how close the terminal is to the runway. Talk about a non standard safety area! Aircraft parked at the gate are barely clear of what would be a standard safety area - 250 feet from runway centerline. Aircraft taxiing are barely even off the runway! :eek:
Click to expand...

They ran one off the end of that runway, across the street and into the Chevron station back in 2000. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1455
 
They are just about finished installing EMAS on the long runway at PDK. Ironically, a CJ ran off the end of the short runway on Monday because the long one has been closed due to the construction.
 
We now have EMAS at both ends of the runway at KMRY. An overrun in either direction would have been tragic.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Wow, I've never looked at the Burbank airport before. I can't believe how close the terminal is to the runway. Talk about a non standard safety area! Aircraft parked at the gate are barely clear of what would be a standard safety area - 250 feet from runway centerline. Aircraft taxiing are barely even off the runway! :eek:
Click to expand...
The layout is not much different from when the airport opened as "Union Air Terminal" in 1930 (and later known as "Lockheed Air Terminal"), as the primary airline terminal for the Los Angeles area. It's tucked into the extreme southeast corner of the San Fernando Valley, with high terrain to the north, east and south. That explains why the only instrument approach is from the west to runway 8, which is less than 6,000' long. And on that approach, the outer marker/FAF is on the Van Nuys Airport, with a mandatory crossing altitude 1,000' above the VNY traffic pattern.

 
midwestpa24 said:
Wow, I've never looked at the Burbank airport before. I can't believe how close the terminal is to the runway. Talk about a non standard safety area! Aircraft parked at the gate are barely clear of what would be a standard safety area - 250 feet from runway centerline. Aircraft taxiing are barely even off the runway! :eek:
Click to expand...

I think it was 15 or 20 years ago but a 737 was taking off to the south and dropped a tire. It went bouncing toward the terminal and hit, fortunately, a belt loader. Bent it in half I heard.
 
Here is a 1976 Burbank accident with which I am quite familiar (https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19760208-0), as its denouement took place just down the street from where I was living at the time.

It happened to be the very first DC-6 (XC-112A) built, flying for Mercer Airlines. The trip was to be from Burbank to Ontario CA with only three flight crew, two cabin crew and a deadheader aboard. As it lifted off KBUR Rwy 15 a blade separated from the #3 engine, tearing the engine from its mounts. The engine landed on the intersection of the two runways. The airplane’s hydraulic system was trashed as well, and the landing gear could not be retracted. The pilot continued the takeoff (there is a cemetery and mausoleum immediately south of Rwy 15) and nursed the airplane through a low-altitude 270-degree right turn and landed successfully on Rwy 7 (now Rwy 8). But he realized that without brakes there was no chance of stopping before running through the fence, across Hollywood Way and into the gas station across the street. So he made it a touch-and-go.

He flew at about 250 AGL six miles west to KVNY, which had a longer runway. What he didn’t realize at the time was that #2 engine oil was also lost and failure of that engine was imminent. When #2 quit the airplane could no longer maintain altitude, coming down just south of the approach end of KVNY Rwy 34L in an under-construction golf course. They might have been all right had they not hit the concrete foundation for what was to be the golf course starter’s shack. The three cockpit crew died; the three in the cabin walked away.

My wife and I came home from church that rainy Sunday morning to find Woodley Avenue blocked off by emergency vehicles just south of our apartment.
 

My wife and I came home from church that rainy Sunday morning to find Woodley Avenue blocked off by emergency vehicles just south of our apartment.

I Didn't know you were from that area Jeff. Wife & I are both John Burroughs Alumni She 58, me 56.

Paul
Salome, AZ
 
MauleSkinner said:
A waste of time and radio airwaves, unless Boeing has a chart that says a 5 equals some distance increase.
Click to expand...

I believe the major manufacturers actually do. However it doesn't take into account the aircraft coming in over Vref and/or touching down late.
 
MauleSkinner said:
A waste of time and radio airwaves, unless Boeing has a chart that says a 5 equals some distance increase.
Click to expand...
Not really. If I put a runway and RCAM into the FMS and it gives me invalid data and I still try to land, it’s not going to end well. Not saying that’s what happened here.
 
It’s not called that for us. We have various levels of clutter, or braking actions but recently that sort of got handed over to the dispatchers to figure out. Or the computer.
 
Pilawt said:
Here is a 1976 Burbank accident with which I am quite familiar (https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19760208-0), as its denouement took place just down the street from where I was living at the time.
Click to expand...

I used to fly into what was then called Hollywood-Burbank or Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport about every two weeks. My friend, who grew up in Tujunga, told me the engine was still on the airport, stuck in a fence.
We sneaked out onto the ramp by what was then the Lockheed (?) plant and we did, indeed find a busted up radial engine buried in the fence and vines along the perimeter, where Vineland Avenue is now!
 
jordane93 said:
Not really. If I put a runway and RCAM into the FMS and it gives me invalid data and I still try to land, it’s not going to end well. Not saying that’s what happened here.
Click to expand...
Ok...for our corporate airplanes, we need the actual contaminant data, which has never been great.

And the numbers are basically useless. A 5 translates into as much as a 129% increase in landing distance, as does a 3, while a 4 is only a little over 50% increase.
 
MauleSkinner said:
And the numbers are basically useless. A 5 translates into as much as a 129% increase in landing distance, as does a 3, while a 4 is only a little over 50% increase.
Click to expand...

Interesting to hear that. As a NOTAM issuer, I always wondered what those numbers did for you on the other side. I can tell you from the airport's side, they mean little to us as well. They are only linked to the contaminant , with limited ability to be changed to reflect the actual braking actions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top