Boeing Dreamliner in Kansas

TangoWhiskey said:
Did they not have charts on board? Listening to the audio, they had to ask for EVERYTHING... frequencies, identifier for Jabara (even after they knew where they were), etc.
Click to expand...

Can't listen to the audio at work, but if they are asking for so much info, maybe they're double-checking themselves b/c they don't think they're landing at the right place.

"OK.. Got everything set for the approach.. Man, that just doesn't look right.. Check the freq's again... ...... Yep.. That's the right freq's, but man that doesn't look like the right place.. Check with ATC to make sure we have the right freq's..."
 
Probably pilot fatigue or complacency... This is what gets the "gestapo" "FAA" enforcing rules making visual approaches for heavies, PROHIBITED... One of these days!
 
CJones said:
Can't listen to the audio at work, but if they are asking for so much info, maybe they're double-checking themselves b/c they don't think they're landing at the right place.

"OK.. Got everything set for the approach.. Man, that just doesn't look right.. Check the freq's again... ...... Yep.. That's the right freq's, but man that doesn't look like the right place.. Check with ATC to make sure we have the right freq's..."
Click to expand...

Yeah, no, this was in the post-landing communications, tens of minutes later...
 
There's a great website that lists many similar:

http://www.thirdamendment.com/wrongway.html

My favorite isn't even on the list because the wheels never touched land. Early 2000's a Frontier 737 got within 200 ft of landing at FTG (8000 x 100) then realized it wasn't at DEN (12,000 x 150). The runways are the same orientation and numbered the same...well, FTG has 26 and DEN has 26 and 25. The two airports are 5 nm apart, with FTG just SE of DEN.

Not urban legend - the Airport Board was meeting at the time and everyone saw it. FTG didn't have a tower at the time.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Best post, on Facebook, from Rob Finfrock on this event: "I would also imagine there are a few unemployed, former Evergreen pilots laughing through their tears right now."
Click to expand...
Rob worked tirelessly for years to become a social media maven for Twin&Turbine crowd, I'm glad he's finally getting something out of that effort.
 
Favoring the north runway, and they'll be IMC soon after departure.

KIAB 211558Z AUTO 33014G22KT 6SM BR OVC006 03/03 A3011 RMK AO2 RAE1542DZB1516E1521 PRESRR SLP204 P0001 T00310031

NOTAMS for Jabara:

!AAO 11/010 AAO RWY 18/36 EDGE LGT OUT OF SERVICE 1311211708-1311212200EST !AAO 11/009 AAO RWY 18/36 CLSD 1311211440-1311212200
!AAO 11/007 AAO AD ABN NOT ROTATING 1311210314-1312060314EST

Did the airport turn off the beacon and edge lights, so nobody else would land there? Presumably so, as I heard the runway had no damage. KAAO has a 100' runway; the 747 has an 84' wheelbase. Good thing they were on centerline! They have 8' either side, if they are spot on centerline.
 
Didn't they have the right airport programmed in to their FMS? (Did they even bother to glance at the GPS to track their progress to the airport?)
 
TangoWhiskey said:
The audio is chilling, when they hear a twin turboprop go around over them!! So much for "deer on the runway, go around!"
Click to expand...

I'm going to update my training scenario: "Dreamlifter on the runway! Go around!!"
 
How long do you think the pilots of the twin,did checking on their position ?
 
I am not absolving the crew of any responsibility here, but I for one am not going to pass too harsh of judgement on them.

Back in my 737 days, we were flying from Chicago to Harrisburg, PA. It was a nice clear night, visibility forever. Approaching Harrisburg, ATC gives us a bearing and distance to the airport. We look, and there is a nice brightly lit runway in about the location ATC mentioned. So we call the airport in sight and get cleared for a visual.

Now, just so you know, it is SOP at UAL to have the ILS (or whatever approach is being used) tuned in for backup guidance to whatever runway being used.

So, we have the field in sight, the localizer looks about right, and we proceed on down for a visual approach. Everything is looking good when one of us looks at the glideslope and we are pretty much full deflection low. WTF? Well, turns out, we were actually approaching Capitol City airport, which is just 4 miles west of Harrisburg, and very close to the same alignment. Not to mention the fact that their runway lights were on high intensity and Harrisburg's were on low intensity.

If we were operating strictly by visual references, we would have landed at the wrong airport.

I don't know what time of day it was with these guys in Wichita, but given the fact that there are a lot of runways there in close proximity to each other, I can totally see how this happened.
 
Henning said:
When was the last time you saw a sectional in a plane like that?
Click to expand...

Didn't you hear? The FAA will REQUIRE you to buy a full NATIONAL set of sectionals, WACs, Terminal Area Charts and IAPs after you pass your OSA test, if you want to keep flying. This whole OSA thing is actually a ploy to keep the NOAA printing presses running; ForeFlight has been killing their operation and threatening the retention of their operational printing budget.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I am not absolving the crew of any responsibility here, but I for one am not going to pass too harsh of judgement on them.

Back in my 737 days, we were flying from Chicago to Harrisburg, PA. It was a nice clear night, visibility forever. Approaching Harrisburg, ATC gives us a bearing and distance to the airport. We look, and there is a nice brightly lit runway in about the location ATC mentioned. So we call the airport in sight and get cleared for a visual.

Now, just so you know, it is SOP at UAL to have the ILS (or whatever approach is being used) tuned in for backup guidance to whatever runway being used.

So, we have the field in sight, the localizer looks about right, and we proceed on down for a visual approach. Everything is looking good when one of us looks at the glideslope and we are pretty much full deflection low. WTF? Well, turns out, we were actually approaching Capitol City airport, which is just 4 miles west of Harrisburg, and very close to the same alignment. Not to mention the fact that their runway lights were on high intensity and Harrisburg's were on low intensity.

If we were operating strictly by visual references, we would have landed at the wrong airport.

I don't know what time of day it was with these guys in Wichita, but given the fact that there are a lot of runways there in close proximity to each other, I can totally see how this happened.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's your CROSS CHECKS that save you. Failure to do that has you fly into the terrain in front of the incorrect airport, that you didn't expect to be there. (TAWS helps with that, now, too, thank goodness).
 
Greg Bockelman said:
D is dual wheels on one axle. Think 737. DT is dual tandem, which is two axles, 4 wheels, or some such permutation.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

So it was a airplane with DT gear? And it weighed 398,000+ pounds. No way to know how much the Jabara runway can take because it is not given a DT- rating, just S- and D-. But whatever the limit is, I bet they greatly exceeded it -- it can't be that much higher than the D-62 rating of 62,000 pounds, can it?
 
PoA armchair experts never cease to entertain. :)
 
Greg Bockelman said:
... given the fact that there are a lot of runways there in close proximity to each other, I can totally see how this happened.
Click to expand...

I wonder why chart makers don't draw the runways of other airports on an approach chart, if they can so easily be confused with the intended runway.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Best post, on Facebook, from Rob Finfrock on this event: "I would also imagine there are a few unemployed, former Evergreen pilots laughing through their tears right now."
Click to expand...

zaitcev said:
Rob worked tirelessly for years to become a social media maven for Twin&Turbine crowd, I'm glad he's finally getting something out of that effort.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the shout-out, Troy! And LOL Pete... I've been called many things, but never before a "maven" of anything.
 
Geo referenced approach charts on my I Pad. Even when visual that and a 496 with the feathers for the runway. Because we all know complacency can lead to mistakes.
 
Gotta wonder if the engines are normally thrust limited by software, and if they loaded a temporary code change to allow more thrust than usual.
 
What do you think? Is Hwy 96 far enough away that they wouldn't need to shut it down while they apply takeoff thrust?

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Jabarta Rwy 36.png
    Jabarta Rwy 36.png
    524.2 KB · Views: 208
Room to spare from what it looks like. Still tired of the media blowing everything out of proportion and reporting the 9200 ft takeoff roll required at mtow instead of the aircraft probably having a load of nothing and minimal fuel...
 
That was a 19 minute flight according to Flight Aware. Since they had to take off northbound and the destination was to the south, it wasn't such a short hop. It was more like flying a big pattern.

flight_track_bigmap.rvt
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top