anyone have additional information?
There’s two job openings?
It appears to be EMASMAX, crushable cellular cement blocks. Doing what it was designed to do.Looks like the overrun was frangible concrete.
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.
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!
What was the RCAM?
Oh no, not again.
https://aviation-safety.net/photos/displayphoto.php?id=20000305-0&vnr=1&kind=C
Man, gas was a lot cheaper then.
Translation: "bold move, cotton"Ah, that’s right - only 8 had an approach.
Interesting decision. I’ll leave it at that.
Oh no, not again.
https://aviation-safety.net/photos/displayphoto.php?id=20000305-0&vnr=1&kind=C
Man, gas was a lot cheaper then.
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.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!
Translation: "bold move, cotton"
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!
A waste of time and radio airwaves, unless Boeing has a chart that says a 5 equals some distance increase.What was the RCAM?
A waste of time and radio airwaves, unless Boeing has a chart that says a 5 equals some distance increase.
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.A waste of time and radio airwaves, unless Boeing has a chart that says a 5 equals some distance increase.
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.
Ok...for our corporate airplanes, we need the actual contaminant data, which has never been great.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.
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.