Witnessed a Columbia runway overshoot KSQL

CaptLabrador

CaptLabrador

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
291
Location
South San Francisco
Display Name
Display name:
Adam
So I was at the airport and witnessed this first hand. Im thinking error chain breakdown. GPS approach to circle to land 30. Base turn pilots discretion, came in high, tight, and extremely fast. Bounced the nose wheel three times with only about 1000 feet left before going over the berm, into the mud. Too many opportunities to go around. losing 15 minutes would have saved this guy a $600,000 plane.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...nway-at-san-carlos-airport-ends-up-in-slough/
 
Ouch, I flew out/into SQl a year or so back. So I am visualizing it... Seemed pretty short, with everything around it :)
 
ja_user said:
Ouch, I flew out/into SQl a year or so back. So I am visualizing it... Seemed pretty short, with everything around it :)
Click to expand...

Very short, 2600 ft to be exact. In a slippery plane like that you have to be spot on. Hell I floated a piper warrior down most of the runway without even trying this morning.
 
Never understood decision making process of some folks. Apply power and go around, instead totals a beautiful plane!

:mad2:

CaptLabrador said:
So I was at the airport and witnessed this first hand. Im thinking error chain breakdown. GPS approach to circle to land 30. Base turn pilots discretion, came in high, tight, and extremely fast. Bounced the nose wheel three times with only about 1000 feet left before going over the berm, into the mud. Too many opportunities to go around. losing 15 minutes would have saved this guy a $600,000 plane.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...nway-at-san-carlos-airport-ends-up-in-slough/
Click to expand...
 
2600 really isn't bad, for the 172 I was in.. I think it was all the building and interstates that I wasn't used too....

But yeah, you don't want to add 15-20kts to final and expect things to work out..
 
ja_user said:
2600 really isn't bad, for the 172 I was in.. I think it was all the building and interstates that I wasn't used too....

But yeah, you don't want to add 15-20kts to final and expect things to work out..
Click to expand...

except he was doing a solid 120 kts on final...he was moving!!!!
 
CaptLabrador said:
Very short, 2600 ft to be exact. In a slippery plane like that you have to be spot on. Hell I floated a piper warrior down most of the runway without even trying this morning.
Click to expand...

2600 feet is very short for a Citation, I imagine, but I saw one land there once. There's no excuse for a Columbia.
 
Last edited:
The 400 should easily be able to get in to 2600'. 1.3 Vso is 75 at MGW, so it's not like your coming in at 110 (maybe in this case someone was). I found the 400 super easy to fly and land. Slowing down is made easy with speed brakes.

Its never the airplane.

BTW- Similar situation on a longer runway: I was at the Cessna dealer at KADS and looked at a 400 that had the brakes locked up for 3000' when the pilot thought he was going to over run on 5,000'. Brakes started a fire, and burned the entire bottom of the aircraft. They were in the middle of a LONG repair process.
 
CaptLabrador said:
except he was doing a solid 120 kts on final...he was moving!!!!
Click to expand...
Holy bat droppings!!!!
The circle to land (others may disagree) approach seems to be the easiest to allow you to get behind the airplane.

Indeed a very expensive piece of bad judgement.
 
I can see it now the little pilot in red with the pitchfork on his left shoulder yelling oh you can do it and the little pilot with the halo on his right shoulder yelling GO AROUND GO AROUND GO AROUND.
 
douglas393 said:
I can see it now the little pilot in red with the pitchfork on his left shoulder yelling oh you can do it and the little pilot with the halo on his right shoulder yelling GO AROUND GO AROUND GO AROUND.
Click to expand...

Doing 120 knots on final the little fellow with the pitch fork should be jamming into the pilot's head. ;)
 
Dunno the situation, of course, but I could see someone who'd been in IMC for a while, broke out low, and had to circle to land, maybe getting a little anxious to be on the ground and in the pilots lounge with a warm cup of coffee and mentally ruling out a go-around. "We made the approach and have the airport in sight. We're done."
 
Most pilots are very goal oriented and landing is the ultimate goal of a successful flight. Other external pressures also come into play such as a passenger that doesn't understand that the approach just isn't right, plus they probably also want to be on the ground and out of the soup. Maybe they are running late for a meeting or worse yet they are on time but a go around will make them late.

I can remember a landing or two over the years that I shouldn't have completed. Things worked out for me but could have easily went the other way. We always tell ourselves that we will go around if the approach isn't working out but it is something we will not really know till it happens.
 
What? All the IT geeks on here and not one bad pun about the identifier? Very disappointed, gentleman. Very disappointed.
 
ja_user said:
2600 really isn't bad, for the 172 I was in.. I think it was all the building and interstates that I wasn't used too....

But yeah, you don't want to add 15-20kts to final and expect things to work out..
Click to expand...

Yeah, you can land a 172 or a Warrior in barely more than 1/4 of that. It's not short.

But what DOES suck, especially for landings on 12 (which is the designated calm wind runway) is that Larry Ellison built his headquarters directly under the base leg. What a butthole.
 
Sorry Ed, Engineering here, can barely spell IT!

How goes the sale of the Comanche?
 
Even in the Cherokee I take a bit of extra care on a 2600 ft strip, especially because it is half the size of what I usually land. Anyone can suffer lapse of judgement, but this one seems a trifle egregious.

I don't consider the flight done until I lock the hangar door.
 
tmyers said:
Sorry Ed, Engineering here, can barely spell IT!

How goes the sale of the Comanche?
Click to expand...

I had 4 or 5 fish on the hook, but they vanished. Since I won't be doing much of anything else this summer with the need to rehab, I may just keep it and try to fly more.
 
Owww, that looks painful. Somebody's insurance premiums are going up.
 
2700ft is not short for that airplane. I will still never understand how somebody can land on a runway, and not notice how much runway is left....
 
tmyers said:
Holy bat droppings!!!!
The circle to land (others may disagree) approach seems to be the easiest to allow you to get behind the airplane.
Click to expand...

Circle to land normally has little to do with flying a circle. You pop out at or before MDA and fly as normal a rectangular approach as possible. It just a way of getting you in sight of the airport at a safe place and altitude.
 
Inverted said:
2700ft is not short for that airplane. I will still never understand how somebody can land on a runway, and not notice how much runway is left....
Click to expand...

This guy didnt TOUCHDOWN (his front wheel only btw) untill about the 1600 ft mark...less than 1000 ft left!
 
CaptLabrador said:
This guy didnt TOUCHDOWN (his front wheel only btw) untill about the 1600 ft mark...less than 1000 ft left!
Click to expand...

That nearly happened to me once when I flew into a new unfamiliar airport under a class C vial, lots of things going on, super narrow runway, I choked up and landed the wrong way (with a 12knot wind). 2500' runway would have been fine, Gobbled up the runway pretty quickly, I did a go around.
 
If he landed on 30, I'm surprised he was able to get stopped in time. Past the runway is a fence, and then a road which is decently heavily trafficked.
 
EpicDraws said:
If he landed on 30, I'm surprised he was able to get stopped in time. Past the runway is a fence, and then a road which is decently heavily trafficked.
Click to expand...

He didn't! Although from the pics and the Google Earth images, it kinda looks like he landed on 12.
 
ebykowsky said:
He didn't! Although from the pics and the Google Earth images, it kinda looks like he landed on 12.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The OP says 30, but this looks like a 12 overrun, which has nothing but slough in the way. Still not a good time. Still can't believe no go-around.
 
MAKG1 said:
Nope. The aircraft was going the OTHER WAY. He tried to land on 12.

Which makes it even harder to understand.

I've stared at upside down numbers coming at me before (on my checkride, at KHWD, no less). I went around.
Click to expand...

Hope it wasn't 28L at KHWD ;)
 
Wow, I really just can't wrap my head around a no-go-around if he were really landing on 12. Even seems like he would have had plenty of speed to perform the go-around by the time he got to the end of the runway... Maybe the OP thought it was RWY 30 because the pilot almost landed right on the numbers for 30!
 
ebykowsky said:
This is what I see:
Click to expand...

I was taught way back when to land on the numbers unless you cant for terrain, or NEED to land long. So to this day I find it weird how somebody will be ok floating half way or more down any runway... This pilot has probably been used to floating forever at his home airport which may have a runway 3 times as long. Not a good habit to develop.
 
Inverted said:
I was taught way back when to land on the numbers unless you cant for terrain, or NEED to land long. So to this day I find it weird how somebody will be ok floating half way or more down any runway... This pilot has probably been used to floating forever at his home airport which may have a runway 3 times as long. Not a good habit to develop.
Click to expand...
..

A few days ago there was a thead that contained a blurb on the Columbia, California airport,, so I Google Earthed it and looked at the runway /surrounding.. It appears to be a firefighting tanker /reloading base... So I zoomed into the approach end of 35.. It has a displaced threshhold..... Look at all the tire marks that exist Before the runway end lines..... These guys/gals probably need every bit of the runway and they do use it ALL....:yes:..

ps. ya gotta love an airport that gives you a choice of either paved or grass..:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top