Ya Think this Would Pass an ATP Checkride?

K

KennyFlys

Guest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

Look carefully... there ain't a lot of room for a miscalculation! :hairraise:

I looked up what I could find and the takeoff distance for the IL-76 is about 7,100 feet.

Does anyone have a clue what airport this is?

I stole this from Tom Dager on another forum. :)
 
I think i'd need a little vodka to settle the nerves after a takeoff like that!
 
well i hope so. it sure LOOKS exciting!
 
Depends on facts not in evidence.

What exactly should they have done different?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Depends on facts not in evidence.

What exactly should they have done different?
Click to expand...
Reduced weight? Not used such a restricting runway/airport?

True, we don't know all the facts. We do know the takeoff distance at (presumably) maximum weight is roughly 7,100 feet depending on the model information I did find. I sent a message to the guy who posted that video asking for the airport and runway length. I'd like to know other performance information but am unable to find it.
 
Bottom line is that this is kind of like any accident that gets discussed here. A whole ton of theories with little or no evidence to support them.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Bottom line is that this is kind of like any accident that gets discussed here. A whole ton of theories with little or no evidence to support them.
Click to expand...
We disagree over margins. At least there isn't a conveyor involved.
 
What margins? Did the guy lose an engine? Crappy technique? Just what caused him to use all the runway? Answer that and we can talk margins.

Like I said, we don't have enough information to know exactly WHAT was going on.
 
Last edited:
KennyFlys said:
We disagree over margins. At least there isn't a conveyor involved.
Click to expand...

Would he have been able to get off the deck sooner on a conveyor? What about a conveyor moving in the same direction? :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I love watching the Mad Dogs at La Guardia...they don't take it quite as far to the end, but they make you start to wonder...

Thank god for such a long clear way. Someone plants a tree and they're in trouble. Greg, when y'all are doing your BFL calculations, do you just use average clearway/stopway length, or do you have distances for each airport independently? Do your numbers change any at airports with EMAS?
 
KennyFlys said:
Reduced weight? Not used such a restricting runway/airport?

True, we don't know all the facts. We do know the takeoff distance at (presumably) maximum weight is roughly 7,100 feet depending on the model information I did find. I sent a message to the guy who posted that video asking for the airport and runway length. I'd like to know other performance information but am unable to find it.
Click to expand...

When you're in the heavy lift business, reducing weight is not always an option. I don't know about that planes registration, but when when I fly a Restricted catagory Ag plane, I as PIC make the determination of the max gross weight of the airplane, not the manufacturer and do so by my practical experience with the aircraft. What I saw in that video didn't disturb me. To me it looked like the pilot intentionaly held it on the ground to the end of the runway. Notice how as soon as he rotated it, it flew, it didn't sit there on the mains for a while. I think he held it down so when he picked it up, there would be no question as to its flying qualities. I've done the same thing many times with fully loaded Ag planes.
 
Teller1900 said:
Greg, when y'all are doing your BFL calculations, do you just use average clearway/stopway length, or do you have distances for each airport independently?
Click to expand...

Wellll, I don't know. I think we have data for each runway at each airport we serve. But bottom line is, we as pilots don't actually do those calculations. The computer does them. With input from dispatch, maybe.

Do your numbers change any at airports with EMAS?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what that is.
 
Well don't get mad just because everybody isn't agreeing with your assumptions that this was a hazardous situation where a major crash was barely avoided.


edit???? What happenned to the quote?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Wellll, I don't know. I think we have data for each runway at each airport we serve. But bottom line is, we as pilots don't actually do those calculations. The computer does them. With input from dispatch, maybe.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I have no idea what that is.
Click to expand...

The Engineered Material Arrestor System. The things that look like elevated concrete pads at the threshold of runways. It's basically really soft concrete that will swallow the gear and stop the plane PDQ. It seems like it's used most on runways with little to no clearway before either populated areas (Runway 22 at LGA) or water (33L at BOS). I didn't know if y'all might be allowed a little more leeway with EMAS equipped runways, or if it's purely an "oh ****" feature that has no bearing on t/o calculations.
 
Teller1900 said:
The Engineered Material Arrestor System. The things that look like elevated concrete pads at the threshold of runways. It's basically really soft concrete that will swallow the gear and stop the plane PDQ. It seems like it's used most on runways with little to no clearway before either populated areas (Runway 22 at LGA) or water (33L at BOS). I didn't know if y'all might be allowed a little more leeway with EMAS equipped runways, or if it's purely an "oh ****" feature that has no bearing on t/o calculations.
Click to expand...

Sounds like it may be a factor in accelerate/stop calculations, but I typically only use two pieces of concrete for takeoffs. 14R/32L at ORD and 16R/34L at Narita. Both runways are plenty long enough for our operations without that.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Depends on facts not in evidence.

What exactly should they have done different?
Click to expand...

Unless the pilot held the airplane on the runway much longer than necessary or there was a loss of thrust, I'm having a hard time believing this was a balanced field situation.
 
Teller1900 said:
The Engineered Material Arrestor System. The things that look like elevated concrete pads at the threshold of runways. It's basically really soft concrete that will swallow the gear and stop the plane PDQ. It seems like it's used most on runways with little to no clearway before either populated areas (Runway 22 at LGA) or water (33L at BOS). I didn't know if y'all might be allowed a little more leeway with EMAS equipped runways, or if it's purely an "oh ****" feature that has no bearing on t/o calculations.
Click to expand...
I thought that (as well as thrust reversers) could not be used in computing landing performance? This was either an actual change or at least a proposed change after the Chicago Midway overrun accident.
 
lancefisher said:
Unless the pilot held the airplane on the runway much longer than necessary or there was a loss of thrust, I'm having a hard time believing this was a balanced field situation.
Click to expand...

It WASN'T balanced at least as presented in the video. The question is "WHY?"
 
KennyFlys said:
I thought that (as well as thrust reversers) could not be used in computing landing performance? This was either an actual change or at least a proposed change after the Chicago Midway overrun accident.
Click to expand...

I know reversers aren't (it assumes engine loss, and reversers aren't allowed after an engine failure), I just don't know about EMAS. Our op specs don't really say all that much, as we're hard pressed to find a commercial service airport with a runway short enough for us to worry about BFL and no other options. And like Greg said, we don't do the calculations by hand, they're given to us in our Dispatch Release, so I've never seen if things change with EMAS. I'm curious now. And ya, I think EMAS started to become more popular after the Midway overrun.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Wellll, I don't know. I think we have data for each runway at each airport we serve. But bottom line is, we as pilots don't actually do those calculations. The computer does them. With input from dispatch, maybe.



I have no idea what that is.
Click to expand...

Oh that is harsh Greg. I am not a pilot? :) Well us in those little baby jets have to calculate it. No one tells us our BFL. Yes, it's independed to each runway.
 
lancefisher said:
Unless the pilot held the airplane on the runway much longer than necessary or there was a loss of thrust, I'm having a hard time believing this was a balanced field situation.
Click to expand...

Why would that be required? This is a specialty heavy lift cargo flight, not a passenger flight.
 
I got a message back from the video's poster. He's a controller, indeed. He couldn't tell me the airport name for some reason but stated the Takeoff Run Available is 2,683 meters or 8,802 feet.

I narrowed my search down to Canberra International Airport (CBR/YSCB ). Judging by the 76's back-taxi and turnaround, it makes sense it would have taken off on 17. From that point to the displaced threshold, it would be 8,802 feet. But, on Google Earth I measured 10,720 feet.

If my airport guess and measurement is correct, he used every bit of that 10.720 feet. That's some 3,600 feet more than the supposed takeoff distance required.

Another thing I found on Google Earth is a picture of an IL-76 that appears sitting on the East ramp, almost under the tower. The tower's position appears to be such controllers can have the view shown in the video.

His reply:
Hi Ken,

Good guess mate. TORA was 2683 metres. We're a bit cagey as to naming our airport. Our employer tends to be a bit touchy about publicity, so I've tried as much as I could to de-indentify it in the video. Probably in vain.

Hope you enjoyed it anyway. We did....... after he stayed airborne for a while!!

All the best.

Of course, a search in, say, Google or maybe ICAO for all airports with that TORA would narrow it down for you!
Click to expand...
 
Earthroamer said:
Oh that is harsh Greg. I am not a pilot? :) Well us in those little baby jets have to calculate it. No one tells us our BFL. Yes, it's independed to each runway.
Click to expand...

Is the data on available overrun part of your approach charts or something entirely different? Maybe you need to get (better?) dispatchers! :rofl::)
 
Teller1900 said:
...
The Engineered Material Arrestor System. The things that look like elevated concrete pads at the threshold of runways. It's basically really soft concrete that will swallow the gear and stop the plane PDQ. It seems like it's used most on runways with little to no clearway before either populated areas (Runway 22 at LGA) or water (33L at BOS). I didn't know if y'all might be allowed a little more leeway with EMAS equipped runways, or if it's purely an "oh ****" feature that has no bearing on t/o calculations.
Click to expand...
That's what they installed at Midway after the SWA jet stopped on Central Avenue in the snow on top a 6 year old in his Dad's van.
 
14 CFR §121.189 - Airplanes: Turbine engine powered: Takeoff limitations. said:
(a) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual for the elevation of the airport and for the ambient temperature existing at takeoff.

(b) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane certificated after August 26, 1957, but before August 30, 1959 (SR422, 422A), may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual for the minimum distances required for takeoff. In the case of an airplane certificated after September 30, 1958 (SR422A, 422B ), the takeoff distance may include a clearway distance but the clearway distance included may not be greater than1/2of the takeoff run.

(c) No person operating a turbine engine powered airplane certificated after August 29, 1959 (SR422B ), may take off that airplane at a weight greater than that listed in the Airplane Flight Manual at which compliance with the following may be shown:

(1) The accelerate-stop distance must not exceed the length of the runway plus the length of any stopway.

(2) The takeoff distance must not exceed the length of the runway plus the length of any clearway except that the length of any clearway included must not be greater than one-half the length of the runway.

(3) The takeoff run must not be greater than the length of the runway.
Click to expand...


The same regulation exists for Part 135 operators (14 CFR §135.379) which I am more familiar with. Pretty much common sense to me. An EMAS system is considered a stopway and would be factored into the calculation of ASDA like any other stopway.
 
Last edited:
HPNPilot1200 said:
The same regulation exists for Part 135 operators (14 CFR §135.379) which I am more familiar with. Pretty much common sense to me. An EMAS system is considered a stopway and would be factored into the calculation of ASDA like any other stopway.
Click to expand...

I guess I didn't specify...does it matter if the stopway is EMAS or just grass. Rather, are you allowed higher weights/different numbers on a runway with EMAS than on a runway with an equal length, non-EMAS overrun or does the type of stopway/clearway not matter, just its distance?
 
Last edited:
Teller1900 said:
I guess I didn't specify...does it matter if the stopway is EMAS or just grass. Rather, are you allowed higher weights/different numbers on a runway with EMAS than on a runway with an equal length, non-EMAS overrun or does the type of stopway/clearway not matter, just its distance?
Click to expand...

Given the fact that I BELIEVE the objective is to remain on the runway, I don't think it matters what the over run is made of.
 
Teller1900 said:
I guess I didn't specify...does it matter if the stopway is EMAS or just grass. Rather, are you allowed higher weights/different numbers on a runway with EMAS than on a runway with an equal length, non-EMAS overrun or does the type of stopway/clearway not matter, just its distance?
Click to expand...

I dug further into this and stand corrected. Advisory Circular 150/5220-22A specifically states:

Advisory Circular 150/5220-22A said:
An EMAS is not intended to meet the definition of a stopway as provided in AC 150/5300-13. The runway safety area and runway object free area lengths begin at a runway end when a stopway is not provided. When a stopway is provided, these lengths begin at the stopway end (AC 150/5300-13).
Click to expand...

...which changes what I posted earlier. Regardless, I think our primary objective should be to touchdown and turnoff before the end of the runway, and not end up in the stopway. :)
 
HPNPilot1200 said:
I dug further into this and stand corrected. Advisory Circular 150/5220-22A specifically states:



...which changes what I posted earlier. Regardless, I think our primary objective should be to touchdown and turnoff before the end of the runway, and not end up in the stopway. :)
Click to expand...

Interesting. That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks! What's with you guys insisting I stay on the runway, though??? :goofy::dunno::rofl:
 
Teller1900 said:
Is the data on available overrun part of your approach charts or something entirely different? Maybe you need to get (better?) dispatchers! :rofl::)
Click to expand...

Jepp puts the over-run data on the chart. You can use it to factor BFL becuase it was made to stop on. You 121 guys are not going to believe it, but us 135/91 guys actually do a weight and balance and know where we are at on a CG graph! Oh the analism and horror!. :) It's horrible to have to decide by yourself, if you can take-off or land on a runway. :) (sarcastic)
 
Earthroamer said:
Jepp puts the over-run data on the chart. You can use it to factor BFL becuase it was made to stop on. You 121 guys are not going to believe it, but us 135/91 guys actually do a weight and balance and know where we are at on a CG graph! Oh the analism and horror!. :) It's horrible to have to decide by yourself, if you can take-off or land on a runway. :) (sarcastic)
Click to expand...

We actually do have to do the w/b and CG graph (Cee-Gee Wheel)...we don't have any of that fancy pancy FMS or ACARS stuff :no::D. The passengers love it when we have to ask them to move forward or backward because the whizz wheel told us so. We don't, however, worry much about BFL when we use all 4700+ foot runways. Anything less than that and we just give up and go home :hairraise:. Since we're without anti-skid, the FAA doesn't let us land on anything that would be short enough to cause concern for takeoff. They don't want us deciding by ourselves if we can use a runway any more than we want to! :)
 
Last edited:
Teller1900 said:
Interesting. That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks! What's with you guys insisting I stay on the runway, though??? :goofy::dunno::rofl:
Click to expand...
I know you're saying that in jest, but you really DON'T want to use that EMAS! It costs millions of dollars, so you and/or your insurance company could be hurting after that! OTOH, It's a LOT cheaper than the loss of life that it can prevent!
 
gprellwitz said:
I know you're saying that in jest, but you really DON'T want to use that EMAS! It costs millions of dollars, so you and/or your insurance company could be hurting after that! OTOH, It's a LOT cheaper than the loss of life that it can prevent!
Click to expand...
How much length did they install at Midway? I can't tell what surface is what on Google Earth or if it was done at all.
 
KennyFlys said:
How much length did they install at Midway? I can't tell what surface is what on Google Earth or if it was done at all.
Click to expand...

Zoom in on the approach end of 22L. Under the chevrons is the EMAS. It's the exact same size as the EMAS on the approach end (under the chevrons) of 22R and 15R at KBOS. Interestingly, the EMAS at LGA (31 and 4) is .02 miles longer, according to the ruler on Google Earth.
 
KennyFlys said:
How much length did they install at Midway? I can't tell what surface is what on Google Earth or if it was done at all.
Click to expand...
I'm glad Matt answered, because I didn't know. I found out the cost at a PAPI meeting for Chicago Executive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top