The weather in CYVR has been terrable in terms of bad corsswinds for the 26s all day.
METAR CYVR 291900Z 20018G27KT 8SM -SHRA FEW012 BKN030TCU OVC080 06/04
A2935 RERA RMK CF1TCU6AC2 SLP939=
Just another normal day of crosswind operations at YYZ. Sounds like a RTO at high weight.
Airbrake wrote:no 100kt call, just 80kts then v1 rotate.
At the weight they were going out at the V1 would have been around 145 kts.
Even at 110knots they were well below V1.
Blowing tires or exceeding temps for plug fuses is much more likely above a 100kt, or in your case 80kt. That's why I was asking what reason was given for the reject. High speed rejects can deteriorate into much more serious events. Any reports of ingesting birds or engine stability?
Man - This must be a jinxed flight. My mom was on this flight 2 weeks ago and they sucked a bird after takeoff. Circled for an hour or so - then landed again and left later that night.
Intentional Left Bank wrote:Body of CTV story says it's a 787, picture captions call it a 747. I think I missed a memo.
You know how the press gets these numbers confused, and let's face it, it's just one digit. But everybody knows its one of those Airbuses that Westjet flies.
---------- ADS -----------
“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.”
-President Ronald Reagan
Looks like there is some updated info at your LINK, beaconfinal:
The Canadian TSB reported on Mar 31st, that the captain was pilot flying and felt violent vibrations from the right hand side starting at about 100 KIAS and rejected takeoff. Both right hand main gear tyres were found failed as cause of the vibrations.
Might be a stupid question, but kind of curious as to what sort of issues would cause an abort at 100 Kt + for a blown tire? That seems like an interesting decision.
Topspin wrote:Might be a stupid question, but kind of curious as to what sort of issues would cause an abort at 100 Kt + for a blown tire? That seems like an interesting decision.
That's where I was going with my line of questions. Which came first, the blown tires or the reject causing the blown tires? If the reject came first, what was the catalyst? Interesting how quiet this one is.
"The Canadian TSB reported on Mar 31st, that the captain was pilot flying and felt violent vibrations from the right hand side starting at about 100 KIAS and rejected takeoff. Both right hand main gear tyres were found failed as cause of the vibrations."
Just speculation but I'll guess the tires went first and the vibration caused the pilot to have second thoughts. As mentioned this is the second time that they have had a problem in the last three months which is unusual. They might have a bad batch of tires on their hands that are failing when subjected to maximum loading. It was nice to see AC tech dept helping out WJ by supplying equipment to remove the aircraft from the runway, at least the mech's can cooperate. You just never know if and who will be merging in the future.
