How does WestJet keep this stuff out of the news??

[Donald]

Incident: Westjet B736 at Abbotsford on Aug 4th 2010, overran runway
By Simon Hradecky, created Friday, Aug 6th 2010 20:34Z, last updated Friday, Aug 6th 2010 20:34Z

A Westjet Airlines Boeing 737-600, registration C-GBWS performing flight WS-105 from Calgary,AB to Abbotsford,BC (Canada) with 105 people on board, landed on Abbotsford's runway 25, that had been shortened to 6002 feet due to construction work. The airplane went past the available portion of the runway into the closed section and contacted some plywood sheeting material used to form the X-marker indicating the closed section of the runway. The airplane stopped without damage.

The Canadian TSB reported, that no injuries and no damage occured, maintenance however replaced all 6 tyres as a precaution.

[stmymdy]

cuz realistically its no biggie?

[Blakey]

cuz realistically its no biggie?

Stmymdy,

I note, from a previous thread, that your experience with aircraft larger than 172s is a bit limited. I wouldn't pretend to be the most experienced pilot on this board but I do have a little bit of time in larger aircraft. I therefore feel qualified to pass along the following:

If a large aircraft blows a tire on landing - that's no biggie;

If a large aircraft cuts a corner too tight while taxiing and clips a taxiway light - that's no biggie; but,

When a large aircraft, carrying passengers, runs off the end of the runway to the extent that it hits an obstacle - this is indeed a "biggie"!

There are bigger things that could happen but not many. I'm not throwing stones here, I've come very close to doing this myself, but this is a significant event.

Blakey

[Meatservo]

cuz realistically its no biggie?

I know, 'cause you've admitted it elsewhere, that you don't have a lot of experience on anything bigger than a 172, but I have to agree with you, it doesn't sound like world-shattering news to me. It would be cool if the pilots were subjected to some kind of action that reminded them of the importance of checking NOTAMs and maybe a little remedial training on how to land a 737 in less than 6000 feet, but in terms of making international headlines, this is a non-event.

[stmymdy]

its fascinating how those who don't have
experience on anything bigger than a 172 are kinda pushed to the side
as not having a valid point based on what they fly. i have nothing but respect
for the people who make aviation a career, but as far as i'm concerned
everyone is collectively there to contribute to aviation safety no?

[loopa]

its fascinating how those who don't have
experience on anything bigger than a 172 are kinda pushed to the side
as not having a valid point based on what they fly. i have nothing but respect
for the people who make aviation a career, but as far as i'm concerned
everyone is collectively there to contribute to aviation safety no?

Read your pm's

[Blakey]

As usual, I see that my limited communication skills have mislead you as to the intent of my comments. I agree that everyone has something to contribute to Aviation Safety and that a lack of left-seat A340 time does not equate to a lack of intellect or insight. My point is merely that, differing opinions notwithstanding, running an aircraft off the end of a runway is a "big thing". Again, I am not throwing stones here; when I almost did it, it was a big thing and it was a result of hubris, complacency, and desultory flight planning . I hope that I have learned from this. Many crashes are the result of an aircraft exceeding the landing area available and the consequences of this are often fatal.

I do not belittle your experience I merely point out what you yourself have said in order to suggest that your opinion may be somewhat skewed by a limited experience profile. In the world of private aircraft operation, where I also operate, running a few feet of the end off a short runway is a fairly common experience and is almost never reported. Maybe this is what has lead you to believe that a major airline has a similar, "no harm; no foul" outlook on these things. This is just not so.

[hnl]

I fly the biggest airplane in the country and yes this indeed is a biggie. Had it been AC........

[niss]

Did WJ hire a few ex-AF employees?

[ZBBYLW]

I would have to say this is a big deal, and like the above poster mentioned, if this was AC the news reports would be everywhere. They could not keep it on the limited runway they had. Sure the runway surface may be longer, but if portions of it are NOTAMed out - it's the same as rolling out into the ground at the end, with a little less damage.

[DanJ]

In aviation circles it might be a big deal and if it had actually gone off of the runway surface into the weeds, it might have made the news. Going past a barricade into a closed portion of runway doesn't really have that wow factor the media types are looking for, like a burning 340 in Toronto, or even a Southwest 737 sitting in a gas station parking lot in Chicago.

[xsbank]

This is a bad one.
It means either the crew did not understand that the runway was closed or they landed long and should have gone around. I would suggest they do not understand their FMS or perhaps they floated on touchdown, which means they need to go back to school for some practice. Or MAPP practice?

Maybe pick a different runway? Good thing there wasn't a hole or a John Deere sitting there.

[teacher]

Even on Avherald very few of any of WJs incidents are published but AC has a tiny hiccup and it's everywhere. They must have a seperate highly skilled PR department

[Black Cat]

In aviation circles it might be a big deal and if it had actually gone off of the runway surface into the weeds, it might have made the news. Going past a barricade into a closed portion of runway doesn't really have that wow factor the media types are looking for, like a burning 340 in Toronto, or even a Southwest 737 sitting in a gas station parking lot in Chicago.

All I can figure out is that Westjet is a "modern marvel of media manipulation". Good for them though, they have someone who has figured it out. Perhaps AC should head hunt them.

Take the example below for instance;


A plane going off the end of the runway has no "wow factor" and hardly makes the news, and not just the Abbotsford incident, the other one barely made the newswire either when it ended up in a snow bank.

BUT apparently WHEEEN Air Canada discontinues a direct flight to Ottawa from Regina for the winter season it MAKES THE 6 O'CLOCK FREEKIN NEWS IN EDMONTON ????


And the best piece of evidence to support the " westjet media control" theory? Read the last paragraph; In other news, "West Jet has unveiled a direct flight to Phoenix from Regina. It will run between December 18 and April 30." Yes, cause now instead of flying direct to Ottawa you can go to phoenix to pitch your farm aid package to the minister of agriculture. HOLY SHEEP SHIT!


Air Canada cancels non-stop flight between Regina and Ottawa




http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/Canada+ ... story.html

[Samson]

People like WestJet.
Jazz.....

[DanJ]

In aviation circles it might be a big deal and if it had actually gone off of the runway surface into the weeds, it might have made the news. Going past a barricade into a closed portion of runway doesn't really have that wow factor the media types are looking for, like a burning 340 in Toronto, or even a Southwest 737 sitting in a gas station parking lot in Chicago.

All I can figure out is that Westjet is a "modern marvel of media manipulation". Good for them though, they have someone who has figured it out. Perhaps AC should head hunt them.

Take the example below for instance;


A plane going off the end of the runway has no "wow factor" and hardly makes the news, and not just the Abbotsford incident, the other one barely made the newswire either when it ended up in a snow bank.

BUT apparently WHEEEN Air Canada discontinues a direct flight to Ottawa from Regina for the winter season it MAKES THE 6 O'CLOCK FREEKIN NEWS IN EDMONTON ????


And the best piece of evidence to support the " westjet media control" theory? Read the last paragraph; In other news, "West Jet has unveiled a direct flight to Phoenix from Regina. It will run between December 18 and April 30." Yes, cause now instead of flying direct to Ottawa you can go to phoenix to pitch your farm aid package to the minister of agriculture. HOLY SHEEP SHIT!


Air Canada cancels non-stop flight between Regina and Ottawa




http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/Canada+ ... story.html

I have no doubt that Westjet enjoys better PR than Air Canada, and probably a large chunk of it deserved. And maybe the fact this happened in western Canada helped. But seriously, take yourself out of the business, and pretend to be the news desk guy at the newspaper in Abbottsford. Someone calls you up and says a Westjet plane just went off the end of the runway. You ask some questions.
Is anyone hurt?
No.
Is the plane damaged? No.
Do they need any equipment to lift it back onto the runway?
Well, no, it's not really off the runway, but it ran over this little sign that meant that part of the runway is closed for maintenance.
Wait, I thought you said it went off the runway?
Well, it did, sort of. It went past the usable portion of the runway and they are going to change the tires just in case they suffered any damage.

I'm not discounting all the things said about what a screw up in the cockpit this was and wouldn't doubt the pilots have had a lot to answer for. But newsworthy? About as newsworthy as a greyhound hitting a railway barrier and stopping 14 feet from the tracks instead of 15. It was posted on Flyertalk on the 7th though, so at least it was noticed by somebody.

[Rotten Apple #1]

This is a bad one.
... I would suggest they do not understand their FMS...

What would understanding the FMS have anything to do with this incident, xsbank? And do you honestly believe that two transport category qualified and current pilots would not understand the functions of their FMS?

[Meatservo]

Sorry Stmymdy I was not trying to belittle you, I was just poking a bit of (I hope) harmless fun at Blakey's answer. I'm not sure why I do that.

I might not fly THE BIGGEST AIRCRAFT IN CANADA, but I think I fly the AIRCRAFT WITH THE COOLEST STRIPES THAT MAKE IT LOOK REALLY AWESOME IN CANADA, and I did sleep in holiday inn express last night!

What I meant to say was, yes, he is correct that it is a big deal. The airline should be taking it very seriously, although I would like to refrain from making comments about airmanship because, also like Blakey says, it has happened or almost happened to a lot of guys. Also, I think it would be serious even if it was a small aircraft, because it reflects the same lapse in planning or execution as it would in any size of aircraft.

But I agree with you that it is "no big deal" as far as the media would be concerned, there are all kinds of times something really bad "almost" happened, but this doesn't create the kind of sensation it takes to sell news.

I wonder if there would have been more attention paid to this incident by the public at large if it was Air Canada. I like to think not.

[KAG]

This is a bad one.
It means either the crew did not understand that the runway was closed or they landed long and should have gone around. I would suggest they do not understand their FMS or perhaps they floated on touchdown, which means they need to go back to school for some practice. Or MAPP practice?

Maybe pick a different runway? Good thing there wasn't a hole or a John Deere sitting there.

Have you ever floated a landing? I sure have, and if you say you haven't/don't I'd be inclined to call BS. Or it must be our training/standards - what unsafe cowboys we must be.
Common man obviously a mistake was made, I'm just glad no one was hurt and from what I gather no metal was bent.

As for why it's not in the media, it's not news worthy as there was no misery or suffering, which I'm glad for.

[jjj]

Blakey, do you really think that a discussion on here or the inaction of the media is representative of how WestJet is handling this matter? Do you honestly think that because this incident or any other that you mentioned is swept under the rug only because the media didn't blow it out of proportion into a "Terror of the skies!!!" article.

This incident like any other has been reported through the appropriate channels and as before corrective action will be taken if required.

Edited

JJJ

[xsbank]

1. They landed long.
2. They made a mistake.
3. They got lucky, only 6 tires replaced.

Why?

They pooched the landing.
or
They did not put the revised runway length in the FMS, which did not give them any warnings.
or
They did not properly brief the short landing.
or
They failed to brief the go-around point. Even Westjet know that a MAPP is an option?
or
God just reached down to smite them, but He missed.

Why are you attacking me? I WASN'T FLYING THAT POOCHED LANDING!

[jjj]

They did not put the revised runway length in the FMS, which did not give them any warnings.

I would suggest that you do not understand our FMS.

XSBank, you are throwing out a narrow list of possible scenarios. Within that list are statements regarding FMS procedure that clearly indicate that you don't know what you are talking about. Example - one does not input runway length into the FMS as you indicated.

It is possible that these guys were negligent and it is also possible that there were a series of events that led to this undesirable outcome that is beyond what is discussed here.

One thing for certain is that the situation is more complicated than you understand.

JJJ

[Blakey]

Blakey, do you really think that a discussion on here or the inaction of the media is representative of how WestJet is handling this matter? Do you honestly think that because this incident or any other that you mentioned is swept under the rug only because the media didn't blow it out of proportion into a "Terror of the skies!!!" article.

This incident like any other has been reported through the appropriate channels and as before corrective action will be taken if required.

Edited

JJJ

Wow! A “provocative” insult. Was it wearing something low-cut! That’s my favorite kind of provocative!

jjj or JJJ as you prefer,

I’m afraid you have me at somewhat of a disadvantage as I don’t know what you’re talking about. I don’t see any of the fine statements you attribute to me in my posts (Perhaps you could help an old guy out and quote the pertinent passages to me?) and I don’t hold the opinions you so generously attribute to me.

Firstly, where did I say that I thought that the discussion here or in the media was the extent of anyone’s investigation into this incident? The fact that the initial post included a reference to the TSB was a very subtle hint that there may be other players looking into this!

Secondly, where did I, or anyone else for that matter, state that we thought this would be “swept under the rug”. See the paragraph above about the TSB, they are a little hesitant to abet “rug-under-sweeping” of their investigations!

Lastly, I’m very happy to hear that this incident has been reported through the appropriate channels and that corrective action, if required of course, will be taken. Could you perhaps point out which part of my posts gave you the impression that I did not believe this to be true?

Perhaps it would be best if I re-phrased my comments. Let me try.

If a pilot fails to stop his aircraft on the landing surface available, this is a big thing. This does not even mean that the pilot has done anything wrong. There could be mechanical failures or conditions he was not aware of that lead to this unfortunate turn of events but it is still a big thing. You need not fly a 172 or even an ultralight to know this; ask your grandmother or your auto mechanic if it’s OK for the plane they're on to go just a little bit off the end of the runway! This is my point. This and only this – it’s a “biggie” to quote the original poster.

Blakey

[El Comat]

Has someone notified Doc (or any of the other crusty old anti-Jazz curmudgeons)??? After the whole Jazz/YYB incident, I'm sure he'd like to voice his opinion on how there COULD NOT POSSIBLY be a valid reason to run a 737 off of a perfectly usable runway!! Or is this situation somehow different??? Anywayzzzz...I digress. Back to your regular scheduled programming.

EC

PS - I've got a lightly-used pot stirring device if anyone needs it

[jjj]

Blakey,

Perhaps I inferred a little too much from your post - if so I apologize.

As far as I'm concerned this is a big deal. A few more knots and the situation would certainly have been news worthy.

I have faith in our flight safety system that the right action will be taken.

Jjj