Westjet Overshoots on RW05 CYYZ

[pilotman15]

Just browsing through the CADORS and read four separate cases of Westjet overshoots on RW05 at CYYZ today (April 16) due to unstable approaches. Any insights?

[Colonel Sanders]

Any insights?

Yes - what an abuse of the CADORs system.

[grimey]

In defense of whoever filed them, back when I was an FSS we were given strict instructions to file an AOR (which transport turns into CADORS) every time someone entered a missed approach. We thought it was fucking retarded too.

[fruz]

This NOTAM was in effect yesterday:

CYYZ A2488/13 13APR0300-17APR1700
FIRST 3891 FT RWY 23 CLSD. LDG RWY 23 NOT AUTH.
TKOF RWY 23 AVBL TO ACFT WITH WINGSPAN LESS THAN 170 FT.
DECLARED DIST:
RWY 05: TORA 6884 TODA 6884 ASDA 6884 LDA 6749
RWY 23: TORA 6884 TODA 8213 ASDA 6884 LDA NOT USABLE

Runways in use yesterday were 05, 06L & R. The winds were relatively calm at the surface but there were significant quarterly tailwinds aloft which is the probable cause for the unstable approaches and subsequent overshoots. ...it happens.

fruz

[gianthammer]

Just browsing through the CADORS and read four separate cases of Westjet overshoots on RW05 at CYYZ today (April 16) due to unstable approaches. Any insights?

Too many new first officers taking a dumb interview question to heart!!!

[Nark]

By 'overshoot' you mean 'go around' or missed approach right?

[pilotman15]

By 'overshoot' you mean 'go around' or missed approach right?

Occurrence Summary
Date Entered:2013-04-16
Narrative:
A Westjet Boeing 737 600 (WJA1237) from KLGA to CYYZ initiated an overshoot runway 05. No reason given. No operational impact.

2013-04-16
Narrative:
An Air Canada Embraer E190 (ACA719) from KLGA to CYYZ initiated an overshoot runway 06R due unstable approach. No Operational impact.

2013-04-16
Narrative:
A Westjet Boeing 737 700 (WJA258) from CYWG to CYYZ initiated an overshoot runway 05 due unstable approach. No Operational impact.

Date Entered:2013-04-16
Narrative:
A Westjet Boeing 737 700 (WJA424) from CYYC to CYYZ initiated an overshoot runway 05 due unstable approach. No Operational impact.

Date Entered:2013-04-16
Narrative:
A Westjet Boeing 737 700 (WJA613) from CYOW to CYYZ initiated an overshoot runway 05 due unstable approach. No Operational impact.

No, I mean overshoot. But go around or missed approach suffices as well. Anyway, back to wondering the reasons...does look like it might have to do with the length available for Runway 05. Thanks Fruz.

[Colonel Sanders]

No Operational impact.

Then why on earth was a CADORs filed?

Nark: In Canada, paperwork is more important
than aluminum. Anytime a pilot has to miss an
approach, he is required to hand-write a letter to
our President, repeating the following 100 times:

"I promise I will never miss another approach".

This is how it's supposed to be done at Pearson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_358

[Rockie]

Then why on earth was a CADORs filed?

Airlines require a safety report whenever a go-around (among other things) occurs for statistical tracking purposes. They're usually filed internally but I guess they find their way to the CADOR's system.

Airlines love statistics.

[Aeroplane17]

Not sure when all these happened but there was a was about 30kt shear last night at about 100-200 agl. couple wj guys mentioned it.

[Beach 200]

I was in the line up behind westjet 613. There was a good 30knot tailwind on the approach and so they went around for a second try. Realizing they were not going to be stabilized on the approach, I don't blame them for the go around.


There's your answer. Not a big deal!

[DHC-1 Jockey]

I was landing on 05 around that time as well and the winds at 1000' and 3 miles back were something like 190 @ 40 giving us a 30 kt tailwind. By the time we touched down we had a 15 knot headwind. Even in the Dash it caught my us off guard and we had a hard time slowing for gear and flap speed. I don't blame them for going around if they couldn't get configured in time. Good PDM.

[pilotman15]

I was in the line up behind westjet 613. There was a good 30knot tailwind on the approach and so they went around for a second try. Realizing they were not going to be stabilized on the approach, I don't blame them for the go around.


There's your answer. Not a big deal!

Perfect thanks!

[privateer]

Go Arounds, Overshoots happen. I am somewhat annoyed that every Missed Approach or Go Around is a CADOR. It can send a bad message to some, and could result in the wrong decision being made in order to avoid triggering a CADOR.

[Son_of_dad]

I'd rather have an overshoot than an overrun

They happen - no big deal

[Edo]

You also have to remember CADORS are public, so someone without an aviation background can get the wrong impression. I think its a big issue in tight charter markets, so a potential customer searches your company, google returns 3 CADORS for overshoots in the last 6 months. They google "plane overshoot"....and get the Lion Air article from last week.
So the customer calls the next guy..who never misses an approach

[Redneck_pilot86]

Go Arounds, Overshoots happen. I am somewhat annoyed that every Missed Approach or Go Around is a CADOR. It can send a bad message to some, and could result in the wrong decision being made in order to avoid triggering a CADOR.

If that is part of your decision making process you have no business in a cockpit.

[fruz]

So the customer calls the next guy..who never misses an approach

Who never misses?

You also have to remember CADORS are public, so someone without an aviation background can get the wrong impression. I think its a big issue in tight charter markets, so a potential customer searches your company, google returns 3 CADORS for overshoots in the last 6 months. They google "plane overshoot"....and get the Lion Air article from last week.

I would assume that if someone is in the know of how to research a CADOR, they're more than likely aware that missed approaches happen all of the time...regardless of the carrier and that they are no big deal in most cases.

[BTyyj]

Going missed on 05 with a strong tailwind isn't unusual for WJA.

IIRC, WJA has fairly stringent stabilized approach parameters. As all their flights are tracked by company, if the approach is flown not within the parameters of the stabilized approach, the skipper is going to get a call from his/her boss. Better to go around and try it again.

[tbaylx]

You also have to remember CADORS are public, so someone without an aviation background can get the wrong impression. I think its a big issue in tight charter markets, so a potential customer searches your company, google returns 3 CADORS for overshoots in the last 6 months. They google "plane overshoot"....and get the Lion Air article from last week.
So the customer calls the next guy..who never misses an approach

Sure they do..right up until they crash because the airline in question doesn't go around.

What are we going back to the 70's here where its not "manly" to do a go around? Damn good decision making and execution of a missed approach. Professional pilots don't push unstabilized approaches. No questions ever from a decent airline, as a matter of fact if you don't go around and you're unstable at most airlines it'll get you fired in a hurry.

[giligan]

You are correct, WestJet does have a very rigid stabilized approach policy please correct me if I am wrong or miss something

All approaches will be stabilized by 1000' agl at which time the decision will be made to discontinue the approach.

criteria for a stabilized approach:
fully configured
airspeed within 15 knots of target trending towards target
sink rates of 1000 fpm or more should be avoided (if you meet the above then it usually isn't a problem)

This stems from Boeing's data that ALL runway overruns they have analyzed have stemmed from an unstable approach. Obviously there could be any number of reasons for the unstable approach from weather to pilot error.

Data would suggest that if you eliminate unstable approaches you LESSEN the probability of a runway overrun.
Cheers
gil

[frog]

Less than a 1000 feet per minute isn't a problem when you are on speed unless you have a strong tailwind.

Let's say vref : 160 kt, tail wind 30 kt, it is getting tricky...

[jjj]

Going missed on 05 with a strong tailwind isn't unusual for WJA.

IIRC, WJA has fairly stringent stabilized approach parameters. As all their flights are tracked by company, if the approach is flown not within the parameters of the stabilized approach, the skipper is going to get a call from his/her boss. Better to go around and try it again.

Hello BTyyj....

All approaches are monitored by gatekeepers. Gatekeepers are not management nor do they sit at the same desk as the flight safety guys. In fact, their office is tucked away in a corner behind a closed door. The gatekeepers are peers. Small group of line-pilots, Captains and FOs.

A violation of the stabilized approach criteria will trigger the gatekeepers to look at the data. Some discretion is allowed - i.e. - unexpected tailwind that precludes a normal approach from being stabilized in time but was stabilized at 950' AGL may be discarded.

Calls are performed on a peer to peer basis and even if a pilot admits to poor judgement then it's a case that if a similar judgment occurs within a specified time, a more thorough investigation may be warranted.

Most calls end well and pilots are encouraged to take it around and do it again. However, if a pilot expresses that they're perhaps above the law or something then their are protocols to escalate to an appropriate response that may involve crew management and standards.

The system works well. Gatekeepers are the little angels on our shoulders that keep us honest.When you make a mistake or something precludes you from having it settled by 1000' AGL but you know it will come together by 500 or so - the gate keeper program is that little voice that may convince you to take it around. Regardless of an identical result, stabilized by 500 vs. 1000, the line must be drawn somewhere. The gatekeepers maintain that line. That line is a component of profesionalism. As airline pilots we are paid to keep things boring.

Regards.

JJJ

[CpnCrunch]

Great post, jjj - thanks for the info. Sounds like a great system, and it's certainly very reassuring to me as a passenger

[C-GOYR]

I actually saw the AC and WJ aircraft initiate their go around and it wasn't out of the ordinary. The AC airplane was a bit closer to the runway and made its right turn. Westjet's airplane was higher and turned left overhead FedEx.

The wind at the time was substantial and I believe there is some kind of construction around the threshold of 23.