Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut

[PostmasterGeneral]

OPs Says go/ or severe repercussions implied. pic knows the trip is tricky given the wx says no , ops blows gasket. ops says wtf pilot says ok after 20 min discussion with crew and quick txt to wife . . the issue is this > tc regs say pilot has last n final say about safety in 703 ops yet. most 703 sops's undermine that final go/no go authority and throw the pic under the bus or into the snow bank if you prefer, . . been into that runway on several occasions .

a twin otter driver with a bizzillion hours said if the wind is crazy strong , told me that if the x wind is better than 17 knots calculated 90 ' on approach. then line up on the edge of the runway upwind touch down just inside the lights upwind and allow some push towards the other side as you roll out you gain about 10 percent in length and more room . Of course easy on the brakes. appropriate beta/reverse.

Its one thing to go, it's another to actually attempt to land. Of course Keewatin wants you to go because I think that's the only way they get paid, but if the wind is howling like that, turn around and come back. I wouldn't have tried to land in that nonsense.

[digits_]

OPs Says go/ or severe repercussions implied. pic knows the trip is tricky given the wx says no , ops blows gasket. ops says wtf pilot says ok after 20 min discussion with crew and quick txt to wife . . the issue is this > tc regs say pilot has last n final say about safety in 703 ops yet. most 703 sops's undermine that final go/no go authority and throw the pic under the bus or into the snow bank if you prefer, . . been into that runway on several occasions .

a twin otter driver with a bizzillion hours said if the wind is crazy strong , told me that if the x wind is better than 17 knots calculated 90 ' on approach. then line up on the edge of the runway upwind touch down just inside the lights upwind and allow some push towards the other side as you roll out you gain about 10 percent in length and more room . Of course easy on the brakes. appropriate beta/reverse.

Its one thing to go, it's another to actually attempt to land. Of course Keewatin wants you to go because I think that's the only way they get paid, but if the wind is howling like that, turn around and come back. I wouldn't have tried to land in that nonsense.

Yup, and most (all?) medevac contracts are set up that the operator gets paid per mile flown, not per patient transported. In a way, it's financially beneficial for the operator to fly, go missed, and return to base. More chance you'll get another call while airborne, and you don't lose time on the ground. Then again, if you do that too often the government will start asking questions.
I would highly doubt that there would be pressure on the crew to land. But it's always possible of course.

[RoAF-Mig21]

OPs Says go/ or severe repercussions implied. pic knows the trip is tricky given the wx says no , ops blows gasket. ops says wtf pilot says ok after 20 min discussion with crew and quick txt to wife...

From personal experience, flying for Keewatin for may years (both right & left seat), I have never been reprimanded, accused or penalized for my decisions. I have refused flights before because I did not feel comfortable. There were times when we went flying knowing the weather was below minimums, hoping it would improve; it did not, and we turned around and landed safely at our home base or alternate.

Never has management given me grief over it. Sure, I had to back up my decisions and I did so. I remember one night where I did not want to fly to Winnipeg due to extensive thunderstorm activity. I gave them a few options that would either delay the flight or have us go to an alternate airport / hospital. The OPS ON CALL (President's) reply to me was "Okay. No problem". We worked together as team and got it done safely, by other means, avoiding the weather in question.

I don't know of a single pilot there that was let go because he or she refused a flight.

There are other things I did not like about that job, such as being away from my family for 14 consecutive days, the cold, the lack of sunlight in the winter and the fatigue with flying for an air ambulance company where you're on call and the long waits for the nurses to come back from the hospital...

Let's be fair. During my time there, management was very decent and very adamant about safety. Unfortunately, some pilots put a lot of pressure on themselves...

What happened after I left, I could not comment on. This was just my personal experience.

[TeePeeCreeper]

Never has management given me grief over it. Sure, I had to back up my decisions and I did so.

*cough cough* so they gave you shit and you had to back yourself up? Sounds like grief to me!

[NotDirty!]

Never has management given me grief over it. Sure, I had to back up my decisions and I did so.

*cough cough* so they gave you shit and you had to back yourself up? Sounds like grief to me!

I don’t know if that is quite what he meant… I can’t speak for this particular company, but having been a manager in a company with some similarities in the operation, I can tell you how I ran things. If the weather was marginal, or a pilot had some other concern, I asked them to talk me through it, trying to get them to consider the situation and make the appropriate decision. This wasn’t to give them grief, it was to support them, as well as to train them, as I was often dealing with pilots with relatively low experience, in their first turbine aircraft.

Junior pilots come in a wide range of attitudes, and I have seen everything from “there’s a cloud in the sky, so I don’t want to go flying” to “I know they’re calling for 0/0, but I want to try anyway”! (And everything in between). Both extremes are dangerous, and perhaps the latter more so than the former, although a pilot who scares themselves en route could be a big problem! So I would attempt to ensure that the pilots understood their limitations (and abilities), and tried to guide them towards making the same decisions I would have if I was in their shoes. I never said “you go, or else!”, and I would support their decision, even if it was a “no go” in a situation where I personally might have said “go”, but after careful consideration the pilot didn’t feel comfortable. There was no grief for such a call, and as far as I was concerned, it was the correct decision for that pilot.

Often times, pilots just need someone to bounce ideas off of, or just confirm that they are making a good decision. Supporting good decision making when a pilot is junior, will help them to make good decisions throughout their career. And it may help to alleviate some of the unfounded concerns that some pilots get nervous about (such as “there’s a thunderstorm behind us, and my radar only points forward, so how do I know that the storm isn’t catching up to us?”, etc. )

I know, I know…. all management is evil, and all they care about is profit… etc.

[RoAF-Mig21]

Never has management given me grief over it. Sure, I had to back up my decisions and I did so.

*cough cough* so they gave you shit and you had to back yourself up? Sounds like grief to me!

You're trying to look for negative scenarios where there weren't any. Nobody gave me "shit". Keewatin Air is a professional company that is in "the business of saving lives". Being a medevac captain in the arctic (and unavoidably in Southern Canada) is not an easy job. You're responsible to make decisions that affect both your crew and the potential patients you're tasked to fly. Drawing the line between GO/NO GO was not always easy, especially for some young and inexperienced captains. It's not always black and white like they teach you in IFR training. Situations change, be it weather, patient status, another priority call or limitations of the aircraft, etc.

You had to make decisions and make them quick. Lucky, we always had someone on the other end of the phone to call and ask for advice. I repeat ADVICE - NOT FOR THEM TO MAKE A DECISIONS FOR YOU. The management were experienced pilots as well, but in the end it was up to the captain and the crew to make decisions, including the flight nurses.

You better believe I better have a good reason to refuse a medivac and a baby could die.

P.S. I was never part of management there, not was I friends with any manager. We had a professional employer / worker relationship. I did my job safely and as efficiently as I could, not always perfect, but I left Keewatin with a handshake and "You're always welcome to come back". That's good enough for me.

[RoAF-Mig21]

Never has management given me grief over it. Sure, I had to back up my decisions and I did so.

*cough cough* so they gave you shit and you had to back yourself up? Sounds like grief to me!

I don’t know if that is quite what he meant… I can’t speak for this particular company, but having been a manager in a company with some similarities in the operation, I can tell you how I ran things. If the weather was marginal, or a pilot had some other concern, I asked them to talk me through it, trying to get them to consider the situation and make the appropriate decision. This wasn’t to give them grief, it was to support them, as well as to train them, as I was often dealing with pilots with relatively low experience, in their first turbine aircraft.

Junior pilots come in a wide range of attitudes, and I have seen everything from “there’s a cloud in the sky, so I don’t want to go flying” to “I know they’re calling for 0/0, but I want to try anyway”! (And everything in between). Both extremes are dangerous, and perhaps the latter more so than the former, although a pilot who scares themselves en route could be a big problem! So I would attempt to ensure that the pilots understood their limitations (and abilities), and tried to guide them towards making the same decisions I would have if I was in their shoes. I never said “you go, or else!”, and I would support their decision, even if it was a “no go” in a situation where I personally might have said “go”, but after careful consideration the pilot didn’t feel comfortable. There was no grief for such a call, and as far as I was concerned, it was the correct decision for that pilot.

Often times, pilots just need someone to bounce ideas off of, or just confirm that they are making a good decision. Supporting good decision making when a pilot is junior, will help them to make good decisions throughout their career. And it may help to alleviate some of the unfounded concerns that some pilots get nervous about (such as “there’s a thunderstorm behind us, and my radar only points forward, so how do I know that the storm isn’t catching up to us?”, etc. )

I know, I know…. all management is evil, and all they care about is profit… etc.

Well said.

Unfortunately, some people fail to understand the "responsibility & accountability" of a job. Being a medevac captain is NOT like being a coffeeshop barista. Your decisions have a lasting impact on the patients you carry and the crews you fly with. You better make the right decisions and having support was important... at least to me. I certainly was not the most skilled, experienced or talented pilot there.

I go back to the same thing I've said before in other posts. A lot of people in our society have a very thin skin when it comes to owning up to their actions. Many are quick to take offense, get into a defensive mode when challenged and often accuse people of being "aggressive" or "giving them shit", when in reality they are doing their job of... managing.

A surgeon is accountable for his patient, an engineer is accountable for his design, a police officers for the public it serves, a captain is accountable for his passengers and a barista is accountable for his coffee order. We all have to answer to someone and if we don't do the job we're hired to do properly there will be consequences, some greater than others.

Our schools need to teach that to our kids. No... I'll take that back. PARENTS need to teach that to their kids and schools need to re-enforce it that "SAFE SPACES" and "PARTICIPATION MEDALS" create adults that take offense when management "gives them shit" (aka being accountable).

By no mean should this read that you should be a "YES MAN" and if managers cross that professional line you must stand up to them. Our society has a lot of problems, especially with cost cutting measures, less and less benefits, harder working conditions, etc. Those are separate topics.

[pdw]

Looks like another lovely day on the Belcher Islands...
RWY is 09/27 with LPV minimums of 250' and 1 sm.

Was there ever another location for the runway at SK? I was there in a Twin Otter out of Churchill in March 1973. The runway was about 1200’ long at that time. I thought it might have been more of a north-south orientation but it was a long time ago.

AP

There must have been a first attempt at a runway (early aviation maybe towards the mid 1900’s on these islands) but seems bleak to find anything on it.

09/27, aleady offset from its implied east/west via magnetic rounding-up from 86/266 and then subtracting W Var of 16 (2017), is 70T/250T. Add further deviation of heading i.e like a 30 degree left crab in stronger north wind turns you so morning sun comes perfectly perpendicular through the right passenger windows (“March” equinox) as you approach. I’d imagine as you got closer depending on winds there’s potentially (visually) an element of greater Illusion of “more north-south “ possible on some trips, esp when nearing the N/S-aligned peninsula on which this Sanikiluaq runway is situated from southwest (the south shore).

[FICU]

Unless it’s changed, Sani’s runway is dished and landing westbound the runway drops away as you come over threshold and keeps dropping as you reach the touchdown zone making long landings a strong possibility unless you are very aware of it. Then the runway slopes up after the mid point from what I remember.

I believe there have been many runway excursions at that airport.

Regardless of all of that it’s ok to go-around and head to Kuujj.

[pdw]

Regardless of all of that it’s ok to go-around and head to Kuujj.

Was a similar situation there at Kuujjarapik 7am. Runways 03 or 210 (20T/200T) 30mph gusting 38mph from WNW (290T)/wunderground history Dec17. Perfectly ninety degree crosswind, …what’s the chance for that.

[FICU]

Regardless of all of that it’s ok to go-around and head to Kuujj.

Was a similar situation there at Kuujjarapik 7am. Runways 03 or 210 (20T/200T) 30mph gusting 38mph from WNW (290T)/wunderground history Dec17. Perfectly ninety degree crosswind, …what’s the chance for that.

And or La Grande or wherever their alternate might have been.

My point being that it’s ok to go-around.

[Eric Janson]

OPs Says go/ or severe repercussions implied. pic knows the trip is tricky given the wx says no , ops blows gasket. ops says wtf pilot says ok after 20 min discussion with crew and quick txt to wife . . the issue is this > tc regs say pilot has last n final say about safety in 703 ops yet. most 703 sops's undermine that final go/no go authority and throw the pic under the bus or into the snow bank if you prefer, . . been into that runway on several occasions .

I've actually been told on several occasions not to fly because of the conditions - this was at a Northern operator.

There is nothing wrong with going to have a look and if conditions are not acceptable you go to a suitable alternate. A Go-around is always a good choice imho. I've never heard a single word about any Go-around or any extra fuel I've taken.

twin otter driver with a bizzillion hours said if the wind is crazy strong , told me that if the x wind is better than 17 knots calculated 90 ' on approach. then line up on the edge of the runway upwind touch down just inside the lights upwind and allow some push towards the other side as you roll out you gain about 10 percent in length and more room . Of course easy on the brakes. appropriate beta/reverse.

This I don't agree with.

Lining up with the upwind edge is fine - but then de-crab and plan for the aircraft to be aligned on the runway centreline as you flare with a little aileron to prevent drift.

If you land on the upwind side of the runway and you lose directional control - you will weathercock and exit on the upwind side of the runway. I've never had an aircraft get pushed downwind with wheels on the runway. Landing on the centreline gives you room on both sides if anything happens.

[pdw]

Here it was responding to the idea when braking index is poor (and vis) and in the high right crosswind.

Landing on ice in a crosswind is pretty simple, you just crab the whole way down the runway. Stopping though can be a problem if you are relaying on tire traction to slow down.

Hugging the right edge “just inside the lights” (upwind side) as that suggests just gives room to move over.. As you proceed …un-crab … touch down… then experience it slippery will be the diciest part whether it keeps straight ahead on the wheels in better traction or crabs them with some side-slippage. Having that extra width to the downwind side leaves the room to go that direction while slowing … esp if swerving with more gusting.

[pelmet]

Lining up with the upwind edge is fine - but then de-crab and plan for the aircraft to be aligned on the runway centreline as you flare with a little aileron to prevent drift.

If you land on the upwind side of the runway and you lose directional control - you will weathercock and exit on the upwind side of the runway. I've never had an aircraft get pushed downwind with wheels on the runway. Landing on the centreline gives you room on both sides if anything happens.

Sounds logical to me.

[goldeneagle]

a twin otter driver with a bizzillion hours said if the wind is crazy strong , told me that if the x wind is better than 17 knots calculated 90 ' on approach. then line up on the edge of the runway upwind touch down just inside the lights upwind and allow some push towards the other side as you roll out you gain about 10 percent in length and more room . Of course easy on the brakes. appropriate beta/reverse.

I'd be real curious where that 10% in length comes from. Have to be an awfully wide runway for the diagonal to be 10% longer than the centerline.

[stef]

Or an awfully short runway.

[pdw]

a twin otter driver with a bizzillion hours said if the wind is crazy strong , told me that if the x wind is better than 17 knots calculated 90 ' on approach. then line up on the edge of the runway upwind touch down just inside the lights upwind and allow some push towards the other side as you roll out you gain about 10 percent in length and more room . Of course easy on the brakes. appropriate beta/reverse.

I'd be real curious where that 10% in length comes from. Have to be an awfully wide runway for the diagonal to be 10% longer than the centerline.

Can utilize the bet/reverse (or stronger wheel braking) without worrying that the gale force blows it off the downwind side. If it does slide downwind, then power (positive thrust) needed to crab back the other way. Add up the swerving curves (linearly) and it could be close!

[PilotDAR]

Can utilize the beta/reverse (or stronger wheel braking) without worrying that the gale force blows it off the downwind side.

I'd be worrying if I were depending upon differential power/Beta/Reverse to remain laterally on the runway! If rudder and a bit of aileron is not enough to stay on the runway, maybe a landing attempt on that runway in that wind is asking too much.....

[digits_]

a twin otter driver with a bizzillion hours said if the wind is crazy strong , told me that if the x wind is better than 17 knots calculated 90 ' on approach. then line up on the edge of the runway upwind touch down just inside the lights upwind and allow some push towards the other side as you roll out you gain about 10 percent in length and more room . Of course easy on the brakes. appropriate beta/reverse.

I'd be real curious where that 10% in length comes from. Have to be an awfully wide runway for the diagonal to be 10% longer than the centerline.

Can utilize the bet/reverse (or stronger wheel braking) without worrying that the gale force blows it off the downwind side. If it does slide downwind, then power (positive thrust) needed to crab back the other way. Add up the swerving curves (linearly) and it could be close!

On short icy runways, I like to intentionally groundloop 180 degrees at high speed, and go full power for more efficient braking.


(yes that was a joke)

[pdw]

Here is a quote from the report about the C208 pilot’s written statement, from Jan 20 1998 at Grand Island Nebraska airport accident.

(Landing emergency in freezing rain, not so much crosswind.)

CH198LA084

The pilot said that following touchdown, he had no braking capability. The pilot used full right rudder and engine power to stay on the runway.

______________________

In grass-stripping (new pilot) I got turned sideways to the left in 15 knot 70deg crosswind, but it wouldn’t go that direction, just crabbed straight. I visualize it can exit the downwind side in strong-enough if traction is weak.

Here the account is about decision to landing on a questionable JBI at windier places on regular basis. The job description offers an out to go back, yet also possible to stay home and then the WX turns out do-able (customer frustration) , where replacements for the job are always near.

Once a landing approach has turned into commitment, and by the time it’s halfway down 3807ft, is getting late. Getting the earliest runway-start (as described), SOME extra length, gives max window for reconsidering go around even after a (high angle) decrabbing touchdown.

[PilotDAR]

The pilot said that following touchdown, he had no braking capability. The pilot used full right rudder and engine power to stay on the runway.

'Sounds right to me, other than engine power is probably not needed. In crosswind testing a modified Grand Caravan, I often applied and held in full rudder to keep the plane straight on the runway. That's what the rudder is there for, and i found that in that configuration, I had reached the practical crosswind limit (19G25 at 90 degrees that day). But power was not an element in that. Forward thrust would make my rollout take longer, and I was trying to minimize my time rolling on the runway as much as I could. The use of reverse (as a single) would reduce the rudder effectiveness a little, and was not worth the runway gymnastics I might have caused myself in those circumstances. It was a very icy runway, so I knew that I had little braking and nosewheel steering effect, so I kept it to flight control use. If traction were excellent, I might rely more on braking and nosewheel steering. But, I was there to test crosswind capability anyway, so flight controls.

If differential power during roll out is in you mind for a twin, differential forward thrust should probably be an element of "it's going wrong, I'm going around". Differential reverse is very sensitive in several respects, and it's use should be based only upon the pilot's familiarity with that airplane, and within company procedures, rather than a generic home made procedure suggested on the internet.

[cdnavater]

Here is a quote from the pilot’s written statement out of a C208 report, from Jan 20 1998 a grand Island Nebraska.

(Landing emergency in freezing rain, not so much crosswind.)

CH198LA084

The pilot said that following touchdown, he had no braking capability. The pilot used full right rudder and engine power to stay on the runway.

______________________

In grass-stripping (new pilot) I got turned sideways to the left in 15 knot 70deg crosswind, but it wouldn’t go that direction, just crabbed straight. I visualize it can exit the downwind side in strong-enough if traction is weak.

Here the account is about decision to landing on a questionable JBI at windier places on regular basis. The job description offers an out to go back, yet also possible to stay home and then the WX turns out do-able (customer frustration) , where replacements for the job are always near.

Once a landing approach has turned into commitment, and by the time it’s halfway down 3807ft, is getting late. Getting the earliest runway-start (as described), SOME extra length, gives max window for reconsidering go around even after a (high angle) decrabbing touchdown.

Please stop posting when brain decoupling exist, resume posting when meds(needed for incoherent thoughts) are at optimum/appropriate level.
Although, perhaps my decoupled brain is reason/cause for unable to visualize/envision describing landing when side crabbing exist in minimal traction event. Should’ve stayed home and let replacements complete/attempt doable(do-able) route trip to question-able land stripping in inhospitable area of territory where out option exist.

[photofly]

I think you need to step back from the words a bit and let them flow more then the meaning becomes clearer.

It’s kind of Joycian.

[pelmet]

C-FSKO, a Beech King Air BE20 aircraft operated by Keewatin Air under flight KEW204, was
conducting a medevac flight from Winnipeg, MB (CYWG) to Sanikiluaq, NU (CYSK) with 2
passengers and 2 crew members on board. While conducting a missed approach on Runway 29,
the aircraft deviated from the intended path and went off the side of the runway. One of the
passengers sustained minor injuries. The aircraft sustained substantial damage.

[FICU]

A missed approach or rejected landing once the wheels were already on the ground?