Air Canada Accident in YHZ

[FL020]

With all the millions in infrastructure spending, there should be an ILS on each runway at every major airport in Canada!!! Look at bloody Ottawa!! Nations Capital, and the most used runway (25) has no precision approach!

[boxcut]

So I heard that runway 32 was not being maintained at the time of the incident/accident, only rwy 05 was open. The other runway was covered in snow drifts. Runway 05 apparently had a JBI of .35 when AC landed. With winds at 340 gusting to 25, that would be 20 knots of crosswind on 05.

Can any pilot tell me if the runway was within limits with that JBI and crosswind?

Seeing that the aircraft took out lights on the approach, I don't think any of the above is a contributing factor to the accident, clearly something else happened (wind shear and loss of lift maybe?) but the crosswind seems really strong for such a slick runway.

[lilfssister]

damage on approach
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CBSME0tW4AARmbr.jpg

[55+]

Any thoughts on why there is no ils to 05? I can't imagine it's a terrain issue. I'm guessing a cost issue more than anything else. With minimums that get you to 277 they probably didn't see a need given the percent of time that weather would demand it. I also feel like airports are holding back upgrading approaches in favour of much cheaper LPVs. Of course any approach with vertical guidance greatly reduces the risk of CFIT on approach (assuming this was the case). I don't fly an Airbus. Does anyone know if the 320 is even capable of LPV? May sound like a silly question but there are a number of large AC not capable.

As far as I know years back studies were conducted for an G/P with the associated LOC for RWY 05 at Halifax and there were some terrain issues in regard to mineral deposits or something of that nature that concerns were warranted, also G/P placement raised some issues as well. Fast forward to the current with a published RNAV(GNSS) with a WAAS LPV component to 720 DA(257ft HAT), those issues may have been mitigated in the eyes of service provision. If WAAS LPV meets operation requirements to the Canadian major airlines, not for me to comment.

[Inverted2]

Do the 320's have GPS? I heard some don't but I can't see how this is true. A GPS/VNAV approach would be better than a step down Localizer. No?

[FICU]

Seeing that the aircraft took out lights on the approach, I don't think any of the above is a contributing factor to the accident, clearly something else happened (wind shear and loss of lift maybe?) but the crosswind seems really strong for such a slick runway.

RFI had nothing to do with this.

If a plane lands short of the runway it's normally due to performance decreasing windshear, CFIT(eyes outside and not on instruments and or miss handling automation/hand flying as in the Korean SFO crash), critical mechanical failure, or, as in the 777 Heathrow crash years ago, fuel starvation.

It will be interesting to see the ultimate cause of this accident and it shouldn't take long once crew are interviewed and CVR/FDR are analyzed.

[magic wand]

It will be interesting to see the ultimate cause of this accident and it shouldn't take long once crew are interviewed and CVR/FDR are analyzed.

I guess if you call 2 years not taking long. The Germans crash an aircraft and within 48 hours we have a a cause. This will take years of planning to cover it all up!

[FICU]

I guess if you call 2 years not taking long. The Germans crash an aircraft and within 48 hours we have a a cause. This will take years of planning to cover it all up!

Pressure will be on the TSB to get information out ASAP after the quick reaction of their European counterparts with the Germanwings accident. The Media will be all over them!

[floydfrank]

"...250 meters short of the runway, climbed the embankment up to the runway level and came to a stop past the threshold of the runway near taxiway B about 300 meters down the runway."

....got stopped pretty short though.

Good short field technique

[Troubleshot]

know the area well here is a google street view of the end of 05

Capture.JPG (132.98 KiB) Viewed 3671 times

[GyvAir]

Air Canada flight AC624 was a hard landing that became a crash, he said.

Well, thank you. That's much clearer!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot ... -1.3014165

[xsbank]

You guys are all forgetting "any landing you can walk away from is a good landing."

[Flying Nutcracker]

And a perfect landing is when you can actually use the plane again

[pelmet]

You guys are all forgetting "any landing you can walk away from is a good landing."

Always did think that this was the stupidest saying in aviation.

[GyvAir]

If Stephen Colbert's people are reading CBC's coverage of this, the bit is being written as we speak.

[GyvAir]

TSB update starting now:

http://www.cbc.ca/i/caffeine/syndicate/ ... 2586927968

(Yes.. a CBC feed)

[thirdtimecharm]

On this episode of "Ice Pilots".... Mikey and . drag a heavily damaged Airbus off the runway.

[HiFlyChick]

Just taxied by the scene a few hours ago - what a mess! There are pieces of the aircraft scattered along the runway and all I can do is echo the sentiment that it is a miracle that no one was killed.

Regarding previous comments - the CRFI had no bearing (they hit well before the runway), and I don't think the lack of an ILS should have played a part. On the LPV, the actions at DH are the same as for an ILS - you either see the lights and land, or you don't and overshoot. Having an LPV and not an ILS means that you may not get in when the ceiling is very low, but following a glideslope is following a glideslope, regardless of how it is generated.

They must have just grazed the top of the berm that lies prior to the threshold, because all I could think was that they could very well have somersaulted if they'd struck it much lower down.

I also can't believe AC was calling this a hard landing... A hard landing generally at least starts on the runway - I agree with previous posters that said this is CFIT.

It will be interesting to hear what the state of their equipment was - I kind of hope they find a flaw in the aircraft nav sys so it won't be the pilots' fault - poor guys...

[Chuck Ellsworth]

It will be interesting to hear what the state of their equipment was - I kind of hope they find a flaw in the aircraft nav sys so it won't be the pilots' fault - poor guys...

This would be the best outcome for everyone.

[Inverted2]

Makes you think of all the other airports we fly into that don't have 24 hr crash/fire/rescue. This could have ended much worse than it did and thankfully there were emergency vehicles if needed.

[CID]

I don't know why people are crapping on Air Canada representatives. They weren't there so how (and why) would they speculate on exactly what happened? It isn't a "cover up". The investigation will bring the answers. One can say it's "obvious" what happened but how often are we wrong about this stuff?

With respect to adding ILS approaches, how would that help? If the weather is below minimums, go around and start thinking about the alternate. Don't be a hero. Besides, having an ILS didn't help First Air in Resolute.

I am certainly relieved that nobody was seriously hurt and that I was not on that flight. I like the underwear I'm wearing and I would have probably ruined them.

Let's hope the pilots didn't do something really dumb. Pilots are losing a lot of credibility lately. It could hurt the industry.

[pianokeys]

Just watched some of the TSBs conference in YHZ. All they said was the aircraft severed the power lines, touched down 1100 feet before the threshold, struck the runway lights and localizer equipment, main gear detached, and it skid 1000 feet on the runway, number one engine detached.

One news reporter asked about the weather since AC has written off the weather as "safe", the TSB says it has not ruled out weather yet. Interesting how AC is already ruling things out when the TSB themselves have said they haven't even begun to compile the information, they're just collecting right now.

[HiFlyChick]

It is indeed good that there were emergency vehicles if needed, Inverted2, but I'm trying to figure out why they left all of those poor pax standing around in the snow and sub-zero temps for over an hour. Even if they didn't have the busses right away, they should have at least tried to get a start with helping people. Even if they had to call up every FBO on the field and get them to drive their courtesy vans to bravo taxiway and shuttle them in groups of 8-10 back to a nearby hangar - anywhere but outside!

[Rookie50]

I don't know why people are crapping on Air Canada representatives. They weren't there so how (and why) would they speculate on exactly what happened? It isn't a "cover up". The investigation will bring the answers. One can say it's "obvious" what happened but how often are we wrong about this stuff?

With respect to adding ILS approaches, how would that help? If the weather is below minimums, go around and start thinking about the alternate. Don't be a hero. Besides, having an ILS didn't help First Air in Resolute.

I am certainly relieved that nobody was seriously hurt and that I was not on that flight. I like the underwear I'm wearing and I would have probably ruined them.

Let's hope the pilots didn't do something really dumb. Pilots are losing a lot of credibility lately. It could hurt the industry.

My definition of a "hard landing" is one taxis normally to the gate, disembarks everyone, and then tows the plan to a hangar and inspects for damage.

Calling a crash that likely came within 10 or 20 vertical feet of multiple fatalities a hard landing is a joke. This was a crash.

[Inverted2]

I think it was initially called a hard landing until the sun rose and they realized the extent of the damage. That A/C is a write off.