Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
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!goldeneagle wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 5:09 pmI'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.oldncold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 11:33 pm 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.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
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.....Can utilize the beta/reverse (or stronger wheel braking) without worrying that the gale force blows it off the downwind side.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
On short icy runways, I like to intentionally groundloop 180 degrees at high speed, and go full power for more efficient braking.pdw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 5:21 amCan 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!goldeneagle wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 5:09 pmI'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.oldncold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 11:33 pm 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.
(yes that was a joke)
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
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
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.
(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.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
'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.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.
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.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
Please stop posting when brain decoupling exist, resume posting when meds(needed for incoherent thoughts) are at optimum/appropriate level.pdw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:24 am 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.
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.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
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.
It’s kind of Joycian.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
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.
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.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
A missed approach or rejected landing once the wheels were already on the ground?
-
- Rank 8
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:41 pm
- Location: Wet Coast.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
It's to the point anything it writes is beyond incoherent. I just added that person to my foes list, that way none of the drivel they write comes into view. Like having a 12 yr old interjecting into a conversation trying to fit in with a bunch of adults having a mature discussion.cdnavater wrote: ↑Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:51 am 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.
How can you tell which one is the pilot when you walk into a bar?....Don't worry he will come up and tell you.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
Ok wait a sec (just needed a coffee)Or an awful short one.
from page one:
The “ten percent” more runway. from an earlier post, is also from the zig-zagging resulting a number of times along a full length. Any left and right oscillations adds ‘hypoteneuse x 2’ a few times in utilizing that extra space on upwind side right from a threshold.
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
If you have enough friction left to be able to turn, that means you weren't using full braking in the first place. Assuming idle power or max reverse, you can only turn more if you brake less. I would think that max braking would give you a bigger chance to come to a stop within the runway edge than suboptimal braking with a marginal longer ground path.pdw wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 12:03 pm
The “ten percent” more runway. from an earlier post, is also from the zig-zagging resulting a number of times along a full length. Any left and right oscillations adds ‘hypoteneuse x 2’ a few times in utilizing that extra space on upwind side right from a threshold.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 700
- Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2021 9:12 am
Re: Keewatin overrun in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut
Are fresh cut fries made from poe-tae-toe or pah-tae-toe?