Waterski went waterskiing off the runway again in YOW

[TOOL CRIB]

Landed in heavy rain. That's #3 for them up there

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc..._plane_runway_110904/20110904/?hub=OttawaHome

 

[Gulf-front]

I guess TR's cost too much!

 

[JumpersAway]

I guess TR's cost too much!

.....and so do their crews. Thanks Hulas- a$$hole.

 

[flyn96]

Landed in heavy rain. That's #3 for them up there

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc..._plane_runway_110904/20110904/?hub=OttawaHome

Maybe Canada should consider grooved and crowned runways, oh and some reflective paint would be nice for night ops too. I don't understand why the rest world hasn't adopted these policies. Numerous overruns on wet runways and nothing is done.

 

[Singlecoil]

Maybe Canada should consider grooved and crowned runways, oh and some reflective paint would be nice for night ops too. I don't understand why the rest world hasn't adopted these policies. Numerous overruns on wet runways and nothing is done.

Great points.

I love the company's press release. The company spokesperson or whomever wrote it apparently doesn't know the difference between heavy metal and the past tense of the verb lead.

 

[spudskier]

Maybe Canada should consider grooved and crowned runways, oh and some reflective paint would be nice for night ops too. I don't understand why the rest world hasn't adopted these policies. Numerous overruns on wet runways and nothing is done.

While that would be a good thing, I don't see any other airlines sailing off the end...

 

[EHE2]

While that would be a good thing, I don't see any other airlines sailing off the end...

How many emb operators fly into there with out TR's? There's food for thought

 

[Poahi]

While that would be a good thing, I don't see any other airlines sailing off the end...

Fair point, but it doesn't look like they were off the end of the runway. It's hard to tell from the pictures, but they appear to have departed the left side. Anyone know how far down 07 they were?

Looks like the runway is 8000x200

The June 2010 departure was an E145 also.

 

[nwa_contrails]

They were landing on 32. The other two excursions - one went off the end of 7 and the other off 25. This incident they went off the left side of 32 about 3/4 of the way down the runway.

From the passenger and witness reports it looks like as soon as they touched down a squall was rolling right over the airport. But who knows...

 

[Salukipilot4590]

They were landing on 32. The other two excursions - one went off the end of 7 and the other off 25. This incident they went off the left side of 32 about 3/4 of the way down the runway.

From the passenger and witness reports it looks like as soon as they touched down a squall was rolling right over the airport. But who knows...

Just looking at the METARs during that timeframe....looks rather wet and windy.

Not my cup o tea when operating an airplane into and out of Canadia.

 

[Dornier 335]

I have about 4000 hours in the EMB-145 and I never really trusted Embraer's brake-by-wire system. I am currently following last year's incident which appears to have been caused by a fault in the BCU and by a similar overrun by Flybe in STR in 2009. Both incidents appear to have been caused by the brakes not responding.

Another thing I could never figure out... There's no landing performance difference between a TR and non-TR equipped 145, yet only one TR can be deferred. Weird.

 

[glasspilot]

Another thing I could never figure out... There's no landing performance difference between a TR and non-TR equipped 145, yet only one TR can be deferred. Weird.

Do you honestly believe that there is no landing performance difference? I don't mean to sound rude, but common.

Quite possibly the dumbest comment on FI or anything else I've ever read. Weird.

 

[Sammy]

Do you honestly believe that there is no landing performance difference? I don't mean to sound rude, but common.

Quite possibly the dumbest comment on FI or anything else I've ever read. Weird.

I believe he means for actual/planned purposes only. Obviously there is a difference. My company has data for landing with and without TR's, but we have to use the no TR landing data for actual/planned performance even though I know the landing distance will be less using TR's. And yes you do mean to be rude.

 

[say again]

Do you honestly believe that there is no landing performance difference? I don't mean to sound rude, but common.

Quite possibly the dumbest comment on FI or anything else I've ever read. Weird.

The plane I fly has no landing data for TR's, yet they are installed. Of course landing distance will be shorter, but it's not in our books.

 

[Dornier 335]

I believe he means for actual/planned purposes only. Obviously there is a difference. My company has data for landing with and without TR's, but we have to use the no TR landing data for actual/planned performance even though I know the landing distance will be less using TR's. And yes you do mean to be rude.

Thanks, you beat me to it. The only planned difference between the TR vs. non-TR was the wet V1 correction. Not sure if things changed in the meantime, I haven't flown this thing for over two years now.