Appears to be a citation down in carlsbad, ca

[SiuDude]

Appears to be N86CE.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N86CE

Not a good history for the n-number:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001206X00656&key=1

 

[banned username 2]

Winds have been a little "elevated" down there just of late. Carrying extra speed isn't necessarily unwarranted.

Well if FlightAware is accurate and he was doing 227 kts at 300 ft, then he was carry quite a bit more than a little "extra speed", he was carrying about 100 kts of extra speed... Probably WAY over tire speed as well...

 

[cheater1239]

Winds have been a little "elevated" down there just of late. Carrying extra speed isn't necessarily unwarranted.

KCRQ 241653Z AUTO 05003KT 10SM CLR 19/M07 A2997 RMK AO2 SLP147 T01941067
KCRQ 241553Z AUTO 08006KT 10SM CLR 14/M07 A2995 RMK AO2 SLP142 T01441072
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KCRQ 241453Z AUTO 06006KT 10SM CLR 14/M09 A2993 RMK AO2 SLP133 T01391094 53013 $[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KCRQ 241353Z AUTO 08005KT 10SM CLR 10/M08 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP128 T01001078 $[/FONT]

 

[flydog]

Winds have been a little "elevated" down there just of late. Carrying extra speed isn't necessarily unwarranted.

If youre landing the space shuttle its just about right

 

[caseyd]

I don't know what happened in southern California, nor at this point in time is anyone else certain. But what we can say is unstabilized approaches leading to accidents are the most avoidable link in the chain that leaves planes wrecked and people hurt or worse. They can be avoided by insuring two conditions are met. The first is to define "stabilized.". Where I work we define stabilized as on-speed, configured, in-trim, spooled with a rate of decent less than 1000 fpm at 1000 feet agl. In visual conditions the on-speed, spooled and in-trim parameters can be delayed until 500 feet agl provided the PF (pilot flying) announces the unstabilized condition thereby acknowledging it and his intent to be stabilized by 500 feet agl. Absent any one parameter a go-around occurs (or should) no questions asked. Now the "no questions asked" takes us to the second condition necessary to eliminate unstabilized approaches as a cause of accidents and that is culture. Flight operations management must state a live the axiom that a go-around is an excercise in good judgement rather than an admission of error. Period. This frees the troops out there where the rubber meets the road to use the judgement for which they are paid.

 

[LAFrequentflyer]

The first is to define "stabilized.". Where I work we define stabilized as on-speed, configured, in-trim, spooled with a rate of decent less than 1000 fpm at 1000 feet agl. In visual conditions the on-speed, spooled and in-trim parameters can be delayed until 500 feet agl provided the PF (pilot flying) announces the unstabilized condition thereby acknowledging it and his intent to be stabilized by 500 feet agl. Absent any one parameter a go-around occurs (or should) no questions asked. Now the "no questions asked" takes us to the second condition necessary to eliminate unstabilized approaches as a cause of accidents and that is culture. Flight operations management must state a live the axiom that a go-around is an excercise in good judgement rather than an admission of error. Period. This frees the troops out there where the rubber meets the road to use the judgement for which they are paid.


Sir / Ma'a,

Well said...I have often pushed a bad approach to landing thinking if i didn't it would be seen as a failure...Your words hit a bone and I know I need to change a bad attitude before it gets me hurt or killed.

Sincerely,
LA

 

[SKYW Pilot]

The winds have been coming out of the east the past day or two. CRQ is a very short runway and doesn't take kindly to being unstablized. I've been in and out of there many times. Who knows.... maybe they had some kind of mechanical failure, but chances are they landed too fast and too long with a little bit of a tailwind. Feel sorry for the poor passengers who were just along for the ride.

 

[joe_pilot]

First and foremost my thoughts go out to the families and friends of the crew and passengers.

I'm not sure how much faith I would put into flightaware's info on this flight. There was something weird going on with the data. http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N86CE/tracklog. From 0926 until 0932 there were several obvious errors. Not sure if this is 'normal' for flightaware, but I checked my flight this morning and all the data looked good. Unfortunately, with the eyewitness reports and the sad result...

Back to the main point once again, I offer my sympathies to the friends and families of N86CE.

Fly Safe.

-JP

 

[FN FAL]

CRQ is a very short runway and doesn't take kindly to being unstablized.

Unstabilized runways are the worst, they're down right jiggy.

 

[wolfpackpilot]

Carrying extra speed isn't necessarily unwarranted.

What??

If your doing over 200 kts at 300 feet you'd better be "leaving" the runway and not landing on it.