Blown tire after 80 before V1 on short runway!

[400A]

I am convinced. Abort.

This was a very good thread.

 

[TXDA2000]

Blown two (seperate occasions) on landing in a Falcon 20. Couldn't tell until turning off the runway.

Question for you Falcon, did you pull the chute??

 

[falconpilot]

Blown two (seperate occasions) on landing in a Falcon 20. Couldn't tell until turning off the runway.

Question for you Falcon, did you pull the chute??

Nope... This was a retro 20-5 with the Garrett apu mod that puts the apu exaust out of the tail cone. Like the Falcon 200. As a matter of fact now that I think about it.. I think all the retro 20s I was in had the shoot removed.

 

[svcta]

I can't say anything about aircraft with single tire applications, so there's my disclaimer, I suppose.

Otherwise, my sticking points are this: A momentary shove away from the centerline or even a nasty lurch that is recovered from is not a loss of directional control. "Very difficult" to control is not a qualifying high-speed reject item to me(in a jet).

I notice that most of the "abort" side of the conversation with experience, if memory serves, have all contended that they were on runways of considerable length; 10-11k feet. Usually if I'm launching on a runway of that size I'll mention it in a brief that will allow for sort of relaxing the high-speed reject items.

It concerns me a little to see so many of us making blanket statements that pretty much fly right in the face of almost all of our training. The major pitfall here being that we aren't always operating on runways with such liberal dimensions and to get in the mindset of sort of making up our own rules(not to be overdramatic) will one day lead to a wrinkled up airplane. I said it earlier, too, but I think it bears repeating......these reject items become almost exponentially more important as airframe weight increases.

I think it was mentioned earlier: it's the ground that's causing all that vibration and all those other problems......get away from it and give yourself a little time to think. In review: --SERIOUSLY consider your runway length(and know BFL). --Consider every takeoff as unique; just because you've seen it before doesn't make the same reaction jermaine every time. --Remember that this list of reject items finds its roots in statistics, high speed rejects are statistically ugly in the end. And how ever you react stick with your decision: if you're alive it worked, but maybe just that once, so keep an open mind.

I sum up my opinion with this: I think of flying jets as a blend of art and science. The art keeps people comfortable, the science keeps people safe. Science doesn't allow much for gut reactions.

 

[oldxfr8dog]

I can't say anything about aircraft with single tire applications, so there's my disclaimer, I suppose.

Otherwise, my sticking points are this: A momentary shove away from the centerline or even a nasty lurch that is recovered from is not a loss of directional control. "Very difficult" to control is not a qualifying high-speed reject item to me(in a jet).

I notice that most of the "abort" side of the conversation with experience, if memory serves, have all contended that they were on runways of considerable length; 10-11k feet. Usually if I'm launching on a runway of that size I'll mention it in a brief that will allow for sort of relaxing the high-speed reject items.

It concerns me a little to see so many of us making blanket statements that pretty much fly right in the face of almost all of our training. The major pitfall here being that we aren't always operating on runways with such liberal dimensions and to get in the mindset of sort of making up our own rules(not to be overdramatic) will one day lead to a wrinkled up airplane. I said it earlier, too, but I think it bears repeating......these reject items become almost exponentially more important as airframe weight increases.

I think it was mentioned earlier: it's the ground that's causing all that vibration and all those other problems......get away from it and give yourself a little time to think. In review: --SERIOUSLY consider your runway length(and know BFL). --Consider every takeoff as unique; just because you've seen it before doesn't make the same reaction jermaine every time. --Remember that this list of reject items finds its roots in statistics, high speed rejects are statistically ugly in the end. And how ever you react stick with your decision: if you're alive it worked, but maybe just that once, so keep an open mind.

I sum up my opinion with this: I think of flying jets as a blend of art and science. The art keeps people comfortable, the science keeps people safe. Science doesn't allow much for gut reactions.

Very nicely stated.

 

[AngelKing]

Not much you can do when the nose slams back down on the runway.


AK

 

[greygoose]

Sorry for bringing this thread up so late. As a FSDO once told me on another subject, but related to this topic. Good luck telling a NTSB judge that you decided to take it airborne when you briefed loss of directional control on your aborted items.
Another point, you will most likely blow your other main when you return to land.

 

[Caveman]

Disclaimer: I'm an airline guy and have almost no experience in a single main wheel light jet.

At the airlines I've worked for the magic number for a highspeed RTO is 100 kts not 80, but the premise is the same. After 100 kts we're going unless there is a catastrophic control failure. The problem is what is catastrophic? I can tell you for certain if I did an RTO after 100 for a blown tire I'd have some explaining to do. We brief to the contrary so I had better have a compelling reason for stopping. Veering away from centerline would probably not be a sufficient reason unless I had a complete loss of directional control. Difficult control is still control. As bad as the situation may have felt immediately after the blown tire it's usually best to get airborne, evaluate and then find a runway and airport that is best suited for me to get back safely.

I'm not second guessing the above guys that have had to live this scenario. They made it work and are still able to talk about it. However, statistically they are in the minority. How many dead guys that aborted would do it the same way again? We brief for a reason. If we're going to ignore the plan, why bother?

My other concern is that even if the landing is ugly and you still leave the runway I'd rather have the crash crew staged and ready to roll than having to wait for the tower to call them. They could be with you in seconds rather than minutes.

Congrats to the guys that made it work and thanks for sharing your experience with us. It is extremely valuable information.

 

[ruhroa]

my .02 cents................ Whatever you do .......go / no go make sure you are both on the same sheet of music............. accelaration is not stopping and chewing up runway is not put on hold while this is discussed........... make the decision, brief the decision and for pete's sake stay with the decision