Citation; dry tanks 4th approach gear up

[SNAFU22]

Amazing, its 2009 and we still have s#$t like this going on.

2009 and so on...Unfortunately there will always be knuckle heads who will continue to scratch up the jet doing the same dumb sh!t, over and over and over again.

 

[getonit]

2009 and so on...Unfortunately there will always be knuckle heads who will continue to scratch up the jet doing the same dumb sh!t, over and over and over again.

I disagree with your statement, this is a whole new level of dumb sh!t. I have read a reasonable number of accident reports and this takes dumb to a different level. Not different dumb, but dumb dumb.
Just give it time someone will do something dumber.

 

[Gear Up!]

Agreed

 

[bizjet800]

I disagree with your statement, this is a whole new level of dumb sh!t. I have read a reasonable number of accident reports and this takes dumb to a different level. Not different dumb, but dumb dumb.
Just give it time someone will do something dumber.

He probably said, "I am only human Harry!" That after limo driver Lloyd drove them 1/6 the distance in the wrong direction.

 

[LJ45]

this is from the NTSB report...WOW !!!

The airplane was examined by a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector who responded to the accident site. The airplane received skin damage to the underside of the fuselage and several puncture holes into the pressure vessel. The pilot reported to the FAA inspector on scene, as well as to a National Transportation Safety Board investigator, that they had "ran out of fuel." They had attempted three instrument landing system (ILS) approaches to runway 24, however due to the fog at the airport they were unable to see the runway environment. On the third missed approach the No. 1 engine shut down and the pilots requested a vector from air traffic control (ATC) for another approach to KILM. The pilot stated to ATC that they were low on fuel. While being vectored for the fourth approach, the No. 2 engine shut down and the pilots requested an immediate turn to the airport; they were able to locate the center of the airport on their global positioning system (GPS) and "aimed the airplane at the intersection of the runways." Approximately 50 feet above ground level (agl), the pilots saw a row of lights, paralleled the lights, landed gear up on the departure end of runway 6, overran the runway, and impacted several light stands for runway 24, coming to rest 2,242 feet past the point of the initial touchdown.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Holy SHEEET!

Talk about consideration for those on the ground.

 

[CelticCitation]

Just over 1000NM, with 7 people (with crew), had to be pretty close to max range in a Cit. II. Three aproaches? they had to have the low fuel lights on for two of them.

 

[ultrarunner]

That trip is a no-brainer at normal altitudes. Had that plane been RVSM equipped, they likely could have shot 10 more approaches before they bellied it in!

 

[CelticCitation]

Was this a Bravo, or an older Cit. II? An older II would have been max range with 5 pax.

Max TO- 13,300
Empty wt ~9,000
7 people ~1300

Leaves 3000 for fuel, about 3 hours worth at 370kts. Flightaware shows the leg took almost six hours to tanks dry. Can a Bravo fly that long with that many people, assuming less fuel because of the pax, or did it depart with full fuel? Either way, it seems like more endurance than I would have guessed for any C-550.

 

[BoilerUP]

No way we could do 1000nm with 7 passengers in our C-II unless we had a monster tailwind...then again, we don't have the gross weight mod and do have a fairly heavy BOW.