Hobby Crash?

[100-1/2]

Anything yet?

FNC says Cessna. Looks like jet fueled fire and scour marks on a southerly heading west of 12R and intersecting rwy. Short impact travel indicates slow speed or high angle of descent. Doesn't appear to align with any runway and unless pax survived impact, all seemed to have perrished.

 

[2000flyer]

Anything yet?

FNC says Cessna. Looks like jet fueled fire and scour marks on a southerly heading west of 12R and intersecting rwy. Short impact travel indicates slow speed or high angle of descent. Doesn't appear to align with any runway and unless pax survived impact, all seemed to have perrished.

NBAA reported it's a Citation III. No other details. Two onboard, both fatal.

 

[2000flyer]

Update

Houston Chronicle reporting a Citation 500...


By PAIGE HEWITT
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Two people died this morning around 10 a.m. when their twin engine plane, a Cessna Citation 500, crashed at Hobby Airport, officials said.

The plane had been waiting on the runway to take off from runway 22 at Hobby to Corpus Christi when an incoming Southwest 737 jet issued an alert because of engine trouble, according to Tommy Dowdy, district chief for the Houston Fire Department.

*****Air traffic controllers told the Cessna to take off quickly. Moments after take-off, however, the pilot of the business jet radioed the tower for permission to land immediately. The plane, however, plunged nose first, tumbled over and skidded nearly 300 feet on the runway, Dowdy said.

The Southwest flight was diverted to Bush Intercontinental Airport, where it landed safely.



Hobby resumed flights at 11 a.m.

 

[HawkerF/O]

NBAA Statement Concerning Cessna Crash at HOU TodayNovember 5, 2005

NBAA is monitoring developments related to the crash of a Cessna Citation III at Houston Hobby Airport this morning. According to local news reports, the accident happened shortly before 10AM local time; Houston Fire Department officials report that bothpeople aboard are dead. The aircraft does not belong to an NBAA MemberCompany.News reports state that the accident occurred after the Citation landedand is contained on the airport. The airport was closed for about anhour following the crash. NBAA will continue to follow developments concerning this accident.Members with questions about today's events are invited to contactNBAA's offices at 202.783.9000.

 

[HawkerF/O]

*****Air traffic controllers told the Cessna to take off quickly. Moments after take-off, however, the pilot of the business jet radioed the tower for permission to land immediately. The plane, however, plunged nose first, tumbled over and skidded nearly 300 feet on the runway, Dowdy said.

That is exactly the reason I don't do things like that. Who knows what caused this crash, but you can ALWAYS deline a controller's instructions with "unable". The worst is when you are on the landing rollout and the tower is barking runway exit instructions. Look Buddy, I am working. As a professional, I am not going to listen to your instructions when I am at 100KIAS trying to slow down and stop and I have the runway. Just not gonna do it. I am concentrating on getting the 10M jet stopped safely on a runway I have YOUR permission to be using. If you weren't ready for me you should not have cleared me to land. Furthermore, I am not going to wear out my boss' brakes trying to accomadate you lack of planning. I'll exit at my discretion and if you don't like it, you are welcome to call me and we'll discuss it.

 

[LJDRVR]

Citation II. Maintainance test flight. Owner/Physician PIC, with the mechanic along to observe.

Rest in Peace.

LJDRVR

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Citation II. Maintainance test flight. Owner/Physician PIC, with the mechanic along to observe.

Rest in Peace.

LJDRVR

lovely.

 

[LJDRVR]

If you weren't ready for me you should not have cleared me to land. Furthermore, I am not going to wear out my boss' brakes trying to accomadate you lack of planning. I'll exit at my discretion and if you don't like it, you are welcome to call me and we'll discuss it.

I don't know you sir, so I'll phrase my response carefully to avoid you focusing on the tone of my message in lieu of the issue.

You seem to be asserting your PIC authority with a healthy dose of chest-thumping, all the while ignoring the physics and reality of what's really occuring. As a rule, controllers will not "bother" you during the initial part of your touchdown and rollout without a really good safety of flight reason to do so.

"Hawker 01B, plan minimum time on the runway, landing traffic behind you."

After hearing this you are going to ignore the controller? (It's not your runway as long as you need it.)

You would rather have the jet behind you execute a go-around, flying directly over you in the proccess, than get on your brakes (Your boss isn't PIC) and make the next high speed? (With the traffic safely behind you.)

So the guy behind you has to perform a low-altitude go-round, mangling their peep's connections and screwing up the crew's schedule all because your wealthy boss's budget doesn't include an extra penny for brake usage above and beyond a liesurely roll to the end and/or because you lack the will or facilities to multi-task during your landing rollout?

Doesn't sound remotely professional to me. I'm not being sarcastic when I ask you: are you really serious about this? I certainly hope not.

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

I don't know you sir, so I'll phrase my response carefully to avoid you focusing on the tone of my message in lieu of the issue.

You seem to be asserting your PIC authority with a healthy dose of chest-thumping, all the while ignoring the physics and reality of what's really occuring. As a rule, controllers will not "bother" you during the initial part of your touchdown and rollout without a really good safety of flight reason to do so.

"Hawker 01B, plan minimum time on the runway, landing traffic behind you."

After hearing this you are going to ignore the controller? (It's not your runway as long as you need it.)

You would rather have the jet behind you execute a go-around, flying directly over you in the proccess, than get on your brakes (Your boss isn't PIC) and make the next high speed? (With the traffic safely behind you.)

So the guy behind you has to perform a low-altitude go-round, mangling their peep's connections and screwing up the crew's schedule all because your wealthy boss's budget doesn't include an extra penny for brake usage above and beyond a liesurely roll to the end and/or because you lack the will or facilities to multi-task during your landing rollout?

Doesn't sound remotely professional to me. I'm not being sarcastic when I ask you: are you really serious about this? I certainly hope not.

I agree. Controllers have a tough job. They really do their best and try to accommodate thousands of different airplanes being flown by pilots who all have their own technique. If they never wanted to have to ask (yes, ask) a pilot to help them out by expediting a takeoff or landing roll, they could just add 5 minutes to each departure / arrival. Imagine what kind of response THAT would get.

I don't know why anyone who has the skills and the equipment would not want to stand on the brakes a little harder to make things flow a little better. Can you spell 'self righteous'? I am confident that something other than an expedited takeoff happened to the poor soles in that Citation. Let's not blame the controller. We don't know the facts.

Ace

 

[Oakum_Boy]

You would rather have the jet behind you execute a go-around, flying directly over you in the proccess, than get on your brakes (Your boss isn't PIC) and make the next high speed? (With the traffic safely behind you.)

So the guy behind you has to perform a low-altitude go-round, mangling their peep's connections and screwing up the crew's schedule all because your wealthy boss's budget doesn't include an extra penny for brake usage above and beyond a liesurely roll to the end and/or because you lack the will or facilities to multi-task during your landing rollout?

Doesn't sound remotely professional to me. I'm not being sarcastic when I ask you: are you really serious about this? I certainly hope not.

I don't think the argument bodes well as 'corporate vs. airlines'. In the real world, at busy airports, with the congestion levels as they are, it is only a matter of time before those factors catch up with an airplane or two.

Crew schedules? Passenger connections? Who cares. If I go-around and time-out as a result, so what. Do what you're comfortable with, and if the controllers aren't happy with it, then too bad. No sense in rushing a takeoff because the tower is freaking out over a situation that THEY put everyone in. Right?