LR60 Crash KCAE: Another Angle

[filejw]

As you mention airlines..it would be pretty much standard to advise the tower you are aborting. This is the job of the PM..

 

[starcheckdriver]

As you mention airlines..it would be pretty much standard to advise the tower you are aborting. This is the job of the PM..

It is the job of the PM to advise of the abort ONLY when the situation is under control, i.e. no more speed callouts or runway remaining callouts are necessary. I've aborted a couple of times and did not advise tower until we began the turn off the runway. It goes back to the old adage of aviate, navigate, communicate. That applies to two-pilot crews as well.

 

[NYG-Flyer]

Instead of focusing on the problem at hand, and a big problem it was, one of the pilots is jaw-jacking on the radio? What do you think the pilot telling the tower what was clear and obvious ultimately costs him/her? I just don't agree with the line of thought where someone gets on the radio where, quite frankly, their help and attention is needed elsewhere. In the sim, during a V1 cut, when the plane is still on the runway looking for Vr, are you on the radio before you get airborne?

I landed an 800XP in MSP a few winters ago on a contaminated runway with a X-Wind, and as soon as I got the nose wheel on, the plane immediately cocked into the wind, but it was tracking right down the centerline; essentially, the airplane was 10 or 20 degrees sideways, but it was stable and tracking straight. Non-Event.

I wrongly assumed the F/O, as a professional courtesy, would give me airspeed call outs as we slowed while I focused on the outside and played the rudder pedals like a Mozart crescendo. Stupid Me; she immediately jumps on the radio telling the tower we were losing control of the aircraft and to standby for her call to roll the equipment. WTF? Nit-wit, shut it and get over here and get back to work is what I wanted to tell her. She had no business on the radio at that point when her skill and expertise was more benificial to the situation at hand instead of talking on the radio. I feel the same way about the CAE accident crew. Do you see where I am coming from?

OK as I've stated before, what appears to have happened here happened to me... So lets take the logic a step further. We are not talking about a V1 cut.. definitely the Aviate, navigate, Communicate come into play with the V1 Cut.. But you hear and feel the tire blow and you begin the abort process.. Your PM gives out an airspeed call and position relative to centerline while Monitoring, he/She simply pushes the PTT and announces we have a Tire blowout.. No one said, He/She was waiting to have a conversation. Logic has a place in aviaiton sometimes.. If the PM is monitoring He/She can actually do two things at once. If your PM announces your losing control of the airplane then you and the PM may need to work on CRM. As I understand this situation, the PM simply stated to the tower we have a blown tire and are aborting TO.

 

[starcheckdriver]

OK as I've stated before, what appears to have happened here happened to me... So lets take the logic a step further. We are not talking about a V1 cut.. definitely the Aviate, navigate, Communicate come into play with the V1 Cut.. But you hear and feel the tire blow and you begin the abort process.. Your PM gives out an airspeed call and position relative to centerline while Monitoring, he/She simply pushes the PTT and announces we have a Tire blowout.. No one said, He/She was waiting to have a conversation. Logic has a place in aviaiton sometimes.. If the PM is monitoring He/She can actually do two things at once. If your PM announces your losing control of the airplane then you and the PM may need to work on CRM. As I understand this situation, the PM simply stated to the tower we have a blown tire and are aborting TO.

You may be correct in your assumption about what the PM stated to the tower. At this point it is all speculation and I am not hear to second guess the crew and the decisions they made. I hope to never face what they did on that fateful day.

I stand by my personal procedure of not communicating until the situation is under control and the PF directs me to talk to ATC. The reason for this is because if I take the 1-2 seconds to transmit to ATC, it may be the same 1-2 seconds the PF tells me something critical and I miss what he/she said. In a takeoff situation or some other critical situation, that 1-2 seconds may be the difference between flying, stopping, or crashing.

All that said, I still don't think aborting for a blown tire is a good decision, especially in a Lear 60. One blown tire on any airplane already reduces brake effectivness. Furthermore, in the 60 a blown tire followed by an abort will most likely yield more blown tires resulting in less braking ability. As stated before, this is due to the anti-skid system on the aircraft. I would much rather be in the air with a blown tire on fire knowing I can make a quick return to the airport than risk aborting and not stopping on the available runway.

 

[GCD]

I don't meant to dishonor or disrespect the pilots in this case.

However, why would one attempt to abort a takeoff in the high-speed regime for a blown tire?

There is not the same amount a rubber on the runway as with all tires and not near enough braking friction to stop before the end of the runway, even below V1. This has been proven time, after time in successful takeoffs and unsuccessful aborts.

There are a couple of good articles on this subject. We have been training to not abort for blown tires in the high-speed regime for well over a decade.

 

[Daytonaflyer]

I think they were airborne, I don't see how they could have kept it that straight with TWO blown tires and metal grinding into the ground making sparks. If there was no radio call, the crew may have started an abort, the other tire then blew and the tower probably saw the sparks, then the crew changed their mind to go after they lost the other tire and realized they knew they could not stop by the end. The plane would limp into the air, then settle back down, especially that damn heavy.

Speculation of course.....but I want to see the runway after the spraks started and the path through the grass to the resting position. I saw nothing on that video.

This is actually a common misconception. When metal contacts the runway at high speed (like with a blown tire or a single main gear failure) there is actually less friction then when a tire contacts the runway. Metal is not a good conductor of friction. This loss in friction causes the object to continue tracking in the direction that it is going, not jerk to one side like most think would happen.
This is often seen in videos where an airplane lands with one main gear up and it is forced to skid along on the engine cowl. The airplane generally continues a straight forward track and is somewhat controllable.
Only when the airplane slows down does the friction of the metal surface contact increase and overcome that of the tire, which often causes it to turn at low speed.
I think it would have to be something more than just a blown tire to cause it to slide off the runway. Exceeding the VMCg limitation comes to mind.

Here is a video of a 737 landing with a collapsed main gear. You can see it continues to track forward in a straight line until at slow speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnGgMSCpu2A

 

[DAS at 10/250]

You may be correct in your assumption about what the PM stated to the tower. At this point it is all speculation and I am not hear to second guess the crew and the decisions they made. I hope to never face what they did on that fateful day.

I stand by my personal procedure of not communicating until the situation is under control and the PF directs me to talk to ATC. The reason for this is because if I take the 1-2 seconds to transmit to ATC, it may be the same 1-2 seconds the PF tells me something critical and I miss what he/she said. In a takeoff situation or some other critical situation, that 1-2 seconds may be the difference between flying, stopping, or crashing.

All that said, I still don't think aborting for a blown tire is a good decision, especially in a Lear 60. One blown tire on any airplane already reduces brake effectivness. Furthermore, in the 60 a blown tire followed by an abort will most likely yield more blown tires resulting in less braking ability. As stated before, this is due to the anti-skid system on the aircraft. I would much rather be in the air with a blown tire on fire knowing I can make a quick return to the airport than risk aborting and not stopping on the available runway.

Starcheck:

I agree with you 110%. Talking on the radio to someone who can't do a dang thing about the aircraft that my 6 is strapped into is the least of my concerns.

 

[Fly91]

This is actually a common misconception. When metal contacts the runway at high speed (like with a blown tire or a single main gear failure) there is actually less friction then when a tire contacts the runway. Metal is not a good conductor of friction. This loss in friction causes the object to continue tracking in the direction that it is going, not jerk to one side like most think would happen.
This is often seen in videos where an airplane lands with one main gear up and it is forced to skid along on the engine cowl. The airplane generally continues a straight forward track and is somewhat controllable.
Only when the airplane slows down does the friction of the metal surface contact increase and overcome that of the tire, which often causes it to turn at low speed.
I think it would have to be something more than just a blown tire to cause it to slide off the runway. Exceeding the VMCg limitation comes to mind.

Here is a video of a 737 landing with a collapsed main gear. You can see it continues to track forward in a straight line until at slow speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnGgMSCpu2A

But if both RIGHT main gear tires are lost, and the brakes are just depressed somewhat strong and not full force.....That plane is going to immediately pull like a freight train towards the LEFT because of the full traction the left tires are getting with the pavement. Also, at 80 kts, there's still a ton of weight bearing down on the main gear in the LR 60 at that heavy take-off weight. The sparks tell me that there was still alot of weight on them. I could see if they were closer to V1 and alot more weight was taken off the main gear from increasing lift, that metal touching the pavement would not have much effect, including the increased rudder effectiveness from that increased speed helping out.

But back to the point of my post, which has nothing to do with a debate about friction of metal on pavement.....there is no path that I can see from the end of the runway to where the plane stopped. And there are antennas all the way to that road that are untouched.

It looks like the plane was airborne before impact.

I think the abort was attempted very briefly, the pilot could not keep it on the runway from the braking required and the rudder didn't have enough authority to help enough, coupled with the end of the runway coming. Then the pilot decided to take-off, and well, that didn't work either.

Until a clear path is shown, thats what I think happened.

 

[LJPilot]

I wouldn't call during an abort, but I'll defend it. He may of wanted to get tower's attention to the problem at hand. Tower can do something about it. They can get rescue vehicles heading their way. Remember in the Lexington Comair crash that the tower did not see what happened. In the midst of doing everything possible, he took 2 seconds to alert tower.

 

[Fly91]

I wouldn't call during an abort, but I'll defend it. He may of wanted to get tower's attention to the problem at hand. Tower can do something about it. They can get rescue vehicles heading their way. Remember in the Lexington Comair crash that the tower did not see what happened. In the midst of doing everything possible, he took 2 seconds to alert tower.

This whole debate on whether to call or not is really just dependant on about a million things. Making the call certainly has its place and should be briefed depending on the situation at the time of take-off. If you're told to make an immediate departure because you have another jet on short final and the abort is at slow speed, make the call, give everyone involved a heads up. If you're aborting because you have smoke pouring into the cockpit at 80 kts, you better get the trucks rolling and let the PF stop the plane. Not making that call immediately could mean your life. Only one pilot can do the AVIATING and NAVIGATING, an abort is a visual event. So why not COMMUNICATE while the PNF is doing nothing....but still it depends on whats going on. I'm sure if the plane is agressively going off the runway at 80 kts, neither pilots' brain is going to think about a radio call.

Crews choice...there is no right and wrong.