MESA Rwy Excursion??

[CA1900]

Indeed, we don't know the facts, so the speculation is meaningless.

To the suggestion that a deferred nosewheel steering system is "always an incident waiting to happen," you might be interested to know that the 1900s with the power steering system are always landed in free-caster mode (and taken off that way, for that matter). It isn't until we're down to slow taxi speed that the steering system is engaged at all; until then, it's rudder and brakes.

 

[chperplt]

you might be interested to know that the 1900s with the power steering system are always landed in free-caster mode

Interesting..... It's still not the safest way to operate in "my" opinion.

 

[RSRVWINDSURFR]

Back when the Beech was in it's final days at COEX, we had a bad problem with one of the props going into ground fine (beta) when the power was pulled to idle in the flair. Any COEX beech guys can back me up on this: It was scary as Sh!+!
We would be a couple of feet off the ground, and all of the sudden, the plane would snap into about 20-30 degrees of yaw! Nothing like looking down the runway, and all of the sudden looking at the terminal! MX could never figure out the problem, and all the beeches were going to be at Gulfstream within a month or two, so they never tried hard to fix it. I'm amazed nobody took one off the runway back then......

 

[Dave Benjamin]

Indeed, we don't know the facts, so the speculation is meaningless.

To the suggestion that a deferred nosewheel steering system is "always an incident waiting to happen," you might be interested to know that the 1900s with the power steering system are always landed in free-caster mode (and taken off that way, for that matter). It isn't until we're down to slow taxi speed that the steering system is engaged at all; until then, it's rudder and brakes.

One advantage of the NWS being disabled until slow speed is better hardover protection. I've experienced unwanted NWS deflection above 80 knots and it gets your attention.

 

[chperplt]

we had a bad problem with one of the props going into ground fine (beta) when the power was pulled to idle in the flair

We had this problem all the time at Colon Air... I always attributed it to the sh!ty maintenance they did...

 

[blott]

Speaking of fuel controllers freaking out. Back in the day, in a SAAB, we lost torque for about 20 sec. on the #1 engine after rotation at 500'. CA pulled power to idle and turned back to the runway. On down wind we decided to shut it down or not-it seemed like it was ok now. It was summer, hot outside, and we had a full boat. We decided to leave it running just in case we needed it. Bad Idea. Memory idem for erradic(sp?) engine was something like push props to the stops-which disabled the torque motor.(tm added fuel in certain conditions). But I didn't pull the check list as we were on final about this time. We landed and going down the runway, #1 goes to 110%. exit stage right. So CA is full left on rudder, brake, and tiller. #1 goes back to idle, plane now hangs a hard left heading for the grass on the other side...#1 back to 110%.. This happens four times before I can kill #1. We taxi to gate, call mx. Mx comes out. we fire up #1 run it up a few times, no problem. Mx says nothing is wrong and ops checks good... we decide we aren't taking pax untill we test fly this thing. three times around the pattern-no problems. We load the pax back up. They don't look very happy at this point. On downwind I had made a PA to the back saying we had the "check engine light on", it was "nothing to worry about", and we were landing just in case. So they know I'm full of BS. Now I tell them the mx had fixed our engine and we were good to go. Meanwhile the pax had all been looking out the window of the terminal and had seen that the mx guy had never even been near the engine.... Flew the thing for three more leggs that day, no problems.


B

 

[SEFlyer]

No Air Midwest plane is equipped with NWS.

 

[flythere]

One scenario I've encountered on the mighty 1900 was landing in a good stiff crosswind, If I can remember right the ground idle solenoid was on the left squat switch. More than once I would plant the upwind gear firmly on the runway, only to have the the props go to ground fine, while the other two wheels were still in the air. It seemed to only be a problem when one governor was faster than the other!!! Then the plane would yaw severely to one side, it cought me by surprise a couple of times!!

I heard from a source that was there shortly after the Mesa excursion, apperently the crew missed the runway and landed in the infield, taking out some runway lights and doing some superficial damage to the airplane!!

 

[chperplt]

If I can remember right the ground idle solenoid was on the left squat switch

It's been a year, but I think it was on the right side.

 

[flythere]

It's been a year, but I think it was on the right side.

It's been over 3 years for me, honestly I can't remember, I just remember that being one of those thing's that would for sure get your attention!!!

 

[jetdriven]

the squat switch that controls the low pitch solenoid is on the right main gear. therefore, if landing in a right crosswind as soon as you touch down the props reset to the ground low pitch stop. With one wheel on the ground.
Once I had a 1900 that the left prop went into the ground low pitch stop while the left one did not. Result was a full rudder and almost full brake correction to the right to control the swerve.

 

[Best on a Camel]

I'm surprised Mesa allows FO's to land in that kind of weather.

 

[ArcticFlier]

Indeed, we don't know the facts, so the speculation is meaningless.

To the suggestion that a deferred nosewheel steering system is "always an incident waiting to happen," you might be interested to know that the 1900s with the power steering system are always landed in free-caster mode (and taken off that way, for that matter). It isn't until we're down to slow taxi speed that the steering system is engaged at all; until then, it's rudder and brakes.

We did the same thing in the mighty Metro. 5 1/2 years flying that thing and not once did I ever have a controllability issue. Line up on the runway NWS off for takeoff. NWS on after slowing to taxi speed on landing roll. Simple.


AF

 

[chperplt]

We did the same thing in the mighty Metro. 5 1/2 years flying that thing and not once did I ever have a controllability issue. Line up on the runway NWS off for takeoff. NWS on after slowing to taxi speed on landing roll. Simple.

I don't know the mechanics of the system, but I don't imagine simply turning off the system is the same as having the rods physically disconnected in the nose.

I imagine that even with the NWS system turned off, you still had the ability to control the nose wheel in some limited capacity. On the 1900 with the NWS deferred, you have no such capability.

 

[MECH]

The EMB-145 has a problem with it's nose wheel steering. It will fail on touch down. I had this happen to me. The a/c will go in the direction that the nose wheel is pointed. You cannot correct the problem unless you turn the off the hydraulic pressure to the nose wheel. At that point it becomes free castoring and the a/c is controllable. We were lucky enough to keep it on the runway. Not something I would wish on anybody.

Things happen very quickly after touch down and I would never question a crew that was unable to keep the a/c on the runway. If the pax survived the crew did their job!!!

 

[mightybeechdrvr]

Mesa (Air Midwest) Runway Excursion

A few tidbits of fact:

1. Yaw Damper was off

2. Pilots did not "cancel ifr" in the air.....merely accepted a visual approach.

3. Nosewheel steering was working just fine.

4. Captain was flying the aircraft

5. Weather (wind) does not appear to be a factor.

Along with the NTSB report already on this thread, should explain it all.

 

[CitationLover]

4. Captain was flying the aircraft

a little left out for a FACToid.

....due to the fact that the fo "didn't feel comfortable" and passed the controls.....

 

[DeltaLima21]

I wonder why he didnt feel comfortable....

Maybe its because the FO was a reserve pilot from MCI, where sometimes you dont fly for a month straight. In fact, I flew 2.7 hours last bid. Also to put this into perspective, there are 14 reserve pilots in MCI, when its slated for 2 (no hardlines whatsoever). With 12 additional pilots, flying an airplane is just a distant memory. Management needs to pull their heads out of their A$$es, and allocate the correct number of pilots to the amount of flying being performed. Sure I like being on a paid vacation, but safety is being jeopardized..... Nothing like Air Big Mess.

 

[CitationLover]

dl21,

if that is the case what is he doing ACCEPTING a flight assignment? bottom line was it was a visual approach with little wind, albeit at night.

put yourself in the captains shoes (who is responsible for the plane) who could use the same excuse as far as not flying that much. it was a tragic incident that should not have happened. i know the captain involved, and he/she must be feeling horrible right now.

 

[mightybeechdrvr]

500 Hours & already complaining?

I wonder why he didnt feel comfortable....

Maybe its because the FO was a reserve pilot from MCI, where sometimes you dont fly for a month straight. In fact, I flew 2.7 hours last bid. Also to put this into perspective, there are 14 reserve pilots in MCI, when its slated for 2 (no hardlines whatsoever). With 12 additional pilots, flying an airplane is just a distant memory. Management needs to pull their heads out of their A$$es, and allocate the correct number of pilots to the amount of flying being performed. Sure I like being on a paid vacation, but safety is being jeopardized..... Nothing like Air Big Mess.

By the looks of your total time (500 hours) and the types of aircraft flown, could I venture a guess that you are a graduate of the San Juan program (Mesa Pilot Development)? While I am sympathetic that you unfortunately are sitting reserve in MCI with a 121 carrier and collecting your 70 hour guarantee, if it were not for Mesa and "Air Big Mess", you would be sitting at your local FBO and begging for $10 per hour to ride around in the right seat of a Cessna 150 teaching kids to fly for the next 1500 hours or 2 years before you would be competitive at any other airline. If management indeed "pulled their heads out of their a$$es, the smart move would simply be to furlough the excess pilots like yourself. Is that what you want? Mgmt. probably realizes that the overstaffing is just a temporary condition (remember seat locks start disappearing next year) and do not wish to furlough unnecessarily. Even with a CFI rating, all that 500 hours is probably going to get you is an exciting and rewarding job in the sanitation or food service industries. AFter you have been at AMW a couple of more years, maybe you will have the right to gripe a little more. Until then....remember....sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees!