PSA runs off runway during a aborted takeoff at CRW!

[sniper]

That's pretty low, from an ex-Mesa, now a big guy Westie.

Florida Gulf was never a PFT outfit.....

PSA was

 

[sniper]

That's pretty low, from an ex-Mesa, now a big guy Westie.

Now say it again MESA SUCKS

 

[SpauldingSmails]

A highspeed abort on a 6,200 ft runway? At the highspeed regime at CRW, unless a wing fell off, I'm going.........

They don't call it Yeager Airport for nothin'!

 

[paddlehigh]

PSA gets training pay

 

[Captzaahlie]

lets hope that one crew gets retraining pay too...

 

[Headfake14]

I always understood the T/O data to include the use of the stopway, or in this case, the EMAS. In short, I fealt that C.W. was a departure not to be aborted unless a wing fell off..............

Installing EMAS would actually do more damage to an airframe at several airports rather than the grass at the end. It's too expensive and very impractical for many airports. If the ASA 700 would have used the EMAS at SAV, it would have torn some stuff up good (gear doors, struts, belly skin, etc.). With the grass at the end, it probably just needed to be hosed off and given an inspection with few, if any, broken parts as a result............

Agreed about EMAS. It's purpose is really for a larger safety margin for places where you can't get a 1000' over run..MDW... or where the end of the runway meets with water...BOS. Places like ATL have LOTS of room for overruns.

Regarding V1s. We at JB call it at -5.

Thank god that stuff stopped them. We don't need another fatal mess at all.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

Without that EMAS they would have stopped down by the river.

 

[paddlehigh]

From what I understand they were almost stoppped when they went into the EMAS

 

[DiverDriver]

From what I understand they were almost stoppped when they went into the EMAS

Define "almost".

 

[kf4amu]

From what I understand they were almost stoppped when they went into the EMAS

Almost doesn't count when theres a 500 foot dropoff.

 

[johnboy99]

From what I understand they were almost stoppped when they went into the EMAS

From what I understand Monica Lewinsky would almost be blind had she not been wearing glasses.

 

[Captzaahlie]

There's a lot of crumpled concrete from "almost" the end of the runway until where they "almost" stopped before hitting the EMAS......

 

[N813CA]

Can anyone give a good reason the flaps are up? Our QRH during evac doesn't say anything about putting the flaps up. If that is the case did the Takeoff Config flaps fail and they tried to take off with no flaps?

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Think of what this means. They do not want you @#%@# around in the highspeed regime of takeoff. Personally, I think we should call out V1 at V1-5 knots. Several CR2 operators already do this. If you callout V1 at V1, and a problem occurs a second before, by the time you abort, the aircraft will be above V1. All book calculations of stopping are now out the window.

Aren't "all book calculations" based on average reaction times?

We did the V1-5kts thing at my past airlines, too. If we're always going to call it 5kts early, why not just reduce V1 by 5kts?

 

[paulsalem]

Aren't "all book calculations" based on average reaction times?

Under part 25 certification there is a 2 second delay at Vef (engine failure) speed before any thing is done to stop the aircraft.

 

[BigFellor]

If that is the case did the Takeoff Config flaps fail and they tried to take off with no flaps?

No, they did not.

 

[Metro752]

Just wait for the NTSB report.

 

[Flyer1015]

They need to teach better on exactly what constitutes a high speed abort. You'd think it's common sense, but many don't seem to "get it." I cringe when I hear some pilots brief they will abort for any "Master Caution or Warning" below V1. Really? You'd take a 120 knot abort due to a master caution for something as stupid as a L Windshield heat msg? On the CRJ, above 80-100 knots, I can't think of any master caution I'd abort for. Short of flight control failure or the actual airplane being unable to lift itself off the runway, I would continue.

 

[COOPERVANE]

Without that EMAS they would have stopped down by the river.

Probably right next to my van.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

It's a great place to live.

 

[kf4amu]

Interesting...


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704820904575056084012937888.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs

By ANDY PASZTOR

A fundamental breakdown of pilot discipline, including personal conversation in the cockpit, apparently was the major reason a US Airways commuter plane ran off the end of a West Virginia runway last month, according to industry officials.
Now, three weeks after the nonfatal incident, the circumstances are prompting extensive discussion and concern among pilots and safety experts, who consider it the latest example of cockpit distraction and erosion of pilot discipline.
The Jan. 19 event involved a twin-engine Bombardier jet that ran off the runway at Yeager Airport in Charleston, W. Va., after pilots abandoned takeoff. Operated by PSA Airlines Inc., a unit of US Airways Group Inc., the plane was damaged when it smashed into a crushable concrete safety zone at the end of the strip. None of the 34 people aboard was hurt, and the incident has generated relatively little media attention.
But among many safety experts, it is viewed as the latest example of a loss of pilot focus, and a symbol of what some regulators believe is a broader problem of lack of pilot professionalism.
A US Airways spokesman said the airline is cooperating fully with the National Transportation Safety Board's investigation and has launched its own probe. But he declined to comment about specifics. The spokesman also said the two pilots, whose names haven't been released, were placed on administrative leave and taken off flying duties, as is normal after such an event.
PSA Airlines hasn't had a fatal accident or incident since it became part of US Airways, or what was then called USAir, in 1995.
Preliminary data collected from the cockpit voice recorder indicates that prior to the botched takeoff, the two pilots of US Airways Express Flight 2495 engaged in stretches of nonpertinent chatter that didn't deal with flight preparations, checklists or pilot tasks, according to industry officials familiar with the details.
Pilots are strictly prohibited from engaging in such private, extraneous conversations during critical phases of flight, particularly takeoff, descent and landing.
A spokesman for the safety board declined to comment on the investigation.
The board's probe comes at a time when Randy Babbitt, the head of Federal Aviation Administration, is stressing the importance of maintaining pilot professionalism and avoiding distractions behind the controls. Mr. Babbbitt, for example, told a House aviation subcommittee last week that the FAA is looking for methods to transfer the experience of veteran aviators to younger commuter pilots. He said such programs are an "important way to raise professional standards and improve cockpit discipline."
Industry officials describe the following sequence of events on Flight 2495. Before starting the takeoff roll, the crew is believed to have incorrectly set the flaps -- movable panels at the rear of the wings that provide essential lift. As the jet accelerated down the runway, reached almost 100 miles per hour and its front landing gear was lifting off the ground, the crew realized the mistake, according to these officials. The pilots quickly readjusted the flaps, prompting an automated cockpit warning to abandon takeoff. The crew then tried but failed to stop the jet before it rolled into the safety area.
Pilots said it is generally considered unsafe and quite unusual to adjust flap settings during takeoff. Airlines typically train crews to work together to handle so-called rejected takeoffs, including practicing decisions about what speeds and runway conditions make it safer to continue climbing instead of slowing down and attempting to stop.

 

[n757st]

They need to teach better on exactly what constitutes a high speed abort. You'd think it's common sense, but many don't seem to "get it." I cringe when I hear some pilots brief they will abort for any "Master Caution or Warning" below V1. Really? You'd take a 120 knot abort due to a master caution for something as stupid as a L Windshield heat msg? On the CRJ, above 80-100 knots, I can't think of any master caution I'd abort for. Short of flight control failure or the actual airplane being unable to lift itself off the runway, I would continue.

Caution: L REV UNLOCKED.... I'll abort for that.

 

[Data]

Can't wait to see the FAA response to this. Summer camp at the Regionals is officially over!

 

[Singlecoil]

So, I don't fly the RJ, but 100 miles an hour, 88 knots or so seems slow for the nose to be coming up. Were the flaps set too high, but still in an acceptable takeoff setting, like 15 instead of 5? That's the only reason I can think of that the takeoff warning horn wasn't going off, as it apparently wasn't in this case.

 

[ASApuppy]

I read this to say they attempted takeoff at flaps 8. Therefore no "Config Flaps" warning. got to 80 or 100, or whatever and realized that they needed to be at flaps 20. I have never tried it, but I cannot imagine a warning or as this stupedous WSJ author said the "automated cockpit warning to abandon takeoff".

 

[Abernathy]

I don't know if they had them set at all if the flaps are at 0 in the picture, but that would be hard to figure because you'd think they'd hear the config flaps aural.

As far as the cockpit banter and chatter, that probably was a huge factor. Sometimes I fly with captains who don't know when to shut up and things get missed constantly. Usually when I fly with guys who are by nature quiet and businesslike in the cockpit, following procedure with briefings and stuff, everything is pretty much covered and rarely does anything get missed.

Just call it like I see it.

 

[SLUF4]

They probably set flaps 8 when they should have been at 20 and so when they moved the handle from 8 to 20 and the flaps were in transit they were no longer at a takeoff setting triggering the "config flap" aural warning. maybe someone already said that-i'm too lazy to read through this whole thread

 

[Abernathy]

I wanna read the CVR transcript. Don't they usually just mindlessly release those to the public.

 

[buscap]

Ouch.

This sucks.

To pull such a cranius-up-the-rectumus maneuver within shouting distance of Chuck's house is a disgrace. This thing reads like Comair in LEX with a twist. Odds are good the thing would've flown with the flaps at 8 or maybe even been at 20 by the time they took off.

I don't have a clue, but I am wondering if perhaps the FO realized the error and brought them up without saying anything? Next thing ya know, here comes the CONFIG flaps audio.

Everyone on that plane is living a second life.

I hope something else comes out which exonerates the crew, but it's not looking good.

Another thought is the possible wisdom of always taking off with flaps 20, ala Comair?

 

[SLUF4]

maybe the experts are right and we should actually focus more on the job at hand instead of talking on the phone or jibba jabberin to each other during taxi out