Teterboro Accident - CL600

[LXJ31]

After all, he did "miss the runway on takeoff", you know.

LOL! Happens to the best of us....

 

[Texasskicker]

From: www.avweb.com

Stuck Yoke On Crashed Challenger?...
Pilot Says He Couldn't Raise Nose
The pilot of a Challenger 600 bizjet that ran off the end of the runway at Teterboro Airport claims both he and his first officer were unable to pull the control yoke back, keeping them from raising the aircraft's nose and forcing him to abort the takeoff. And the pilot of a newer Challenger 601 that crashed off the end of a runway in Colorado in November reportedly said he too was unable to pull back on the yoke of the aircraft he was flying, resulting in the deaths of three people. According to The New York Times, the pilot in Wednesday's crash, John Kimberling, told NTSB investigators that with the airplane at takeoff speed on the runway, he could only pull back the yoke about an inch instead of the normal three to four inches of travel.

> In Wednesday's crash, one of the pilots is heard to say "discontinue takeoff" on the cockpit voice recorder before the thrust reversers were deployed and plane tore through a fence, crossed a highway and hit a warehouse. NTSB member Debbie Hersman told reporters the NTSB hasn't reached any conclusions and hasn't ruled out any factor that might have contributed to the accident. No one was killed and all 11 occupants of the airplane were able to free themselves from the wreckage. Nine others were hurt, including the passenger of a car hit by the plane, who is in critical condition with head injuries.


...Ice Not A Factor?...
Although it hasn't been ruled out, airframe ice doesn't seem to be a factor in the crash. Witnesses, surveillance videos and ground-crew personnel all seem to indicate the aircraft was ice-free as it departed for Chicago with eight investment bankers, a flight attendant and two pilots aboard. According to Debbie Hersman of the NTSB, one aircraft had been de-iced about an hour before the Challenger departed. It was clear and cold at the time. The baggage on board will be weighed to determine if the plane was too heavy. Bombardier spokesman Leo Knaapen said the plane involved in the Colorado crash was overloaded. "That plane was too heavy, sir," Knaapen told The Associated Press. He wouldn't speculate on what might have caused the Teterboro incident. Kimberling's first officer, Carlos Salaverria, is apparently backing up his captain's version of the events. Salaverria is in the hospital with multiple leg fractures and hasn't spoken with investigators yet but his lawyer, Manuel Epelbaum, said Salaverria told him the captain called for his help and he, too, tried to pull his control yoke back. "When neither of them could pull it back, they decided to abort," said Epelbaum. He added the pilots did everything they could to keep the plane tracking straight so as not to tear the wings off and spill fuel.


...Fresh Fodder For TEB Opponents
Wednesday's crash has given fresh ammunition to airport opponents and politicians who'd like to see operations at Teterboro curtailed. The airport is 12 miles from Manhattan and is consequently among the busiest GA airports in the U.S. On Thursday, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates Teterboro, decided to try to reduce the number of flights at the airport. "We are going to try to improve the safety and the quality of life for residents in and around Teterboro Airport," Acting New Jersey Governor Richard Codey told reporters after meeting with Port Authority officials. The Jersey officials reckon it's an odds game. The fewer the flights, the less chance of accidents. However, they did let it slip that safety wasn't their only concern. Codey said he'd like to see noisier Stage 2 jets banned from Teterboro (the Challenger is a Stage 3 aircraft), which would bring about a 5-percent reduction in flights. But the state and port officials also say only the FAA can make those sorts of decisions and it hasn't shown much interest in the past. "The FAA has been extremely unhelpful," Rep. Steve Rothman (D-N.J.) said. "Given their history, they will not reduce flights without extreme pressure.

*************************

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

See my previous post. When you say "Intentionally flying with a stuck elevator....sheeesh!," its minimizing what actually is occuring. Its not a simple choice, in some cases, of deciding that I'd enjoy the death-defying challenge of flying a malfunctioning airplane, or that I think aborted takeoffs are for quitters, but rather using one's head to analyze the situation before you even leave the chocks. .

I agree these are great things to discuss and think about as we all may be challenged by a unique situation some day. I have joked that non of the malfuntions I have had in an airplane have been in the emergency checklist. Our training hits the same, obvious stuff. I wish life were that simple.

Now, to the facts to consider when you 'think' about making this kind of choice.

1. Admitted, the high speed abort is statistically one of the most dangerous events in aviation.
2. Aborts above V1 have no data or guarantee.
3. Most death injuries are from the vertical impact, not horizontal. Tests show you can slam into a brick building at 100 kts and live, but if you drop vertically from 25 feet (I forget the exact G load) you die.

In this one, the logic is easy for me. #3 trumps 1 and 2 by far. There are many more situations where you should continue the take off, as a matter of fact, most. V1 is not a descision speed, it is a go speed. That being said, a control malfunction keeps me on the ground everytime.

Ace

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

Amen, and well-put. Evidently, what they did worked- a worst-case scenario and everyone lived. Hope they don't turn around and hang him in the court of public opinion. After all, he did "miss the runway on takeoff", you know.

I actually heard a reporter once say: "...any takeoff you walk away from is a good one." As we all know, any take off you WALK AWAY from is a very, very bad one.

Not to joke about this very bad situation, but what the reporters say is our publics reality and is bad of our whole industry.

Ace

 

[Texasskicker]

Verified

Those of you who scoffed at my suggestion in the days right after this unfortunate accident occurred, now take heed. Remember, this is the 2003 accident data I quoted.

NTSB Identification: NYC04IA054.
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Public Inquiries
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Incident occurred Tuesday, December 16, 2003 in Teterboro, NJ
Probable Cause Approval Date: 12/3/2004
Aircraft: Canadair CL-600, registration: N95EB
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.
Earlier in the day, a different flightcrew performed a successful aborted takeoff in the incident airplane. The aborted takeoff occurred with seven to nine passengers on board, at 139 knots; when the flightcrew was unable to rotate the airplane. The only difference between that aborted takeoff, and the uneventful previous flight, was the addition of 3,000 to 4,000 pounds of fuel. Following that aborted takeoff, the airplane underwent a maintenance inspection which did not reveal any discrepancies pertaining to the inability to rotate. The airplane was then returned to service. When the incident captain arrived at the airport, he was informed of the previous aborted takeoff. The incident captain attempted a takeoff on a shorter runway at the airport. During rotation, the airplane did not respond to elevator inputs, and the captain aborted the takeoff. The airplane then traveled off the end of the runway and came to rest in mud. Following the overrun, the incident captain failed to produce a weight and balance calculation, or accurate count of passengers on board at the time. The wind was reported as variable at 4 knots. When asked why he chose a shorter runway to attempt the takeoff, the incident captain reported that it was the runway in use at the time. The aircraft manufacturer inspected the airplane, and did not find any discrepancies pertaining to the aborted takeoff. The manufacturer also computed two weight and balance calculations for the incident takeoff. Both calculations revealed that the airplane was above the maximum gross takeoff weight, and outside the forward center-of-gravity envelope. Subsequently, the airplane tookoff with no passengers on board, and flew uneventfully to another airport.


The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows:

The captain's inadequate preflight planning, which resulted in an overrun during an aborted takeoff.
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594

Here is what AIN is sayin'

Well forward’ C.G. Implicated in TEB Challenger Overrun
“The center of gravity (c.g.) was found to be well forward of the allowable limit,” according to an NTSB update of the investigation into the Challenger 600 that overran Runway 6 on takeoff from Teterboro Airport, N.J., on February 2. Initial findings of the investigation have indicated that the airplane, as configured, would have had a c.g.“well forward of the forward limit based on its cabin interior configuration combined with full or nearly full fuel tanks, including the fuselage tank, and a full or nearly full passenger load and minimum passenger baggage,” the NTSB said. In addition, the horizontal stabilizer trim position was in the middle of the green band (the normal takeoff range). The NTSB said it conducted tests using a simulator to evaluate the airplane’s takeoff characteristics based on the trim settings and weight-and-balance data. “The initial findings of those simulations indicate the airplane would not rotate for takeoff at the defined rotation speed.” The Safety Board also found that on the morning of the accident, icing conditions at Teterboro were “minimal or nonexistent” and there were “no anomalies” of the pitch-control system. A CVR transcript will be released in the near future. Meanwhile, the FAA revoked the Part 135 certificate of Darby Aviation (dba AlphaJet), one of the operators connected with the Challenger flight


Verified, Y'ALL.

Tx.

 

[Jetz]

History of problems with Challenger aircraft

Those of you who scoffed at my suggestion in the days right after this unfortunate accident occurred, now take heed. Remember, this is the 2003 accident data I quoted.



Here is what AIN is sayin'

Well forward’ C.G. Implicated in TEB Challenger Overrun
“The center of gravity (c.g.) was found to be well forward of the allowable limit,” according to an NTSB update of the investigation into the Challenger 600 that overran Runway 6 on takeoff from Teterboro Airport, N.J., on February 2. Initial findings of the investigation have indicated that the airplane, as configured, would have had a c.g.“well forward of the forward limit based on its cabin interior configuration combined with full or nearly full fuel tanks, including the fuselage tank, and a full or nearly full passenger load and minimum passenger baggage,” the NTSB said. In addition, the horizontal stabilizer trim position was in the middle of the green band (the normal takeoff range). The NTSB said it conducted tests using a simulator to evaluate the airplane’s takeoff characteristics based on the trim settings and weight-and-balance data. “The initial findings of those simulations indicate the airplane would not rotate for takeoff at the defined rotation speed.” The Safety Board also found that on the morning of the accident, icing conditions at Teterboro were “minimal or nonexistent” and there were “no anomalies” of the pitch-control system. A CVR transcript will be released in the near future. Meanwhile, the FAA revoked the Part 135 certificate of Darby Aviation (dba AlphaJet), one of the operators connected with the Challenger flight


Verified, Y'ALL.

Tx.

The odds were in your favor that you were correct, Mr. Texas. Though please do not pat yourself on the back too hard there, padre.

There have been so many CL-6xx accidents and incidents lately, is it just bad luck or is there a systemic problem with the design? Or, has there been a rash of pilot error (as the NTSB is most likely to show in any accident report.)

Fly safely out there ladies and gentlemen.

 

[siucavflight]

I know this guy, not his first challenger off the end of the runway. It has happened to him twice before at KUGN, nothing nearly as serious as the TEB crash but he is known around the Chicago area as being a real "hot dog". Mr. J.K. Seems to have a very bad track record.

 

[Texasskicker]

Cutie flight attendant girl

Y'all know where the hottie flight attendant was during takeoff? I bet she were sittin in the jumpseat makin that nose even harder to lift into th'air.

Tx.

 

[ATA For Now!]

I knew the pilot of this aircraft and he is not one to cut any corners whatsoever, has a tremendous record, was a pilot for Pepsi and has recommendation from a number of his employers and customers.
He flew high profile government dignataries and believed safety first.
Vortilon breaks the first rule, it is ok to speculate on the cause but not on the pilots when you have no clue who the h they were.

I flew with JK also. He was a total disgrace and ended up getting fired from the company I worked for after a few months and lots of lies. He was a horrible person and pilot.

Seeing as there were 2 of them, I hope we mean different people.

 

[siucavflight]

I think that Publisher is talking about the other pilot, because this was J.K's third CL-600 accident, and his second overrun on an aborted takeoff.


He is the worst pilot that I know.