Sign in to follow this  
blues deville

747 at YHZ

Recommended Posts

The winds at the time were 230 at 11 G 18.  Up on Avherald now and a picture of where the thing ended up indicates they landed on 15.  Is 24 closed over night?

The landing gear was probably stripped off like the engines as they went down the hill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Warren said:

The winds at the time were 230 at 11 G 18.  Up on Avherald now and a picture of where the thing ended up indicates they landed on 15.  Is 24 closed over night?

The landing gear was probably stripped off like the engines as they went down the hill

Update with better pics.

Cargo plane goes off runway on landing in Halifax

 
 
 
image.jpg
A cargo plane went off the runway while landing at Halifax Stanfield International Airport, sending five crew members to hospital.
 
 
     
 
     
     
     
     
 
     
     
 

CTVNews.ca Staff
Published Wednesday, November 7, 2018 6:01AM EST
Last Updated Wednesday, November 7, 2018 9:45AM EST

A 747 cargo plane skidded off a runway while landing at Halifax Stanfield International Airport early Wednesday, leaving a trail of debris and sending four crew members to hospital, according to the airport’s official Twitter account.

The runway where the incident took place is closed until a safety review is conducted by officials, airport spokeswoman Theresa Rath Spicer told CTV’s Your Morning on Wednesday.

But the airport’s main runway has been re-opened on a limited basis — the airport had activated its emergency operations centre which meant temporarily suspending all flights coming in or out of the airport.

 

Photos

 
SkyLease Cargo plane skidded off a runway

A SkyLease Cargo plane skidded off a runway at Halifax Stanfield International Airport and stopped near a road early on Nov. 7, 2018. (Andrew Vaughan / CANADIAN PRESS)

 
SkyLease Cargo plane skidded off a runway at Halif

A SkyLease Cargo plane skidded off a runway at Halifax Stanfield International Airport and stopped near a road early on Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2018. (Andrew Vaughan / CANADIAN PRESS)

Spicer said, after the SkyLease Cargo plane skidded off Runway 14-32 just after 5 a.m., the crew members on board Flight KKE 4854 were taken to hospital with minor injuries.

It is not yet clear what caused the incident, she added.

Flights are expected to be “significantly impacted” by the incident and Spicer urged passengers to check with their airlines for specific delays or changes to their flights.

Officials said the flight had been travelling from Chicago to Halifax before the incident occurred, CTV Atlantic’s Natasha Pace reported Wednesday.

As part of the airport’s emergency procedures, RCMP, local police, Halifax fire services and medical response teams were called in.

Citing privacy concerns, Emergency Health Services spokesman Remo Zaccagna wouldn’t comment on the precise nature of the injuries, but said two ambulances were sent to the airport along with a supervisory unit.

Hours after the incident, the plane was still sitting on a slight incline far off the runway and within about 50 metres of a fence that marks the perimeter of the airport boundary.

The landing gear wasn’t visible, the nose of the white aircraft had sustained moderate damage and the underside of the plane appeared to be cracked and heavily damaged.

Two of the engines also appeared to be heavily damaged with the two other engines completely sheared off.

District chief Gord West said the Halifax fire department had assisted the airport's fire unit and confirmed there was no fire resulting from the crash. He added crews had sprayed the aircraft with foam.

In August, Stanfield airport announced SkyLease Cargo was operating two flights a week for First Catch, a Chinese-owned seafood freight forwarding company.

It said SkyLease's 747-400 aircraft had the capacity to carry up to 120 tonnes of Nova Scotia seafood to China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just attempted that approach with this mornings weather loaded in a 747-400.  it was a bit nasty.

now I am not a 747 pilot by any means but it was gusty for sure.  

BTW I failed 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

plane_off_runway_20181107-1.jpg.5937c34ea9fe8bdd2e05b1b391461d03.jpg

 
DrZihtsWsAU1TY-.jpg:large
Previous
Next
 

BREAKING : Airport confirming that their Emergency Operations Centre has been activated in response to a 747 cargo aircraft that went off the end of Rwy 32 earlier this morning upon landing. 5 people on board, no reported injuries at this time.pic.twitter.com/wRIcRo9urh

DrZihtoX4AErf4-.jpg
DrZihtsWsAU1TY-.jpg
DrZihvhX0AAL6Hw.jpg
DrZihuFXgAAixpZ.jpg
6 replies 50 retweets 33 likes
 
6
 

plane_off_runway_20181107-1.jpg.5937c34ea9fe8bdd2e05b1b391461d03.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, boestar said:

just attempted that approach with this mornings weather loaded in a 747-400.  it was a bit nasty.

now I am not a 747 pilot by any means but it was gusty for sure.  

BTW I failed 

 

3rd times a charm...made it stick but used the entire length....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATC tried to raise the red flag with a subtle wind update on final. 

Been on that approach many times with a strong tailwind on approach that doesn’t want to give up,  never ever seems to transition to the surface winds until you’re very low. The surface wind in this case was a slight quartering tail wind. 

I’m not saying this overrun is due to the wind, could’ve been an equipment failure, could have been anything.

 

ILS 23 U/S & now ILS 14 as well,  leaving Halifax with its only useable approach with any wind that doesn’t favour 05 a NPA with raised minimums to a displaced threshold for the moment  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Warren said:

The winds at the time were 230 at 11 G 18.  Up on Avherald now and a picture of where the thing ended up indicates they landed on 15.  Is 24 closed over night?

The landing gear was probably stripped off like the engines as they went down the hill

They did land on 14, runway 23 ILS and CAT2 have been OTS for months.  Strong x-wind landings on 14 with winds favouring 23 have been the norm in YHZ all summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CYHZ approach/airport facilities clearly substandard for an airport with the type of weather routinely experienced locally.

Guess that AC 624 did not get anyone’s attention, including NAV CAN. This does not absolve the pilots in that accident or the 747 accident of responsibility for safe operation of the aircraft, but these both will have the common theme of lack of available precision approach guidance on most suitable runway for landing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve done that route a few times. ANC-ORD-YHZ-ANC. Sometimes a layover in ORD. No matter what by the time you’re in YHZ your body is somewhere else.

Not sure why runway 23 wasn’t available. The cargo ramp is nicely located at the north end of 05. Easiest route to pick up a load of lobsters. 

 

0FEDE626-5087-4903-B81A-7C96361B9694.png

Edited by blues deville

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the crustaceans alive or deceased in the boxes??

I am guessing alive because when I was running the HFX RCC, the good guys over at the Rescue Unit in Gander sent me a brand new silver garbage can full of lobsters, (alive), for my wedding anniversary " she" wasn't happy that they were alive  so I did the cooking and had the neighbours over for a treat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, rudder said:

CYHZ approach/airport facilities clearly substandard for an airport with the type of weather routinely experienced locally.

Guess that AC 624 did not get anyone’s attention, including NAV CAN. This does not absolve the pilots in that accident or the 747 accident of responsibility for safe operation of the aircraft, but these both will have the common theme of lack of available precision approach guidance on most suitable runway for landing.

Substandard is being kind. bordering on negligent.  With some of the countries poorest weather at times this is unacceptable.

How is the makeover of the Tim Hortons and the lobster shop coming along though ???   (SARCASM INTENDED).

You are 100% correct on the "noise" from AC624, and now this. Two accidents (thankfully with no loss of life), possibly prevented with proper and operational equipment at the airport.

Is it really going to take a mass casualty event for things to change ????


Won't be long before YVR has issues with no ILS 08L either, the fog is a coming . . . . . . . . . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2018 at 12:49 PM, Kip Powick said:

Are the crustaceans alive or deceased in the boxes??

There was a cargo deck temp selection of course but I think these boxes (full 777 load) were all packed with ice. 

Edited by blues deville

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SMP said:

260 16G21 Mag on final and TWR Confirms “14 still is acceptable?”

So they accepted the only ILS approach functioning with a quartering tail wind?

Rwy 14 Localizer antenna now appears to be toast. By my count that means no ILS approaches available in YHZ. Perfect. 

DF1FD1CD-0AF2-4FCC-859F-AB1CC9348B1C.png

8424C5BC-59D8-4B53-BC80-769751D2604E.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen some other photos. Still no evidence of landing gear. I can't imagine how an overrun like this would take out all (at least 3, possibly 4) main , body and nose landing gears.

Additionally, from the pix above, it also doesn't seem to have full landing flap extended. Anybody else see this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moon The Loon said:

I've seen some other photos. Still no evidence of landing gear. I can't imagine how an overrun like this would take out all (at least 3, possibly 4) main , body and nose landing gears.

Additionally, from the pix above, it also doesn't seem to have full landing flap extended. Anybody else see this?

TSB, at a Press conference, said all gear collapsed during the overrun.

Flaps??? I don't know the landing flap config, not certain if they are in full flap or not.

Perhaps when the crew saw that they were going to go past the end, they selected flaps up to increase weight on the gear in hopes of stopping faster......just a WAG.😯

Edited by Kip Powick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be missing something here. Wind was M260 16G21. By any measure  that is a small headwind on Rw23. Where is this quartering tailwind chit chat coming from?  If a light wind (for here) with a massive 5 kt gust is a problem, I have a tip for ya - don't come here...ever.  There is another issue at play here which will come to light soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Southshore said:

I must be missing something here. Wind was M260 16G21. By any measure  that is a small headwind on Rw23. Where is this quartering tailwind chit chat coming from?  If a light wind (for here) with a massive 5 kt gust is a problem, I have a tip for ya - don't come here...ever.  There is another issue at play here which will come to light soon enough.

Well, it was a quartering TW for runway 14.  The crew decided that a slight quartering TW on the shorter, wet, runway with an ILS was a better option than dealing with an RNAV approach to a displaced threshold on the longer, into wind runway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this