Back to Squawk list
  • 14

Jet slams into hangar in California during run-up

提交時間:
 
A jet was on a ramp undergoing a routine engine run-up test when it rolled into the hangar. (www.cnn.com) 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Av8nut
"brakes - I knew there was something I missed on the checklist"
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Actually, you are not far from the truth.... If my analysis is correct I know what happened. They were doing a check and one of them is to pull the WOW CB's (Weight Off Wheels). But the step they missed is to turn off the Anti-Skid first. To prevent pilots from landing with their brakes set, the Anti Skid removes the brakes (parking brakes included)and since it said they were doing a power run... The rest is history.
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
My guess is, they didn't turn on the 3 A&B pumps before start up and thought they set the park brake. These pumps are stand alone electric and provide N/W steering, gear uppy downy and brakes, as well as flight control redundancy. Normally on for takeoff and landing, start up and taxi. The prox. (proximity) switches are not normally pulled for ground runs, if memory serves me correctly, so as not to disable the brakes. I think they had it chocked, thought the brakes were set, and when it jumped the chocks it was off to the races and into a hangar. With both engines running you have 1&2 A pumps (engine driven) that power the inboard and outboard brakes. They would have had brakes after engine start from 1&2 A pumps. If you get the idea that a Challenger has a somewhat complicated hydraulic system, you would be right. There are 6 hydraulic pumps. Hydraulically drive flight controls, no manual reversion. Chime in here Preach, if you care to, I believe the CRJ has a very similar system.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
I disagree, as the brake pressure would have bleed off gradually. 3B is to be run all the time and 3A as required. The CRJ and a Challenger are the same plane. One is corporate one is airline. When they pull the WOW without turning the AntiSkid off it will release the brakes. They were probably at FULL Power and then pulled the breaker and the ride begins.. You know the rest. As far as the breakers being pulled on ground runs, it depends on what checks you are running. If you are at IDLE, you have to pull the WOW breakers to test the HIGH IDLE. Once off the ground, the engines idle at a much higher rate. Running as much power as they were running, the chocks did not mean much.... Personally I feel that they HYD system is fairly simple. System 1 and 2 are flight controls primarily and 3 is for the gear/brakes/steering. However, system 3 also backs up all the primary flight controls. Pump 3A in auto mode comes on with flaps at greater than 0 degrees.
bentwing60
bentwing60 2
For the sake of agreeing to disagree, lets just say that I do have a CL60 type rating in my pocket and an A&P next to that. Tomato, tomoto, Bombardier calls them proximity or target type switches. In the hangar we used to put a piece of aluminum tape on them to do a trick me in flight test without jacking the airplane. Just pulling the breakers didn't do it all. Regardless, I will concede to your vast and superior knowledge, and comment that the ground test crew evidently didn't take the proper precautions for a high power ground test run and the results speak for themselves. By the way, my checklist, in front of me calls for all B pumps off in the climb section. As for a simple hydraulic system, not so. Hence the clean up on the 300. Too much weight.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
If I am reading you right that would be an impossible scenario and here is why.There are 6 PROX Sensors, 3 of the 6 and 1 on each gear would have been already failed or marked. Further more they would have has a Prox System Fault. Also keep in mind that they would have never had any brakes, so unless they did this intentionally they would have never developed the speed to penetrate the building. Basically 2 sensors on each main gear would have had to fail at the same exact time. If that would not have happened they would have had a PROX SYSTEM FAULT and it would not have indicated Weight Off Wheels (or Air Mode) and released the brakes. If the PSEU had failed then it would again not allowed i to Weight Off Wheels configuration.

I have been a CRJ Mechanic (200 and 900) for 3 years now and currently working Maintenance Controller Position plus the fact of 28 years of Airline/Avionics/Electrical experience all in the part 121 arena may explain why I would call it fairly simple to understand and track... At least it is for me.

The only plausible thing that can come into mind is High Power with Anti Skid turned on. I am really interested to find out what the FDR and CVR says. American Eagle had one on an ERJ slide on ice into a hangar, blocking in 6 planes for several days because of door damage. Cause: Mechanics were talking and looking at Playboy Magazines and did not realize they were moving. Please look at: http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/n714bz/photo.shtml for an example of what getting distracted while thinking the plane is not moving :) Look at all 7 images.
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
Didn't say they taped the targets,said we did on occasion for certain CAMP cards. Readily concede that your maintenance background is stronger than mine, but might also postulate that when we did high power runs, we also had light airplanes. Use big chocks, and don't aim the airplane at a hangar. And follow the cards to the letter, no matter how many times you have done it. And from the other end of the deal, I have more than once looked up to realize the airplane was moving after engine start, with a firm conviction that the brakes were set. The human side of aviation.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
For the prox sensor to pick that up, it would have to be with in 50 thousandths of an inch (.050"). It would have to had been a target inserted into it, and then it would have had to be the correct type of metal.

This A/C with the brakes on can sustain running at full power with out moving. We do this routinely for power assurance runs, Engine Trimming, ETC.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 2
I thought it was one of those cases where mechanics were doing the test and both took their feet off the brakes, but the skid marks from the chocks into the building suggest the brakes were locked. Some speculate that tests had been going on all day to prep the plane for a new owner and used up most of the fuel. The reduced weight allowed it to jump the chocks and use the building as a speed brake. I've never flown anything larger than I can push by hand, but was taught to chain the plane to the ground when doing such tests.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
That plane on full power would not have produced that kind of skid mark unless they were already traveling at a high rate of speed, and then turned the antiskid off, locked it up and then slid into the hangar, If that is the case, they would have been better than 50 kts ground speed before locking up the brakes.
mpradel
Marcus Pradel 2
This stuff happens!

Remember that AB340 that got messed up at the delivery center in toulouse?
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Very much.... The cause was the same thing.. They pulled the WOW breakers and the parking brakes released under power and over the wall.... People never learn to read the manual. They had just accepted that plane and had never flown it.
chalet
chalet 1
The same (dumb) crew who ruined the Emirates 340 at Toulousse were hired by this California MRO outfit (LOL!!!)
garp
garp 2
"Now *there's* something I don't see every day." -- The Geico Gecko
eddyandy
eddyandy 2
Looks like my wife parking in the garage.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
Does your wife drive in MEMPHIS.... I may have seen our out and about. :)
N5DW
N5DW 2
Had they just switched to decaf?
vanstaalduinenj
Sh*t happens......
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
LOL, I would hate to explain that one to the boss.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Prolly wouldn't have a boss no more. :-)
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
No big deal. Those metal hangers are easy to fix. 8-/
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
LOL, I like your line of thinking.... On the other plane, that plane will probably never fly again....
cgalliand
Craig G 0
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Jet Crashes into Hangar at Chino Airport

A small passenger jet crashed into a hangar at the Chino Airport Thursday, sending workers running for cover.

Read more: http://ktla.com/2013/06/13/jet-crashes-into-hangar-at-chino-airport/#ixzz2WCFTy8dO

http://ktla.com/2013/06/13/jet-crashes-into-hangar-at-chino-airport/
WilliamHolcombe
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Bombardier aircraft crashes into airport hangar during engine test

Engine tests are usually considered non-eventful in the aviation industry – they’re basically a routine task that happens behind the scenes. However, a recent engine test in California was far from non-eventful. In fact, it’s being covered by international media for all the wrong reasons.

http://www.theaviationwriter.com/2013/06/video-plane-crashes-into-hangar.html
johncotton
John Cotton 0
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

VIDEO: Bombardier aircraft crashes into airport hangar during engine test

During this particular engine test, a Canadair Bombardier Challenger aircraft was placed on a ramp at Chino Airport, with rubber stops in place to prevent the business jet from moving.

Unfortunately, it rolled over the rubber stops and eventually crashed into a hangar. The photo on this page shows the severity of the incident, and there’s video footage below too.

http://www.theaviationwriter.com/2013/06/video-plane-crashes-into-hangar.html?goback=%2Egde_145367_member_250395535

登入

還沒有帳戶嗎? 現在就註冊(免費),設置諸多客制化功能、航班提醒等等!
您知道FlightAware航班跟蹤是由廣告支持嗎?
通過允許展示來自FlightAware.com的廣告,您可以幫助我們使FlightAware保持免費。我們努力使我們的廣告保持相關性,同時不顯突兀,以創造一流的體驗。在FlightAware上將廣告加入白名單快速而簡單,或者請您考慮選擇我們的高級帳戶.
退出