全部
← Back to Squawk list
Small jet slides off runway at KSGR
Reports of an Embraer jets slides off the runway at Sugarland Regional Airport. No reported injuries. (www.click2houston.com) 更多...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Photo of the aircraft sitting in the ditch... https://twitter.com/jjobeskhou/status/535854086893993984/photo/1
Flight track for an Embraer at that time -- http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N584JS/history/20141121/1500Z/KHOU/KSGR
More summary details -- http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20141121-0
More summary details -- http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20141121-0
So I just did a runway analysis using APG. APG is an industry leading runway performance calculator. Operators spend lots of money per year per tail number to pay for runway takeoff distance required, climb performance calculations, landing distance, missed approach/balked landing performance, and can add things like wet runway and snow criteria etc. Now I am not supporting landing w an 8kt (9mph) tailwind. But let's ignore that for a minute. I took the data from the SGR ASOS at 0953 that day. SE@9mph 30.15 and temp of 19°C. I selected 130@8 and a wet runway and set the altimeter. And kept all criteria the same for RW17 and for RW35. The APG analyst data showed the same exact number that the aircraft could weigh for landing for each runway. But... The landing distance necessary for a full stop on RW35 was 3811' and for RW17 was 3290'; of course it's the tailwind causing the difference. Now I'll remind you, those numbers already have wet runway criteria in them. Both those numbers are more or less close to half the distance available for landing. Something else caused this overrun IMO wasn't just the tailwind. Every accident or incident has a chain. There was a chain for this as well IMO. Could've even started in Houston hobby who knows. Some things that may have contributed to this were many different things, things like: Mechanical anomaly with brake system, not coming in stabilized, or fast, or floated, or something, a pilot technique not supported by company procedures, or their time in type. The note someone discovered about the runway not being grooved is a significant factor IMO. I hope the final ntsb report has a clear cause so other operators can learn from it.
Bad decision to land with a 17 knot tailwind on a wet runway.
Is there a different article that says 17kts? The artice on ASN says the METAR was 130@8 just after the accident, which would be just over a 6kt tailwind component using runway 35. Just curious, because 6 kts puts them well within the aircraft tailwind limitation while 17kts would be well over.
I looked up the historic sequences on Intellicast for the Houston area. After 10:00 AM at least 10 gusting into the 20's the rest of the morning. Intellicast reports in MPH.
The choice to use runway 35 might have been preferred even though there was a tailwind because an ILS approach is only available in that direction. They really should have an ILS for runway 17, which is generally the direction of prevailing winds in the area.