Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view

Texasspilot · September 28th, 2006, 23:48

Aviation disaster - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view

A pilot/writer posted this at another writing site. He gave permission to repost this here because it is both relevant & important.

I live in Lexington and have thirty years of airline experience flying in and out of LEX. I was also the station liaison for Lexington for ten years; here is what I think happened:

The two runways in question share the same common run-up area. The extended taxiway to the correct runway, runway 22 was closed due to construction. It has always been difficult to tell between the two runways when you are taxiing out. The natural thing to do is to take the wrong one. It is just there and you are always tempted to take it. When I flew out of LEX we always checked each other at least three times to make sure we were
taking the correct runway. We checked the chart, we checked to make sure the correct runway number was at the end and we always double checked the FMS generated moving map.

Most FMS systems will have a warning called "runway dissimilarity" pop up in magenta when your position at takeoff doesn't match the runway you programmed into the computer. This would not happen at LEX since you are virtually in the same spot when you take either runway.

It was also raining at the time of takeoff and dark. The control tower opens at 6am (because we are, after all, all about saving money) and only has one controller on duty at that time. He or she has to: run ground control, clearance delivery, approach control and departure control. The one controller also has to program the ATIS and make the coffee. He or she probably cleared Comair to take off and then put their head back down to do a chore or work another airplane.

Taking the runway, the Comair guy would put the power up and wouldn't realize they were on the wrong runway until they were about 70% down the pike. Too late to safely abort so he probably decided to try and continue the takeoff.

This is when the eye witnesses heard a series of explosions and though the plane blew up in the air. Didn't happen -- what they heard and saw were compressor stalls of probably both engines. The pilot no doubt pushed the throttles all the way up and that demand to the engines combined with the steep pitch attitude cut off enough air to the intakes to cause the compressor stalls -- which, by the way, made them even more doomed; LESS POWER.

They stalled or simply hit one of the large hills to the west of the airport and came to a stop. Everybody on board was probably injured but alive. Then, a second or two later the post-crash fire began. With the darkness and the fact that most of them had broken legs , pelvises and backs they literally burned alive. Not smoke inhalation. They really actually burned to death.

In my role as station liaison I wrote most of the post crash safety procedure for Delta at that field. Too bad there weren't enough survivors to use them.

BTW, Comair and the press will tell you what a great plane the RJ is. This is a total lie. The Canadair RJ was designed to be an executive barge, not an airliner. They were designed to fly about ten times a month, not ten times a day. They have a long history of mechanical design shortfalls. I've flown on it and have piloted it. It is a steaming, underpowered piece of ####. It never had enough power to get out of its own way and this situation is exactly what everybody who flies it was afraid of.

The senior member of the crew had about five and a half years of total jet experience; the copilot less. -They had minimum trainin g (to save money -- enjoy that discount ticket!); and were flying a minimally equipped pos on very short rest. The layover gets in about 10pm the night before. They report for pick-up at 4:30am.

I'm sorry if I sound bitter, but this is exactly the direction the entire airline industry is going. Expect to see bigger more colorful crashes in the future.

If you doubt me as a so-called expert; I have 20,000 of heavy jet flying time and am type rated in the 727, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, DC-9 and L-1011

BobDDuck · September 28th, 2006, 23:52

It's been posted before.

There are SO many inaccuracies in that. Tower is 24 hours. Wasn't raining. FMS in the CRJ won't show runway discrepency. You get the picture.

Mavmb · September 29th, 2006, 03:11

Anyone else think the writer sounds just a wee bit jaded?

SteveC · September 29th, 2006, 10:55

Here's the other thread where we discussed this a little bit already:

Interesting Take on Com-Air Crash

.

Grim Reaper · September 29th, 2006, 13:26

I don't want to dispute the posters point of view. If the pilots were taking off from a precision runway they would have seen the runway edge lights color change when 3000 feet from the runway end change to alternating red & white. When 1000 feet from the runway end they would have seen the runway edge lights all red warning them they needed to consider an abort. If the runway they took off on was a basic runway it would have only white runway edge lights the full length of the runway. Maybe the guys had a few drinks I don't know. Maybe they had their families on their mind. They weren't alert because of fatique maybe. I have flown out of Stewart Florida before and 3 runways all connect at one end of the airport. It's easy to get on the wrong runway it happens often. Plus runways are not always flat. They may slope or have a hump in the middle this causes problems estimating the runway length. I'm looking for a good colored text or online FAA circuliar with runway lighting examples if any one knows where I can find one I would appreciate it.

BobDDuck · September 29th, 2006, 13:32

Tox screens came back negative for both pilots.

The runway lights were out all together.

The runway is only 3500 feet long and has no instrument procedures for it so there would only have been white edge lights.

I've posted before about this, but I'll say it again. Finding the reason why they used the wrong runway is going to be interesting but I don't see a major breakthrough in saftey coming from it. What I am more interested in is why the aircraft incinderated like it did. The crash should have been survivable from an impact view only. According to the preliminary report most (if not all of the deaths) were due to burns, not impact trauma or smoke inhalation. This leads me to blieve that something could be done to improve the flash over potential in the CRJ.

SteveC · September 29th, 2006, 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobDDuck

Tox screens came back negative for both pilots.

The runway lights were out all together.

The runway is only 3500 feet long and has no instrument procedures for it so there would only have been white edge lights.

I've posted before about this, but I'll say it again. Finding the reason why they used the wrong runway is going to be interesting but I don't see a major breakthrough in saftey coming from it. What I am more interested in is why the aircraft incinderated like it did. The crash should have been survivable from an impact view only. According to the preliminary report most (if not all of the deaths) were due to burns, not impact trauma or smoke inhalation. This leads me to blieve that something could be done to improve the flash over potential in the CRJ.

I just started a thread in the Aviation Safety forum about this crash, and regional jet occupant safety in general. Check it out: Commuter Jet safety factors (re Comair 5191)

lostplanetairman · September 29th, 2006, 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobDDuck

Wasn't raining.

The day of the crash, the local meteorologist on TV was showing the localized radar (too local to be picked up by the national radar). He showed the radar minute by minute beginning at 6 AM. There was a localized storm that passed over the airport at 6:07 AM. So, it is quite possible that it was dark and raining hard.

jdflight · September 29th, 2006, 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostplanetairman

The day of the crash, the local meteorologist on TV was showing the localized radar (too local to be picked up by the national radar). He showed the radar minute by minute beginning at 6 AM. There was a localized storm that passed over the airport at 6:07 AM. So, it is quite possible that it was dark and raining hard.

Except that it wasn't. Visibility was 10 miles. Light rain. Daylight was breaking. All this according to a classmate of mine who took one of our CRJs off the correct runway a mere six minutes prior to Comair.

All this speculative ######### is really starting to piss me off.

Texasspilot · September 29th, 2006, 20:21

Is it not possible the cell was coming over as the previous aircraft took off?

September 28th, 2006, 23:48	#1
Texasspilot Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,080	Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view Aviation disaster - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view A pilot/writer posted this at another writing site. He gave permission to repost this here because it is both relevant & important. I live in Lexington and have thirty years of airline experience flying in and out of LEX. I was also the station liaison for Lexington for ten years; here is what I think happened: The two runways in question share the same common run-up area. The extended taxiway to the correct runway, runway 22 was closed due to construction. It has always been difficult to tell between the two runways when you are taxiing out. The natural thing to do is to take the wrong one. It is just there and you are always tempted to take it. When I flew out of LEX we always checked each other at least three times to make sure we were taking the correct runway. We checked the chart, we checked to make sure the correct runway number was at the end and we always double checked the FMS generated moving map. Most FMS systems will have a warning called "runway dissimilarity" pop up in magenta when your position at takeoff doesn't match the runway you programmed into the computer. This would not happen at LEX since you are virtually in the same spot when you take either runway. It was also raining at the time of takeoff and dark. The control tower opens at 6am (because we are, after all, all about saving money) and only has one controller on duty at that time. He or she has to: run ground control, clearance delivery, approach control and departure control. The one controller also has to program the ATIS and make the coffee. He or she probably cleared Comair to take off and then put their head back down to do a chore or work another airplane. Taking the runway, the Comair guy would put the power up and wouldn't realize they were on the wrong runway until they were about 70% down the pike. Too late to safely abort so he probably decided to try and continue the takeoff. This is when the eye witnesses heard a series of explosions and though the plane blew up in the air. Didn't happen -- what they heard and saw were compressor stalls of probably both engines. The pilot no doubt pushed the throttles all the way up and that demand to the engines combined with the steep pitch attitude cut off enough air to the intakes to cause the compressor stalls -- which, by the way, made them even more doomed; LESS POWER. They stalled or simply hit one of the large hills to the west of the airport and came to a stop. Everybody on board was probably injured but alive. Then, a second or two later the post-crash fire began. With the darkness and the fact that most of them had broken legs , pelvises and backs they literally burned alive. Not smoke inhalation. They really actually burned to death. In my role as station liaison I wrote most of the post crash safety procedure for Delta at that field. Too bad there weren't enough survivors to use them. BTW, Comair and the press will tell you what a great plane the RJ is. This is a total lie. The Canadair RJ was designed to be an executive barge, not an airliner. They were designed to fly about ten times a month, not ten times a day. They have a long history of mechanical design shortfalls. I've flown on it and have piloted it. It is a steaming, underpowered piece of ####. It never had enough power to get out of its own way and this situation is exactly what everybody who flies it was afraid of. The senior member of the crew had about five and a half years of total jet experience; the copilot less. -They had minimum trainin g (to save money -- enjoy that discount ticket!); and were flying a minimally equipped pos on very short rest. The layover gets in about 10pm the night before. They report for pick-up at 4:30am. I'm sorry if I sound bitter, but this is exactly the direction the entire airline industry is going. Expect to see bigger more colorful crashes in the future. If you doubt me as a so-called expert; I have 20,000 of heavy jet flying time and am type rated in the 727, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, DC-9 and L-1011

September 28th, 2006, 23:52	#2
BobDDuck Old Skool Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Left Seat Posts: 5,924	Re: Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view It's been posted before. There are SO many inaccuracies in that. Tower is 24 hours. Wasn't raining. FMS in the CRJ won't show runway discrepency. You get the picture. __________________ TBJC08 The Gear Monkey The Gear Monkey Store

September 29th, 2006, 03:11	#3
Mavmb Old Skool Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 2,169	Re: Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view Anyone else think the writer sounds just a wee bit jaded? __________________ My accomplishments: 30,000 hours logged, at yo momma's house!

September 29th, 2006, 10:55	#4
SteveC Modulator Join Date: May 2003 Location: GRR Posts: 8,788	Re: Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view Here's the other thread where we discussed this a little bit already: Interesting Take on Com-Air Crash . __________________ . If life gives you lemons, throw 'em into a quart of vodka. ~Red Green

September 29th, 2006, 13:26	#5
Grim Reaper Newbie Join Date: May 2006 Location: KHSV Posts: 15	Re: Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view I don't want to dispute the posters point of view. If the pilots were taking off from a precision runway they would have seen the runway edge lights color change when 3000 feet from the runway end change to alternating red & white. When 1000 feet from the runway end they would have seen the runway edge lights all red warning them they needed to consider an abort. If the runway they took off on was a basic runway it would have only white runway edge lights the full length of the runway. Maybe the guys had a few drinks I don't know. Maybe they had their families on their mind. They weren't alert because of fatique maybe. I have flown out of Stewart Florida before and 3 runways all connect at one end of the airport. It's easy to get on the wrong runway it happens often. Plus runways are not always flat. They may slope or have a hump in the middle this causes problems estimating the runway length. I'm looking for a good colored text or online FAA circuliar with runway lighting examples if any one knows where I can find one I would appreciate it. __________________ Turn and Burn

September 29th, 2006, 13:32	#6
BobDDuck Old Skool Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Left Seat Posts: 5,924	Re: Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view Tox screens came back negative for both pilots. The runway lights were out all together. The runway is only 3500 feet long and has no instrument procedures for it so there would only have been white edge lights. I've posted before about this, but I'll say it again. Finding the reason why they used the wrong runway is going to be interesting but I don't see a major breakthrough in saftey coming from it. What I am more interested in is why the aircraft incinderated like it did. The crash should have been survivable from an impact view only. According to the preliminary report most (if not all of the deaths) were due to burns, not impact trauma or smoke inhalation. This leads me to blieve that something could be done to improve the flash over potential in the CRJ. __________________ TBJC08 The Gear Monkey The Gear Monkey Store

September 29th, 2006, 20:21	#10
Texasspilot Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,080	Re: Comair Crash - - A Retired (Eastern) Pilot's view Is it not possible the cell was coming over as the previous aircraft took off?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode