The Mystery Of The Missing Runway | United Express Flight 4933
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июл 2022
- Donations are never expected but appreciated: paypal.me/miniaircrashJoin My Discord: / discord
This is the story of united express flight 4933. On the 4th of march 2019, an Embraer 145 flying for United express was making the flight from newark to presque isle. It was a cold winters day at presuqe isle and the the snow coated everything. The snow also made it quite hard for landing planes to well land. Information available to the pilots let them know that there was about a quarter inch of snow on the runway and the airport was trying its best to keep the runways clear of snow. As flight 4933 approached presque isle the pilots set the plane up to land at runway 01 at presque isle, they went over the procedures to land on the runway and they tuned the ILS beacon to land on the runway. The ILS would be absolutely essetntial in landing this plane today as the ILS or instrument landing system would take the plane most of the way in towards the airport and then once they were close enough to gain a visual lock on the runway the pilots would take over taking the embraer in all the way to the runway. Its not a complex system but it gets the job done. With the briefing done the pilots lined the jet with 31 people onboard with runway 01. The first officer was the pilot flying and at the start of the approach he had his head down looking down at his instruments, he was making sure that the airplane was where he expected it to be. At this point they were flying by their instruments, I mean looking outside wouldnt do you much good as all you could see would be snow. As the first officer looked up from his instruments to visually find the runway he saw just a whute expanse, he expected to see the thing grey outline of the runway out off in front of the plane but nope he just saw the white expanse. The runway that they had been flying towards was not there. The captain who was the pilot monitoring saw a small tower out in front of them and she called for an immediate go around. As the pilots pushed the throttles to max power the jets started to climb away from the ground but, I don't know if the pilots realized this at the time but the plane clipped the lightning rod of the tower as they went around. That was a close call if anything. As they went around the first officer asked the captain if she had seen the runway lights on their way down She said that she did see the lights and added “Its really white down there thats the problem”, the snow was really making life difficult for the pilots.
The captain couldnt understand why they couldnt find the runway, their instruments had told them that they were lined up with the runway but they werent, she came to the conclusion that they must have drifted off to the side as the first officer was transitioning from instrument flying to visual flying so for attempt number two she wanted the first officer to fly by instruments all the way down to the decision altitude. For this approach the decision altitude was 200 feet above ground level so when they were 200 feet off of the ground they had to go around if the pilots did not have the runway in sight, no questions asked. Thus the pilots set the plane up for approach number two, the plane latched onto the glideslope and the localizer the two radio beams that would take the plane all the way down to the decision altitude. The captain made sure that the runway lights were at maximum intensity by asking the maintenance workers on the ground, they were so when they got near the runway it would be lit up like a christmas tree. Approach number two went flawlessly until they reached the decision height. As they hit 200 feet the captain said “runway in sight 12 O’Clock”. The first officer couldnt find the runway he said “I’m stayin’ on the flight director ‘cause I don’t see it yet.”. The embraer 145 continued to drop. The piltots searched for the runway in the snowy expanse of presque isle but they couldnt find it, they were running out of time they were only a 100 feet off the ground the captain said “what the expletive and the first officer said “ I dont know what Im seein” 
Наука
My guess is that it wasn't reported because of the human tendency to think "they already know, someone else will take care of this". Which isn't supposed to happen in aviation.
Or maybe the pilots thought it was their aircraft that was malfunctioning?
In aviation is where we see the most spectacular consequences but it happens everywhere, from household items to corporate structure. In some ways we are still mediaevals with complex toys and systems we don't ultimately understand.
@@savroi Hear, hear.
It could also be partly a jaded mindset of "they're not going to do anything about it, anyway."
@@RadioactiveSherbet HAHAHA, That's normally an excuse for "I can't be bothered"
A pilot once told me, flying is simple. You just try to have as many landings as takeoffs 🤔😂🤣😅
As a passenger I'd say that in addition to the rough ride of slamming into the ground and skidding along, seeing landing gear out your window, sticking out of the engine, would certainly provide some clues that the landing isn't proceeding as planned :)
This runway was racist
Nahhhh.
that's not where landing gears go when you're done with them?
@@insertcognomen I mean it was convenient for the accident investigators to find :)
Passenger: Ah we're finally do- why is there a wheel outside my window?
I do not envy pilots who need to make the quick decision whether to trust their senses or their instruments. So many aviation incidents boil down to choosing the wrong one.
...and most of the time the correct answer would have been TRUST NEITHER. BAIL, NOW, IDIOT!
Several years ago, my jet pilot son in law taught me that virtually every such incident is the result of a chain of events and bad decisions leading up to the fatal moment, any one of which could have prevented such accidents if it had been changed. It is a kind of "accident gestalt" when the whole of it is considered.
Never, ever trust your senses. Always trust the instruments especially in IMC.
@@cdc3 yes, we are taught the Swiss Cheese hole effect from day one in ground school..
Supposed to be able to use both....why they are pilots.
Imagine if emergency services required 2 phone calls before they would send out fire fighters, paramedics or police officers!
Yeah, this seems like a really weird rule.
In some less serious cases, they do require 2 reports.
@@briant7265 But it turned out to be pretty serious, didn't it?
Recently, in Texas, cops showed up at a school shooting but didn't do anything for over an hour.
Well said
I guess in northern Maine 5 feet can be described as a "tiny bit of snow"
Lol That's why the wife and I leave our lovely house in southern Maine around mid-late October and go back to coastal NC until May or so. 😄
I have an idea why the misalignment wasn't reported earlier;
two things might have come together:
1. if you notice something weird but noone else seems to, you may think that maybe you just made an error and you'll try to avoid drawing attention to that and
2. if the error you spotted concerns a thing you don't need right now, if may feel less relevant and once something else comes up, you just forget about it until you get reminded by a related occurrence.
Since the last landings had worked out despite the misaligned localizer, the pilots probably had a good visual and didn't run into any issues because of that - so they simply forgot about it. The one time it was really relevant, it promptly led to an accident.
The only way to prevent this sort of thing is training everyone to report anything out of the ordinary, no matter how insignificant, in all cases and follow it up; give feedback on the report once investigated so people know their observations are valued and NEVER make it feel like an unwelcome bother. That way, even small things can be caught before something unfortunate happens.
*guy next to chalkboard meme*
"pilots trying to explain why flying isn't dangerous"
Very good assessment, in my opinion. I was definitely thinking the same in regards to the previous non-incident being in better weather so not cause for much concern ..at that time. Also, I genuinely hope that the aviation industry will implement something like your suggestion; that ANY and ALL unexpected behaviors of the aircraft, environment, or what have you, is both positively awarded and more focused upon in the future. Our lives literally depends on it. Even more so when you realize how tiny errors can and have lead to many fatalities.
Crowd mentality. It's something I warn my wife of anytime I see it in a tv show/movie to drive home that she needs to be on guard for it
It's the mentality that if you see something like this (or someone in danger, particularly a woman being raped in public, which is why I warn her repeatedly), you assume someone else will or already has done something, and you go on with your life
100% this
Agree.
Hardest part is most flight crew only go into the airport once a day... so any anomaly cam easily be written off as "did we really see that?"
And that these issues are presented in a busy time of flight, so by the time they land safely, taxi in icy conditions and unload, they may just completely forget as it wasn't fore front in their mind... just a "that was strange" or "did that happen?"
10:53 "More Mini Air Crash Investigation is always a good thing". Couldnt agree more 😁😁
Not when people die
“It’s interesting when people die, they love dirty laundry”
Mini Air Crash Investigation is always thorough. And easy to understand. Even for us non-pilots. Thx!
More mini aircraft investigation is indeed always a good thing. Nice job on this one. The flight was extremely fortunate to have turned out as well as it did.
I chuckled at the Ryanair comment- for those outside Europe, Ryanair is known for its often hard and fast landings and very quick turnarounds....but, they've never had a serious incident, hull loss or loss of life to my knowledge
I still call them Valujet Europe because I'm waiting for their equivalent of the Everglades accident.
People love to hate on them but they still fill their jets up.
Despite the misalignment issue, the blame rests squarely on both pilots. Since the F/O did not see the runway at the minima for the approach, the F/O should have immediately called for a missed approach / go around. No question.
We tend to want to give others the benefit of the doubt, which is exactly what the F/O did when the captain said "Runway in sight". The F/O assumed that the captain had contact, even though the contact could not be confirmed.
As a rule, if something doesn't seem or feel right, or feels slightly off-kilter while on approach -- even if the instruments seem ok, call for a missed approach and set up again, or just divert.
It really doesn't take much to interfere with an ILS signal. Nearby puddles, snow, airport vehicles, and even planes on certain taxiways, can and do "warp" those ILS signals. Its exactly the same thing that happens that cause loss of cell tower signal when going through a tunnel or a mountain valley.
As such, most airports have designated ILS hazard areas in which no vehicle, including aircraft. are allowed to encroach. Likewise, almost all airports with ILS have two hold-short lines at the ends of runways - the normal one at the runway's edge, and an ILS hold-short line much farther back (~100 to 500 feet into the taxiway). The latter must be observed whenever ILS approaches are active and in use.
Glad that all made it out safely.
They should have, no question about it. Still for me a basic unsophisticated equipment like the ILS that's feeding the pilots wrong information is thoroughly unacceptable. In the end, as you said, the decision lies on the pilots and on their judgement yet I can't put the blame on the pilots alone, this is not the mid XX century so either you have the equipment in running order, you state there's no ILS or you close. Having it transmitting the wrong information is a hundred times more dangerous. Can you imagine what that would have done in a much bigger airport? Of course not for in a bigger airport it would be either out of commission or running perfectly. That standard has to be applied to any landing space which means that in this case the airport, with that weather should have stayed closed. Not a popular decision I'm sure but a safe and honest one.
Missed approach / go around and encounter the same problem again.
What is gained by that? They merely needed to know where the runway was.
They would have been better off to ask the airport personnel to park a vehicle in line with the runway and thus been guided to the runway by the vehicle's lights.
@@savroi ILS systems have signal monitors that would sense a deviation such as this one. Those monitors don't do any good at an unattended airport, where no one's watching them. In remote areas, airport snow removal is often the responsibility of highway department plows, whose operators may not be aware or respectful of the niceties of airport snow removal. I remember once shooting the ILS to minimums twice at an unattended outlying airport, and twice going missed when the runway lights appeared out my side window. Third try (bingo fuel, trick or treat), I saw the runway from a higher altitude through a hole in the clouds and was able to sidestep to a landing. Once on the ground I discovered a highway department snowplow sitting on a taxiway in the ILS exclusion zone waiting for me to quit buzzing the field so they could go back to work. I wrote up a NASA safety report and cc'd it to state highway dept, aeronatics dept, airport manager, and my employer.
@@geoh7777 You've clearly never shot an ILS approach at night in falling and blowing snow. Vehicle headlights are tiny pinpricks barely visible through the reflections of your landing lights upon falling snow. They would give you no usable guidance at all.
@@wcate8301 Thanks for your experience! My father was a pilot during the fifties and sixties. I barely met him, he died as a passenger in an aircrash back 1971. This is what draw me to read and watch a lot about air-crashes and their causes. I am sometimes baffled by how much airport operations are underestimated in clear skies let alone under bad weather conditions. Airplanes are not buses, pilots are not drivers and last but not least flight attendants are not waitresses. My mother was a flight attendant during the fifties on DC-4's, DC-6's, DC-7's and DC-8's, she has loads of stories about bumpy landings having over ran the runway at least twice.
Every time you start a video and say “this is the story” my mind immediately says “all about how my life got flipped turned upside down” and it still fits haha
Yeah dude that song SLAPS
You know it's pretty bad when "Ryan Air" has become a universal punchline.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a plane eating its own landing gear before. I know they cannibalise parts for different planes, but this is a new one.
I know people stick their foot in their mouth sometimes, i didn't know planes did.
It was a mobile order!
wheels on meals perhaps...
You do a great job with these videos
Presque Isle is a tiny airport in Maine almost bordering Canada. The flight was not actually from Delta, but from a codeshare airline. These smaller airlines usually don’t pay their pilots well and pilot stress and fatigue end up being way harder.
That's a good explanation that in no way serves as a justification for either the airport or the airline.
@@savroi believe me I know …. But with deregulation happening in the usa that is what happened. There even is PBS special even talking about it.
@@medicinaemdia4895 Right! But that's the point in the end, deregulation, at least in the way it was implemented meant and means "profit at any cost", exacerbating competition whilst giving the upper hand to bigger companies. This ends up creating pseudo monopolies in which low profit sectors are not cared for even if they are essential to the community it serves. This kind of politics never ends well, "the quick buck" economy generates long term passive debt: Infrastructure is the first victim, then services and finally every other form of commercial exchange. A few get richer while the immense majority can't even live up to the same standards the previous generation did. In the end down the drain goes the faith in the system. Believe me that's a tough mountain to climb back.
@@savroi don’t you think I know about it ? You’re 100% right. It’s just a pit that this had to happen to the airline industry.
@@medicinaemdia4895 Yes, it is in general but it is quite notable in the airline industry, one that at a point was the epitome of future and style.
Oh wow! I actually saw this aircraft after the accident while going to visit relatives!
Thanks for covering it!
another great video mate they just get better and better
I really enjoy your video's. I primarily like listening to these.
This is a hugely vital lesson for all instrument pilots. Thanks.
The nice thing about GPS-based LPV/RNP approaches is that the system self-detects any errors so the flight crew has a conclusive indication of whether the approach guidance is valid. The only way it can really go wrong deceptively is if the procedure is coded incorrectly into the FMS nav database. With ILS and other analog radio navaids, it's garbage-in garbage-out. There are certain airports internationally where pilots are warned not to couple the autopilot to the ILS glideslope too soon, because reflections off mountainous terrain can cause autopilot-coupled jets to pull 2g vertical load trying to chase a phantom glideslope reflection and then push over into a negative-g dive to get back on the real glideslope. The autopilot doesn't have the common sense to recognize when the ILS is BS, and even with human pilots, as in this case, common sense isn't always an adequate substitute for automated fault-detection.
Well explained, especially for a non pilot like me. As I understand it, New Zealand's worst aviation disaster (Air New Zealand Flight 901 (TE-901), Mt Erebus, Antarctica, 28 November 1979) was caused by incorrect navigational coding the day before. And this was not initially known. The deceased pilot was exonerated years later.
GPS is not as precise as ILS. You cannot use GPS to get you onto the runway, it can be out by 100m or more, so you need to be visual with the runway while still fairly high. Its altitude information is even worse, so you need to use the aircraft pressure altimeter or radar altimeter for height.
@@islandlife756 the Air New Zealand flight was not during an approach. It was due to an error with the plane’s the INS that took them straight into Mt Erebus. The crew couldn’t see the mountain because of the white snow blending in with the white cloud cover. They were flying a site seeing flight that was supposed to start and end back in Auckland.
This is true, but CRJs are incapable of LPV approaches. They may have LNAV+V, but that's not an official glideslope and provides no guarantees of obstacle clearance. Irrespective, even an LNAV approach would provide guidence to the runway, or alternatively, inputting GPS waypoints and setting a bearing pointer to the GPS while the CDI is on ILS.
@@kukulkanlordofcas4931 This was an ERJ, not a CRJ. Embraer, not Canadair.
That's Crazy, you're taught "Trust your instruments" Not so in this instance, Glad everyone's OK !!
"Trust your instruments" worked here. It's just that the next step is "confirm runway in-sight or go-around" at 200 ft. Unfortunately, the crew failed.
Great vid, man. Thanks!
Another great video 🙂
I like thinking back when you first started your channel. I could see the effort you exerted ; always striving to become more informed and certainly more self-assured. If this sounds to others like empty platitudes, those familiar with your channel know I am sincere. I believe in encouraging instead of discouraging. I apologize for any embarrassment I might have caused you, but you have become someone whose information is reliable, someone who asks for answers when he doesn't have them and just an all-around good egg. Best wishes and good health, sir, from the hills of Virginia. Cork
Very interesting!! Thanks for sharing!! 👍✈✈👍
If ILS had been replaced by MLS, as was planned in the 1970s, the accident probably wouldn't have happen because the microwave frequency would have been unaffected by the snow.
GPS now. Main threat now is solar flare or a cosmic blast
An airport a short distance from us had one of the first MLS units set up as part of a test program. A friend who had contract flight check experience was contracted to do check flights, and the FAA installed a temporary MLS receiver in his plane. I got to fly a few approaches in it outside of official testing time, and was not impressed. The MLS runway already had an ILS installed, and they were aligned to coincide, so comparison approaches could be flown. If you flew the ILS with a stabilized approach and centered needles, The MLS glide slope needle would wander up and down. If you flew the MLS, it was next to impossible to fly a stabilized approach as you had to constantly adjust pitch and sink rate to keep the glide slope needle on the dial, not to mention in the donut. Eventually it was determined that the wavy glide slope was caused by multi-path reception reflecting off the steep rocky terrain beneath the glide path, confusing the receiver. From outer marker to runway threshold the ground was seldom more than 450-500 feet below the glide path. In the end they decommissioned the MLS and moved the ILS to a different runway. FAIL!
@@wcate8301
I was quite interested to read about your experiences. The system you saw was almost certainly the US-sponsored Time Referenced Scanning Beam (TRSB) system, adopted by ICAO. this system was chosen under controversial circumstances.
At the time of the meeting where the decision was made, TRSB simply did not work. The British-sponsored Commutated Doppler MLS (DMLS) demonstrably did. Politics and low skulduggery resulted in TRSB being adopted as the standard, which was never fully implemented, largely due to inherent problems with TRSB.
Awesome video!
Thanks for this report.
Also liked the Ryanair reference. 😂
Your videos are so good!
Great educational video friend. Amen 🙏.
As always, fantastic job. Am glad i subscribed, and you always give me good reason to post a Like.
8:22 2-5 feet is a “tiny bit of snow”? Even in places where that amount isn’t unusual, like northern Maine, it generally isn’t considered tiny.
Love this channel
Not the RyanAir roast 💀💀💀
Presque Isle is like Derry from all of Stephen Kings books. Creepy little town! Nice though.
I used to be based at PQI. We all knew that this would eventually happen. It was even worse when it was a localizer only and then there is Mt. Katadin only a small number of miles off of the runway centerline.
Hehehe... even Ryan Air did not escape a mention! Nice subtle dig in the ribs there.
Strong airplane. Respect for the engineers.
when you put up the picture of the airport, my immediate thought was "that's a post office"
10:35 lol. Shots fired at Ryan Air. You ain't lying though.
I've filed a report on the ils system in ktys. When you fly ils23L into Knoxville, the papi shows 4 white. Its not cheated. My company report resulted in faa flight test passing through.
Nice thumbnail! 😃
didn't know snow could interfere with the ils. by the way, congrats for 22k+ visits in one day
Great paralleled parking
Fascinating... fortunately everyone survived. But in a lot of respects you just have to blame "the system" for that one 🤦🏻♂️
The captain didn't look qualified, I'm surprised she was allowed to fly commercially. She twice said she saw a runway that wasn't there and continued descending below the decision altitude without seing the runway. It could have ended without any damage had she diverted, but it looks she really didn't want to do that.
@@ZentimeProductions "Women and machinery do not mix"--Quote from James Cameron's "Titanic"🙄
We live in Presque Isle and fly out of PQI fairly frequently. We saw the plane after the bad landing (i.e. crash) witht eh wheels stuck in the engine. Ouch! Weekly we drive by the runway on the way to Mapleton.. and make sure the snow is cleared from essential equipment. You never know. We may need to fly in the winter. We did experience a rather exciting there go around due to wind last summer. Felt we were at a 35 degree angle. But we love our local airport!
I love your videos, but I know it’s probably the limitation of the airplane that you were using for the video, but 708SK is a SkyWest CRJ700 lol. Not a 145.
I know because I’ve flown her haha
But great video as always!!
Yeah haha it’s hard coded into the livery. What a small world eh
You missed that in the first part of the briefing!
Yes it was indicated in the video.
The problem probably wasn’t reported earlier because pilots knew from experience that most likely nothing would be done. Hurrah for bureaucracy!
Yeah, I'm a bit troubled by this rule that requires _two_ reports about defective navigation equipment before anything is done. 😕
In such a case, reporting a problem does achieve at least one thing: It covers your ass.
"That landing would have made Ryan Air landings absolutely divine," 🤣🤣🤣👌🏻
That’s crazy to think that there were so many different ways this could’ve been prevented.
That's why the US has so few airliner fatalities -- there are multiple layers of safety checks built in. The crew failed the most critical one "is the runway in sight?" not "I think that's the runway".
It’s a subsided route, Essential Air Service.
Flying along with a flashing master caution?
I’m glad everyone survived
Man , they have to " FLY IN THAT STUFF ❄️
Pilot error, they should have done a go-around at the decision height and diverted.
I concur with DogGone. The other pilots got down safely. Likely blew it off as a fluke or something. Or thought the misalignment had already been reported.
Also yet another airport with inept systems that are tolerated until a disaster actually happens.
What seems really odd is that after the first attempt, the captain did not take over for the second.
I'd like to know with so many deficiencies in her past, why was she a captain? Why was she still employed?
@@hrdley911 There is a shortage of pilots that has been getting worse for a long time. Regionals end up with new pilots trying to build hours to move to the major carriers and pilots who aren't good enough to make it at the major carriers.
Another very interesting video! Now, what’s this about Ryan Air landings…..😎
Gotta go around ✈️
When I flew the Barbie (ERJ-145) we used to say their isn't a runway it hasn't gone off the end of. Great little jet though- 1200 built and no fatalities.
Hmmm... sounds like a list of pilot nicknames for different models of civilian planes could be a fun read!
I'm kinda short so ERJs and CRJs are the perfect scale - no climbing required to check if you can shoot a carry-on into an overhead luggage bin!
The only bad part of flying "pipsqueak" airliners is you can't bring two pets with you like on a big plane (military, moving from one place to another).
Love the dig at Ryan Air….🤣🤣🤣
I am surprised that such a small airport got ILS. In fact it is not a good idea to have "advance" equipment if they are rarely used and you don't have proper person to do maintenance.
It's probably because it's northern Maine. There's NOTHING out there for quite a while, so I bet it has been equipped because it may be called on in case of emergencies, national or single flight. It's a long way to Bangor from there, and a lot of international flights come down through Maine. I can sit outside and watch them come and go all day southwest to northeast and back again.
Instruments that lie are much worse than instruments that give no answer at all, unless the lie is something that can be interpreted and compensated for somehow. A clock that's 15 minutes fast is still useful, as long as you know it's 15 minutes fast.
Super. 💙 T.E.N.
It's sounds as if the FO might have been aware of what was going on with the magneta and green lines on the PFD in regards to the navigation modes. The Magenta indication let's you know that the navigation mode is set to the FMC and the green indications let you know your are set to VOR navigation which is also what is used to tune the ILS of the runway as well.
Pretty simple explanation of what happened. Gross incompetence of the captain. If you don’t see the runway go around. There are a lot of approaches with offset approaches.
@Mini Air Crash Investigation I understand that embedding links of suggested videos in the video itself is a pretty cool option.
Maybe you are not aware that people watching your video using mobile devices, not with the app, but with the mobile website, are UNABLE TO CLICK on links that are placed inside videos.
Could you please include links to suggested videos in the description for those using the mobile website.
Thank you
Great video by the way!
I'd like to second the suggestion to include the suggested links in the description. The links in the video don't work on some devices. Thanks.
10:35 is an unnecessary stab at Ryanair and I love it.
Why do you have a SkyWest CRJ700 in the animation?
Great vlog as always. I guess the captain lost her job… look into the accident of WF710 the 6th of May 1988. Keep up the good work!
Yes! Do WF710! It would be really interesting with a good visualization of that one if the report is even available in english!
can u make a video on air france flight 11
Yo I appreciate these vids they are well produced 🫡
Runway 1 is long and has enough slope upward that it is preferred even with some tailwind. A tailwind during snowfall can pack onto the runway lights and even block sight of the VGSI (and the runway surface). In such a situation, even if a pilot can see where the runway is neither the runway edge lights, the runway, its markings, nor the VGSI are seen. Seeing at least one of these is needed for continuing the approach below Decision Altitude.
I know this is going to sound like a really strange suggestion, but could the controller not proactively inform the next few pilots following the complaint to inform them of any deviations from the whatchamacallit approach signal/path of the ils/vor whatever it is signal after they land in order to get a picture of the state of the whatchamacallit and whether something could be wrong with it?
I saw a video of 2 Mirage fighter jets taking off on an asphalt runway in Africa.It was missing afterward, or afterburner. But...
You cannot have a decision altitude above ground level, it must be decision height. The airfield elevation is over 500ft, there is a huge difference between the two.
Question for MAC Subject Fly By Wire systems, What would happen if an aircraft was either approach or departure at around 1000 meters lets say flying out over a city and The Computers just Died and all backups are dead - Everything is black screen - *is there a Manual Control?* in a Commercial FBW computer controlled Aircraft? or once the computers are gone that's it?
May I suggest a video? Air France 447 crash on the middle of the Atlantic Ocean
I didn't know there was an ERJ for MSFS. What product did you use for this video?
That is a crj700
@@BobbyGeneric145 ohh ok
Thank God for the 1500 hour rule enacted in 2013 or this flight would have safely diverted to KBGR. ;P
Clipped the lightning rod??? Sweet JE-sus!
Embraer:
CRJ in flight sim: Am I a yoke to you?
Flew into Presque Isle many, many times back in the day. It can be done safely! Why was this "captain" allowed to keep flying after demonstrating such a lack of proficiency over and over again? These "pilots" need to be weeded out once and for all, it's not fair to the passengers (they buy a ticket, not a chance).
You're probably right still ILS misinformation under the wrong weather conditions (which adds pressure and stress to whomever is piloting) is not a minor problem.
@@savroi Not ideal but it does happen out there. And definitely not an excuse to drive your jet into the ground.
@@rob737700 You’re right. Management’s problems are on both sides:a company that allowed a scarce pilot to fly and an airport that didn’t know or care enough about a system that is crucial when landing with less than ideal weather. I doubt very much this would have happened had the pilot seen the runway. The pilot should have gone to the alternative airport.
Could make a drinking game for every time you said "runway".
Crazy that a bit snow could cause a *lateral* shift of the localiser by a few hundred feet.. like I could see how a reflection might change the angle, but surely it would still lead to the antenna, just at a slightly different angle?
It was still leading to the localizer antenna, like you said that angle of the beam was off. That leads to an increasing deviation from the lateral path the farther out from the antenna you go.
@@jimbob5891 Then by following it, they should have arrived at the threshold, just.. pointing 5 or 10 degrees or whatever from the runway heading, which they clearly didn't, as they were displaced from the threshold by a few hundred feet
@@isbestlizard A localizer doesn't tell you what heading your aircraft should be flying, it tells you where you are, either left or right, relative to the center line of the runway it is serving. If a snow pile is somehow redirecting the beam being emitted by the localizer antenna, you won't arrive at the runway threshold on the wrong heading, you will arrive at the threshold of an imaginary runway somewhere to the left or the right of the actual runway.
@@jimbob5891 I figured out why - the actual antenna of the localiser is at the FAR end of the runway, not the end you land at, so deviation by a few degrees is going to cause lateral offsets at the end you land at
Sounds like the Captain should have chosen another career.
This...
...is the story
Since when is 2-5ft a "tiny bit of snow" 🌨️ ha??
Best guess why pilots hadn't reported it before was that they were flying in good weather. The ILS got them pretty damn close, saw the runway and made a slight correction, probably didn't think much of it. Possibly even equating it to their own error, oh I guess we didn't line up right on it, type of deal.
Or, in the previous incidents, it wasn't that far off. Say maybe 20 feet off centerline, which would peak their curiosity, but again, easy enough to just make the slight correction and equate it to your own error.
This is oddly reminiscent of this 3-part TV series by Stephen King called The Langoliers that actually took place at Bangor, Maine airport which is (relatively) nearby where this happened. Weird.
DL: Langoliers did NOT "actually take place". Ahem.
That is a air perfect storm
You need to do a video of the commercial flight with passengers supposedly landing at Tampa International that actually landed at MacDill AFB Completely differed configuration of runways .....
No injuries....Plane surrounded by armed Security ...Giant SNAFU!
As explained to me by a retired Navy Pilot with many years of experience....It is routine for highly qualified commercial pilots on instrument approach to call out ..."Runway In Sight"...at decision altitude altitude Before they can actually see the runway...and just keep on the glide path for a few more hundred feet...until they break out of the clouds...and when you actually see a runway in front of you land on it...In his assessment that is what these guys did and they landed at the wrong airport...
Lets see this one debated?
I've flown Ryanair loads. Always been good, even letting me go pee after 5 or 6 pints just before take off. I won't hear a bad word said about them to be honest.
"That landing would've made Ryan Air landings 🛬 look devine." BAWHAHA!!! 😂
2 to 5 feet or inches of snow?
I noticed the same thing. Two to five feet of snow is by no means a tiny little bit. ☃️
Why are you using a CR7 for a video about an E145?
I suppose two phonecalls have to be made because of "workload" or being sure there is really something.
That makes allready a treshold for registering a "complaint".
So six earlier experiences that could have led to an early solution never made it to "the autorities".
I think the decision "this is nothing" versus "wait a minute..., what is that..." should be taken on a level where seemingly unsignificant signals can be aggregated.
saw the teaser for this, immediately thot of old pollack joke: they skidded to a stop on landing, and the pilot sed: "jeez that was a short runway!" copiliot: "yeh, and really wide, too."