This Was A Miracle In Miami | Miami Air 293
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Donations are never expected but appreciated: paypal.me/miniaircrashJoin My Discord: / discord
Video And Image Credit: NTSB
This is the story of miami air international flight 293. On the 3rd of may 2019, a miami air international 737 was on its way from guantanamo naval air station to jacksonville naval air station, This was the second flight of the day and this was their last flight of the day. Before leaving the pilots checked the weather for their destination. It was quite stormy so they decided to also check the weather for their alternate airport as well. Moreover they found out that the left hand thrust reverser was out of commission for this flight. The thrust reverser is pretty important as it redirects the engines thrust allowing the plane to slow down while landing. Its a nice to have but not a must so they decided to go ahead with the flight. The takeoff from guantanamo and the cruise were all normal once they started to near jacksonville they started to pick up some weather on their radar. The pilots decided to fly around the storm cells avoiding the worst of it. At this time jacksonville naval air station was getting absolutely hammered by rain. The winds were at 20 knots and gusting upto 30 knots. In the cockpit the pilots were setting the plane up for a Rnav approach to runway 10 at jacksonville. The pilots set the autobreak to 2. But the controller then changed things up, the controller cleared flight 293 for an rnav approach to runway 28. The controller told the pilots to expect moderate to heavy rains on their approach to runway 28. As the controller took flight 293 lower and lower the pilots programmed the RNAV 28 approach into the flight management computer of the 737. As they flew the approach the controllers could see that the rain was moving to the east and so they inquired with flight 293 about landing on runway 10 instead, the captain thought that that was a good idea and said “yeah go ahead lets do it”. The controller guided flight 293 to the final approach fix for runway 10. The controller let flight 293 know that he'd be using precision approach radar monitoring to help the pilots get down to the runway threshold. PAR or precision approach radar is often used by the US navy in poor visibility conditions to help pilots line up with the runway. As the plane got closer, the controller gave the pilots roll out and go around data for the approach. As the gear came out the winds at the runway was at 240 degrees and 10 knots. At 9:40 pm the controller let the pilots know that they were well above the 3 degrees glidepath down to the runway. Within seconds the autopilot was disconnected and the rate of descent went up from 1100 to 1400 feet per minute. The pilots worked through the landing checklist, as the landing checklist was completed the rate of descent slowed to about 1000 feet per minute. The 737 was pretty much on glide now. But it didnt stay that way for long, the 737 was above the glideslope again within minutes. Moreover the pilots were struggling to keep the plane lined up with the runway when they were at 1400 feet the plane was 100 feet to the right of the runway and that margin just grew for a while till they were 220 feet to the right of the runway. As the plane descended the pilots put the plane into a left bank to correct that. In the cockpit the sink rate warning blared as the plane got closer and closer to the runway. They were descending way too fast and they just too fast period. Flight 293 touched down 1500 feet past the displaced threshold of runway 10.
As soon as they were on the runway the pilots engaged the reverse thrust on the right hand engine and the spoilers came out slowing the plane down. As the plane went down the runway the auto brakes were applied and soon after that manual braking kicked in. The captain was braking as hard as he could but the plane just wouldn't slowing down. The captain was fighting to keep his plane on the centerline. But despite all of this the plane still wasnt slowing down fast enough. The problem was that unlike at most airports runway 10 at jacksonville lead right to a
![Cody Johnson - I'm Gonna Love You (with Carrie Underwood) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yy9PuYMU29g/mqdefault.jpg)
oops i said 747 instead of 737 a couple of times, yeah sleep deprivation isnt fun
It's OK, at least you weren't flying! Get some sleep.
Their plane converting between a 737 and 747 must have been a distraction on top of what they were dealing with
It’s called continuation bias.. you continue with what you believe even though it maybe wrong
It’s ok slugger
You need to call in the relief captain
The main cause was not knowing the RCR (runway condition reading) and RSC (runway surface condition) to calculate the landing distance...especially with the heavy rain! Navy runways all over the world are known for being sh!tty! 🤨
well, it isnt like it rains a lot in Florida, especially when winds are 20-30 knots. LOL
This. An overworked pilot due to the other pilot being on their check ride, a runway in terrible condition, an ATC that didn't provide necessary information, and bad or missing SOP's, all let that become an actual accident, but without the runway state and the pilots lack of knowledge of it none of that would have led to an accident.
I've hydroplaned a number of times in the car. The first time it happened, I was still very young. Somehow it dawned on me that it was like driving a boat down the highway where my rudder was in the front instead of the back. I have also never driven a boat, but what I realized was that I couldn't make sharp changes to my direction of travel but could only make them much more slowly. I was going quite quickly on the highway when this happened because water had pooled in the area and I live in a place where we don't often get that much rain. I managed to stay in my lane even and avoid all of the other cars.
After that experience, I learned both when I should slow down because of the risk of hydroplaning and how I should handle it if it did happen. In an aircraft, I imagine the physics are the same but the geometry of where the wheels are and the velocity of the aircraft make it much more difficult to hydroplane successfully. I don't know since I've only landed in a simulator and only flown a real plane whilst still in the sky.
I hydroplaned on my motorcycle on the new SF Bay Bridge when it had just opened and there was a rain shower. Not fun AT ALL!
Thanks to this channel, I've been introduced to the podcast called The Podcrashed. I'm addicted!! Thank you for referring them in one of your videos!
Hydroplaning is a phenomenon familiar to most people that drive a car where it rains frequently. Dont really need to be a pilot of an airplane to know about its effects.
You'd be utterly dismayed then that few people who drive actually know what it is even if they've experienced it.
Difference is as a pilot it's something you HAVE to know about and the effects of it for a plane are far worse due to the speeds and weight involved.
@@skylined5534 I believe people are vaguely/indirectly familiar with hydroplaning as it is the reason why one should drive slower in the rain. And even those people that decide not to adjust their speed on wet surfaces, they are generally aware that there are risks associated with this decision.
Its not rocket science.
Great to see some of the footage of NTSB investigators doing their job at the end, added a new dimension to your videos and hope we see more of this in future videos.
absolutely love your content ! even among all the A/C crash investigation series, i perticularily enjoy yours. could you make the sound volume a little higher tho?
One of the things I love about his channel is that he doesn't add any background music to his narration. This way we just hear him talking to us. Even Mentour Now has started using background music. Background music on these types of channels with the narration is absolutely annoying and distracting. We're not watching a movie or tv show that needs to push our emotional buttons.
i agree, audio is very low
Hydroplaning was a big issue in the 1970s and 1980s on highways and roads in Holland.
Grooved tires took away most of the danger, plus instructions to all car drivers to 'brake gently' so the brakes wouldn't seize up.
Cars didn't have ABS in those day (system preventing the brakes from locking up).
Groovy
MEL (Minimum Equipment List) or not, there's no possible way I would have tried to land on an ungrooved wet runway with an inoperative thrust reverser.
Having minimal wheel braking plus minimal reverse thrust will almost certainly result in an overrun, as it did here..........
I probably missed it but did the video say they knew it was ungrooved? I'd personally expect any runway in Florida to be grooved, due to the amount of rain they receive compared to other states.
But yeah, I would've rejected the landing I think. If I didn't, I would have definitrly done a touch and go. The moment they touched down 1500 feet beyond the displaced threshold, the captain should've put it into TOGO and taken back off. After all, they didn't have reverse thrusters, they were landing on an ungrooved runway in rain, any overshoot meant going straight into water and they were far over the speed they should've been? That's 4 very good reasons to say never mind and take off for another approach.
Especially not coming in hot like that...
@@reformCopyright Lol.....they did just about everything they could to ensure an overrun........
@@Faded-Tales-PreviouslyHarley The runway surface type should be included in the pre-flight paperwork given to the pilots by operations.
I would place considerable culpability on the airport for having an ungrooved runway in an area prone to rain.
@@rrknl5187 You're right, I wasn't even thinking of preflight paperwork. I'm still just on my private pilot training, and haven't gotten to the end yet where I'm planning all that.
But yeah, there's no excuse for an airport in a rainy area not to be grooved. Not looking at any paperwork or charts, I'd assume essentially the southeast from Alabama down and over would be grooved, as well as at least the coastal side of Oregon and Washington. But personally I feel like every runway that accepts more than a tiny Cessna should be grooved, considering how wild the weather is throughout the country. It'd help with rain and likely snow, but also wind in areas that are pretty dry. It's wild to me that some runways just aren't.
Good videos. But why do people refer to bad weather as "weather?" Weather is comprehensively everywhere. You have to add the relevant adjectives. Stormy weather.
I wonder WEATHER you are right 🤣🤣🤣
I love these videos, im so interested in learning to fly and these videos help me get a bit of a head start by informing me on stories of not what to do and what to look for!
good luck on your flying journey!
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation Have you ever done some polling to find out the demographics of your viewers? It might surprise you to find out how many are not pilots, and maybe have never even flown before. I just thought it would be an interesting community survey. Enjoying the content, thank you.
@@hotsoup1001 I would expect a large percentage to be gamers and/or R/C pilots.
Now that’s a hydroplane
I see what you did there. I’m low key mad at myself for not thinking of that one
🤣🤣🤣 Nice
Underrated comment. Great one haha
I’ve watched all your videos and I find them fascinating. It’s the first time I’ve really watched aviation videos, and I’m learning a lot of knowledge and terminology as I go. Would you consider making a series of videos about how things normally work - such as air traffic control, airport ground crews, aircraft maintenance, different approach systems, autopilots, etc? I reckon these would be popular with aviation enthusiasts as well as noobs like me. Knowing the normal procedures would really aid understanding of when things go wrong! Thanks
There are a *lot* of aviation channels that do just that. This channel is its own little niche. Try Mentour Pilot, Blancolirio, Scott Perdue ( FlyWire) for starters..there’s a lot of really good content on RUclips covering the more technical aspects of flying.
i have been on a hydoplaning plane.......... as well as a hydroplaning bus, going down a hill. The feeling reminded me of sliding over a frozen pond, no traction , ...........and makes you feel a little queesy. great episode , it is nice to hear some non lethal stories !
I've been on a hydroplaning boat....🤣
In all considerations and with available information, the number one reason for this accident was confirmation bias, and by extension...the captain. We should not expect operators to hold our hands to guide us through every situation and decision. As airmen, it is incumbent upon us to break the tunnel vision and go around. I too was also a victim of my poor decision to continue an unstable approach to landing. Luckily I was fortunate like many of us were. But I will never make thay mistake again....go around and get stable.
Someone didn't get past the halfway point did they.
Seems obvious the main problem was not knowing the conditions of the runway. Since the previous plane landed ok I assume it was just a dynamic situation.
“Jacksonville Naval Air Station was getting absolutely hammered” sounds like my type of job
This was "A Miracle in Jacksonville" Florida and NOT "A MIRACLE IN MIAMI, wasn't it?
'Otherwise your content in this subject area is undoubtedly the best short form (but extremely comprehensive and well rounded, nonetheless!!) documentary coverage on the Internet!
'Surely that's obvious to everyone from nascent Av Geeks, to veteran pilots, to NTSB aviation investigators!!
Thanks very much for all of your efforts and obvious expertise and accomplishment in this fascinating realm of international human endeavour!!
🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦
A miracle indeed. But sadly this cost everyone their jobs and the airline closed 🥺
I love right across the river and had a perfect view of everything. I missed the accident, but saw the clean up and resuce. The weather was horrible
Yes I knew about hydroplaning on runways - that is where antilock brakes first came from. Later they showed up on our cars.
*Next video: How Did A Passenger Jet End Up In The Sky?*
A Miami based FAR-145 repair and overhaul facility an interior shop that overhaul escape slides was slammed by the FAA for the R1 door slide that failed to inflate due to not being qualified to have service the Air Cruiser evac slide. Can’t say the shop name as they were a former client, but could say they came very close to having their FAR-145 certificate pulled by the Miami FAA / FSDO-19 as the shop Primary Maintenance Inspector (PMI) is a friend.
What caused this accident? Classic Swiss Cheese Model: The approach was unstabilized, landed fast and long. Checklist wasn't followed, autobrakes kicked in late. The runway condition was very poor. The plane had an inoperative thrust reverser. The pilot failed to recognize the situation. Simple case of "All of the things went a little wrong".
I've experienced hydroplaning in a car. It's incredibly frightening. I had assumed that landing conditions would be supplied based on information from previous landings.
This captain has the experience...he should have known the possible consequences and initiated a go-round himself. A delay is better than a disaster. I would not want to fly with this guy.
I'm flabbergasted at how the plane is able to change from a 737 to a 47, and vice-versa, so many times.
Honestly, the First Officer gets a pass in my book. Such low hour count, coupled with poor SOP's, almost no real information present about the runway conditions other than is was wet (to the pilots), and captain being severely task saturated due to poor planning/negligence on the airlines part really makes me question how much of this was actually pilot error. I do agree a missed approach should have been executed though.
Is a plane on the river not just a weird looking ferry?
I worked operations at San Diego international for a major airline. I'm not familiar with this airport but there's a lot of pressure on these guys to push off and land on time. I think they make such a big deal at the airlines when pilots go around or want to land at their alternate, that it's almost an option that's rarely taken. I'm not a pilot but I'm a pilot's brat and lived and breathed airplanes and airports since I was a baby. when you stand on the flight deck of a carrier that's pitching around and there are many, many go arounds....... and its pitch black out there, well, this doesn't relate to this video, but it makes you appreciate how the navy wants the go-around. yep, not really on a schedule are they. not relevant put totally awesome.
This was fascinating. I didn't think a runway could exist without drainage channels.
... especially in Florida. Runways (most of them) do have a "crown" cross-section -- an upward slope of about 1.5 deg from either side towards the middle -- which does help some with water removal.
I think ungrooved runways should simply be closed down in heavy rain. The crew wasn't flawless, but they didn't cause the accident.
MINI!!!!
Mega!
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation Plane thing
The engines on that flight were leased. I know because we owned them. As you can probably imagine, a total loss for both.
Too much water too quickly, or did rocks damage them?
#425👍🤔🦃s!!
ERAU 80 CFIA&I ret.
You'll be livin' in a 737 down by the river!
Brilliant video once again. 😁
That's just the engine powering up...that's just the engine struggling... That's just a carp swimming around your ankles...
I continue to believe that we have a generation or two of people who are equipment operators who have forgotten that they are aviators.
"Get - home -itis" is as old as aviation and ever more dangerous. As with any all accidents there are many contributing factors, usually headed by a lack of professionalism.
Great summary. For me it seems to be a problem with crew resource management. Having an FO that has no experience is not an issue per se, but the FO should have had enough training to help the captain out by far more.
FO?
@@Capecodham First Officer
@@TheNewAccount2008 What these type threads are full of are a closed club of elite who try to show how hip and cool they are by using aircraft terms
that easily could be spelled out so the casual viewer could understand them.
What did he do with the time he saved not typing irst fficer?
@@Capecodham I am sorry that you feel offended by me using abbreviations. I am not an aviation expert, but some abbreviations come natural to me, so I use them without thinking too much about it.
@@Capecodham What a bizarre comment to make. Most acronyms found here are common ones in aviation and if not, Google is always there to help. No need to feel embarrassed by not knowing them 👍
*Slippery when Wet*
So... this JUST happened in 2019. Wondering why it looks like so much CGI ? There's NO WAY actual footage doesn't exist. I'm FAR from a pro on any level, just an interested bystander cuz I love this channel.
Let me see, you're not configured right before you even get to the runway, you over reach the touchdown by 1500 ft, what pilot in his right mind would continue the touchdown? Why wouldn't he immediately abort and go around? You see so many of these were pilots refused to go around and insist on trying to force it on to the ground and force it to stop when there's not enough room. Okay even taken off that there's water that wasn't planned for on the runway, setting all that aside, he should have still done a go-around.
Not 1500ft past the touchdown zone, but past the displaced threshold (basically, it is a part of the runway on which you are not allowed to land for various reasons). Usually airliners aim to land at least 1000ft from the beginning of the runway and "touchdown zone" (where it's OK to land) in Jacksonville is 2500ft long, so the landing was well with in these limits. The issue was mainly with procedures (assuming better braking action then in reality) and airport ops (not actually providing this information).
@@sergeydubovyk9268 Thank You very much for responding and clarifying that up for me.
'Great content as always! The NTSB coverage of the post accident situation and investigation certainly enhanced your presentation as well.
However, I just don't understand your title for this incident and video since it didn't take place anywhere near Miami. The site of this very significant runway overrun incident was Jacksonville Naval Air Station, which is 350 miles north of Miami.
Only the name of the air contractor for the US Navy involved that other city's name; namely Miami Air International.
Did you mention that this was a hull loss incident as well. After the NTSB investigation was concluded, the aircraft was scrapped. Twenty-one minor injuries were reported. As well, the death of several family pets, which were being transported in the cargo hold under the passenger deck, was also documented.
My understanding is that both engines were also a total loss, as might well be expected on this Boeing B737-800 NG (Next Generation) series aircraft suffering this type of off pavement excursion with turf, earth and FOD ingestion as well as the inntake at power of seawall concrete, river mud and brackish water!
I can't recall if you mentioned the name of the river involved. The St. Johns River is a very prominent feature not only for Jacksonville NAS,but also for what's technically the largest city (not metro area) in Florida, in the southeast as well as in the American south outside of Texas!
🇺🇸 🌎 🇺🇲 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦 🍁 🇺🇸 🌎 🇺🇲
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacksonville,Florida 🇺🇸
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_Air_International usa 🇺🇸
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air_Station_Jacksonville usa 🇺🇸
🇨🇦 🍁 🇨🇦
Pretty great video... As to your questions...
Yes, I'm aware of hydroplaning in just about any vehicle with sufficient speed and contact-patch to the ground... Water, and thereby hydrodynamics, is an interesting and occasionally TERRIFYING beast. In any quantity sufficient to pool, water has surface tension, created by hydrogen bonds. It's why rain drops are round and can stick to things with very little surface contact, and how certain insects and even a lizard or two can walk on its surface. It's also nearly impossible to compress... AND just like air has a maximum speed on its own of "mach", water will only move so fast for you, too... Put enough speed onto any surface and it doesn't matter how much force or weight is pushing down when it hits water, it's GOING to either "float" on the surface, or "skip" right off of it... EVEN BULLETS will bounce off the surface of water at the appropriate angle!
I'm going to have to hold BOTH the Operator and Captain responsible for contributing to this incident. The operator didn't have a safety-oriented and conservative approach documented for landing procedures regarding landing distance, AND they allowed this kind of workload to be put on the Captain all at once... When you can have the lives of more than a hundred passengers relying on your flight crew, that just doesn't seem like a good idea to me... We ABSOLUTELY MUST be capable of bringing "rookie pilots" up to the "professional ranks" without relying on outside sources of training and experience... BUT piling it all onto ONE Captain is NOT the answer.
As for the Captain, while it's easy to lay blame on the woulda, coulda, and shoulda... The fact is, that we HAVE learned that from one landing to the next, EVERYTHING should be considered a Go-Around with the option to land the plane... every single time. As fussy and impatient as one might get, it's imperative that we learn to take our time wherever possible. Be SURE of a maneuver like landing BEFORE you commit. If the approach is unstable, it's okay (and well it should be) EVEN to call it off as a go-around early, and admit that we just don't have a stable approach on the glide slope this time. We can finish lining up on the fly-over, and just circle back at the prescribed altitude for another approach. THAT right there would've bought the time to get all the checklists done, program the course in, and double check EVERYTHING to be sure the next approach was solid... NOTHING good comes from "rushing it"... AND that's as true when I'm riding my motorcycle like a bat out of hell through the twisties as it is when a pilot is trying to bring a plane in down the centerline and "butter" the landing. ;o)
Completing the mission at any cost always has the potential for incidents or accidents. I suspect the landing briefing was also inadequate. These guys were lucky the airplane stayed in one piece after going through that stone wall, glad everyone survived.
Kool
Yeah, I've been to NAS JAX a couple of times...military air strip so this has multiple factors involved. But pilot error is primary.
The most significant cause was, in my view, the Captain's choice not to go around. The internal reasons for this - confirmation bias, or the similar mission-oriented attitude were factors. It seems that very poor CRM (Crew/Cockpit Resource Management) was also at play; Why was the First Officer overloaded with work? What was the First Officer doing and not doing, and why?
The training manuals regarding unknown runway conditions were also significant. And the First Officer's lack of experience in heavy aircraft is key - did he know how much momentum had to be overcome in braking? Did he have training - including simulator - on these issues?
The from one runway to another and back probably created a rush in the cockpit. That, if well handled, is not a big concern. Key questions I have: Why was the descent to glide slope from above, not below? Why was the plane going too fast and too high, so it had to descend too quickly? Why was it so difficult to maintain alignment with the runway? I raise these questions because *if the flight crew did not know the reasons for these conditions, the landing was not under control.* And a key safety rule is: If you don't know what is going on, and even one thing goes wrong, go around. So it seems to me that there was also a lack of situational awareness.
There may have been cultural issues as well. These were civilian pilots flying into military bases. Was there pressure due to the miltary culture's expectation of mission focus and the pressure that puts on civilian contractors. Also, Jacksonville is a long way from Miami. Where did the pilot live? Did he want to get home by a certain time? Were they attentive to key differences, such as the lack of grooves on the runway and the use of a military system to assist approach? Was the lack of a report of runway conditions more common at a military airport? Often, these conditions are passed on from prior pilots landing. Landings happen every few minutes at major civilian airports like MIA. How much time passed from the prior landing to this accident? Did the prior plane come in before the rain?
There's a lot to explore here.
These are good questions.
A combination of the ubiquitous U.S. arrogant ‘know it all! Attitude, and the old ‘get there-itis’, usually attributable to U.S. corporate expectations.
Have you made any significant changes during the making of this production, or were not I the best of your spirits?
(You sounded a bit off).
The flight crew should have done a go-around. Hydroplaning on aircraft led to ABS.
I’ve flown on this plane and pretty sure this was considered a smooth landing by Miami Air’s standards. I can say from experience there were so many missed approaches on Miami, even in VFR dry conditions.
These pilots made several mistakes. Lack of experience or poor pilot planning prevented them from looking at their charts and understanding that landing an airliner on an ungrooved runway in heavy rain is the equivalent of landing on an ice rink. This isn’t a secret. It’s well known by most with an ATP. The controllers were simply keeping them out of the weather. The second mistake was accepting a PAR. Flying a PAR is something that most civilian pilots have never done, and it takes practice. It’s a completely different approach because you are processing audible commands and not a visual reference. They should’ve gone around from the start and held until the ILS or RNAV could be safely flown. Most pilots with experience have made mistakes on other smaller aircraft, and wouldn’t have made these errors on a passenger jet. If they did, hopefully the other pilot will plug the hole in the Swiss cheese model.
This landing was doable if they had maintained proper VRef and landed into the wind on rwy 28. Winds were 240/10. They landed downwind. On the 737 inop thrust reverser is not a no-go item in certain conditions, but it should be.
Left thrust reverser not working......evidently that wasn't enough to "down" the airplane?
What’s the point of having a co pilot if you don’t let them do their job? Sounds like el Capitano might have had a bit of a God complex...and hey, guess what...airplanes and weather will soon fix that foolishness.
JEEZ! If ever there was a landing that was unstable from the beginning. Why didn't they just go around?
It always blows my mind that Air Mobility Command contracts with such incompetent carriers to transport our personnel. It's just more evidence of how low on the DOD priority list personnel are!
None of the 143 people onboard....were injured. I thought he was gonna say none survived lol. The tone was that way lol
They were landing at NIP. I've done some concrete work there, and the concrete used there tends to be very slippery when wet. They also have poor drainage. Ultimately, this was due to an engineering failure.
Where I live a driving course in a driving center with slipperg surfaces and hydroplaning is mandatory because we get a lot of ice. Trucks also have to do it, so whuke we were having lunch they were slipping across the course with 8 and 12 ton trucks. As much as it was fun to watch, seeing a truck spin out anywhere besides that center would probably scare the shit out of me. Spinning out a car in a safe environment really helped me in situations where I encountered it in real life and it can be hella scary with 1.5 tons... I can't imagine what it must feel like with the weight of a plane.
The Wikipedia article of this incident indicates 21 were injured. 0 human fatalities but some pets on the flight apparently died.
There’s nothing like a little hydroplaning on a busy highway to put your like into perspective.
Fren I was totally gonna say that this incident reminded me so much of TAM 3054 and then you mentioned it LOL
Hydroplaning is a problem with driving cars and trucks also.
Hydroplaneing I've heard of. I'd say it's partly down to the operator but also questions need to be asked of the controller and airport. What did they know about the state of the runway etc
Just wondering if they could have decided to only do landing with slower than normal approach. Or is that just even more unsafe. 🤔
“None of the passengers on board….. were injured.” Almost had me on that one chief
Lol, he sounds like a school kid giving a speech in 6:23. His voice cracked like crazy😂
I blame passport control/immigration, if they weren't so moody all the time the weather would be better!
A lot of English for a mistake. It is a mistak, whatever. You can call it confirmation bias et al. Just goes to show pilots are as human as you and me. They, like computers, can make mistakes, once in a while.
I am casual about this as no one was hurt or killed. One of the few times when aircraft accidents turn about to be so tame, at the end.
It was hydroplaning. Anything else just modifies how far it was going to go in the drink. Pilots have no way from the air to measure the depth of water on a runway.
It may have been within spec, but if they had the both reversers functioning, it probably would have made the landing.
spec?
@@Capecodham Specifications. Meaning that even with a thrust reversed broken, the plane was allowed to fly by airline / federal specifications.
@@pyro226 What did you do with the time you saved not typing ifications?
@@Capecodham I thought spec was a commonly understood abbreviation. I don't know if it is regional (Midwestern USA), more used in engineering / technology fields, or by generation. Google suggests that the abbreviation has been in use since the early 1900's, reaching peak popularity about 1960 or 1970 (though I'm nowhere that old) and has been trending down.
In the mid 1970’s I was driving a Triumph Herald on a motorway in very wet conditions at 70 mph. I was hydroplaning and the lack of sensation through the steering wheel was fascinating and having no steering, so too my foot off the accelerator and just over 60 mph felt the tyres grip the road. I have never forgotten this. So i guess any jet doing a hundred + mph would aquaplane. The tons weight loading per tyre must be managed in design hence the greater number on the big jets would still aquaplane as easily as a smaller plane.
This is all assumption as I am only an armchair pilot without the flying games, therefore “I know nothing”.
Cracking little cars, Heralds. I was driving my mk2 Clio back along an absolutely rain soaked A50 the other year and whilst the tyres weren't illegal they were pretty much worn out. I recall the oddest moment where the front left actually span up a little over a sudden deep amount of water on the left, felt quite like when you wheelspin on ice but at around 70mph! Very strange.
I have strong "continuation bias" in everything I do! I never knew the word for it before. 😊
You’re constantly say 747, plane was a 737
Sleep deprivation oops
Imagine your plane growing two extra engines in the air. Oh boy.
He said it twice. Grow up.
1st mistake USA military being in Cuba :(
747 of corse not - disater 9 don't think so all alive
I've had that bias soo many times, just doing routine things.
F1 fans should know what hydroplaning is
The reason for the crash. Was a incompetent co pilot if the captain was not doing both jobs he may have had time to make better decisions
One of my favorite channels as you do stories and follow ups that tend to disappear after awhile. I believe the only casualties were family pets in the cargo hold which was unfortunate? Did the NTSB address if runway 28 was used with 1,200 extra feet available the landing would have been successful?
I always wonder about the animals in an evacuation! Some baggage handlers have left dogs out on the hot tarmac for extended periods. I have also seen videos of people taking small dogs and cats as carry-on in carriers. I WOULD stop to grab my kitty and go down the slide with him. Once I even read in Reader's Digest of a flight where the cargo was carrying a poodle and had an issue (depressurized, stopped heating or something?) and they had the people on the plane vote if they wanted to turn around and save the dog's life or continue. Enough people voted to turn around. I'd make a ruckus and force them to turn around, especially if it was my pet!
Love your videos. Wish I could hear them better but o well.
Brilliant video once again. 😁
Good morning indeed 😊
Love waking up to a new video.
Main cause? Get-it-on-the-ground-itis.
"Mom i want to go to the beach"
"Sweetheart, we already are"
You have to wonder why they didn't go around!!!
flight of torturers,
schedules caused that accident and pilot pressure
Awesome video!
So they needed another runway or Airport really.
I wonder how they removed the plane from the river.
Why was it suddenly a 7_4_7 ??
Just one thing. I think you mean AQUAPLANING. The tendency for a tyre with insufficient tread-channels (or sipes) to move the water away from the footprint area, causing it to plane, instead, on the film of water, that builds up ahead of it. A HYDROPLANE refers to a very high speed, shallow-Draught, stepped-hulled boat, in a class known as ‘Skimmers’. They were often driven by an airscrew. (Aeroplane propeller). Modern, mono-hulled boats eschew stepped hulls because the steps cause huge drag at low speeds. (Except for racing boats).
Be that as it may, I used to do airliner tires (and brakes) for a living, and we called it "hydroplaning".
"Hydroplaning" is an American English phraseology. Obviously, the commenter is from England
Why the FUCK is a plane with a broken thrust reverser cleared to fly?
Because they normally aren't needed, so it's up to the crew to figure out whether in a particular situation that will be the case.
Spoken with great authority but wrong. They were unstable, too high, too fast.
Wrong in what way? Are you perhaps saying that hydroplaning wouldn't have happened if the landing had been at a slower speed?
Interesting and informative!! Thanks for the wonderful work put into this video!! 👍✈✈👍
Wow this one seems eerily familiar.
Reminiscent of the American Airlines md80 that went off the end of the runway in Little Rock, Arkansas USA a few years ago. Flight crew was determined to land even though weather had deteriorated and their approach was unstable and fast. Simply put, “get there-Itis “ has claimed many planes and many lives.