Another Airlink aircraft down

rvanwyk said:
most of the braking force comes from the engines and not the wheels which should cancel out the possiblity of aquaplaning. Perhaps there was a problem with the reverse thrusters and the pilot had to rely only on the wheels for breaking friction causing it to aquaplane.
Click to expand...

correct, but reverse thrust is only given on immediate touchdown, then manual brakes are applied towards the end.
 
There is no reverse thrust on the Airlink Embraer 135 aircraft. George experienced some rain, but from what I hear, it wasn't that much, so it must have been building up.
 
Last edited:
rvanwyk said:
most of the braking force comes from the engines and not the wheels which should cancel out the possiblity of aquaplaning. Perhaps there was a problem with the reverse thrusters and the pilot had to rely only on the wheels for breaking friction causing it to aquaplane.
Click to expand...

When calculating runway requirements reverse thrust is not taken into account, the aircraft must be able stop using wheel brakes alone.

If the aircraft aquaplanes on touchdown the pilots should have aborted the landing, they should never have reached the end of the runway at high enough speed to go off the end like that.

If the runway was not flooded and they landed within the landing zone (i.e. they were following procedures) they would not have gone off the end of the runway. Since we would all like to think that pilots do things by the book there must be more to this than pilot error, it would have been the airpot's responsibilty to inform the aircraft of the runway conditions.
 
KhoisanX said:
When calculating runway requirements reverse thrust is not taken into account, the aircraft must be able stop using wheel brakes alone.

If the aircraft aquaplanes on touchdown the pilots should have aborted the landing, they should never have reached the end of the runway at high enough speed to go off the end like that.

If the runway was not flooded and they landed within the landing zone (i.e. they were following procedures) they would not have gone off the end of the runway. Since we would all like to think that pilots do things by the book there must be more to this than pilot error, it would have been the airpot's responsibilty to inform the aircraft of the runway conditions.
Click to expand...

true!
 
Ok wait a second....

Should runways not have a draining system so water doesn't build up on it? I mean aquaplaining happens if you add force+water. I fail to see how any airport would have a runway that has a water build up. If so they fail pretty bad :o
 
Some pics from emails I have received and Avcom postings
Sorry do not have mention who took the images

Ouch crunch overshot the runway, with the rain and no reverse thrusters on the Embraer 135
It was raining reasonably as I was just installing a 5000l water tank - worst drought in 132 years

0_1.jpg

071220092.jpg


Runway open and Kulula has just been given the clearance for landing

Hmm
"The plane overshot the runway because the brakes apparently failed," Sapa quoted him as saying.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
KhoisanX said:
When calculating runway requirements reverse thrust is not taken into account, the aircraft must be able stop using wheel brakes alone.

If the aircraft aquaplanes on touchdown the pilots should have aborted the landing, they should never have reached the end of the runway at high enough speed to go off the end like that.

If the runway was not flooded and they landed within the landing zone (i.e. they were following procedures) they would not have gone off the end of the runway. Since we would all like to think that pilots do things by the book there must be more to this than pilot error, it would have been the airpot's responsibilty to inform the aircraft of the runway conditions.
Click to expand...
It depends on how much control the pilots had. If they open the throttle, there is a lag in getting full power from the turbines. Then when they have the power, in which direction is the aquaplane going to take them?
 
Sackboy said:
It depends on how much control the pilots had. If they open the throttle, there is a lag in getting full power from the turbines. Then when they have the power, in which direction is the aquaplane going to take them?
Click to expand...

I see no water:( It's not even muddy next to the road.:D
 
kilos said:
Some pics from emails I have received and Avcom postings
Sorry do not have mention who took the images

Ouch crunch overshot the runway, with the rain and no reverse thrusters on the Embraer 135
It was raining reasonably as I was just installing a 5000l water tank - worst drought in 132 years

0_1.jpg

071220092.jpg


Runway open and Kulula has just been given the clearance for landing

Hmm
Click to expand...

eina!!
 
None of you pro's are answering my question :(

Shouldn't a Runway have some sort of draining system for water?
 
Pitbull said:
None of you pro's are answering my question :(

Shouldn't a Runway have some sort of draining system for water?
Click to expand...

jip. It is suppose to have. I see no water to speak of, in puddles on any of the pictures... so I think they are making up and excuse:D
 
Pitbull said:
None of you pro's are answering my question :(

Shouldn't a Runway have some sort of draining system for water?
Click to expand...

Well ive never seen any types of drainage systems on a runway, nothing on either side to allow for the flow of water. But what I have noticed is that no runway is entirely flat, maybe they are designed to allow water to runoff rather than sit in pools.. ive never seen pools of water on a runway, even when it rains hard.
 
"The plane overshot the runway because the brakes apparently failed," Sapa quoted him as saying.

Well if it was aquaplaning, then the brakes wouldn't work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X