Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Corendon Ran Off Runway At AMS  
User currently onlineCrimsonNL From Netherlands, joined Dec 2007, 1844 posts, RR: 42
Posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 14999 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

According to a Dutch news website, a Corendon 737 ran off runway 04/22 at AMS roughly an hour ago. It doesn't say overshoot, but it says the nose gear is in the mud.

My first question is why did they use RWY 04/22? That runway is hardly ever in use for commercial traffic? Does anybody have more info?

Link only in Dutch
http://www.nu.nl/binnenland/2347375/vliegtuig-naast-baan-schiphol.html


Fly DC-Jets!
41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinegroundopsLEY From Netherlands, joined Oct 2008, 11 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 14867 times:

During peak hours and a wind direct in the direction of the runway they use that runway regurarly.
So nothing new.

Most only the NB and the regionals.

Gtz,
Jan



groundopsLEY
User currently offlinePHBUF From Netherlands, joined Mar 2009, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 14870 times:

It's TC-TJF..I too do not understand too well why they (ATC) would use 22 as a landing runway..generation aviation and KLM Cityhopper I get, but 737s..

more info: it's CAI 603 from Dalaman to Amsterdam..aircraft has been evacuated, no injuries, aircraft will be towed away later tonight..

[Edited 2010-10-02 11:31:02]

User currently offlinerikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1624 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 14863 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Benjamin Blum



The affected aircraft.



AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offlineTK787 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4381 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 14817 times:

Quoting PHBUF (Reply 2):
It's TC-TJF.

737-400. When did Corendon start flying to AMS, I thought they used Eindhoven.


User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14785 times:

Quoting TK787 (Reply 4):
Quoting PHBUF (Reply 2):
It's TC-TJF.

737-400. When did Corendon start flying to AMS, I thought they used Eindhoven.

Since the very beginning.. Actually, the owner of Corendon lives next to the airport  .

Anyway, how could this happen? Maybe they should check the FO's pilot licence :p


User currently offlinePHBUF From Netherlands, joined Mar 2009, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14735 times:

could be anything..late touchdown, too high airspeed, too late use of thrust reversers, too late deployment of spoilers, etc etc..or maybe they simply underestimated how short this runway really is

2010/10/02 18:25 EHAM 021825Z 16013KT 9000 -DZ FEW004 SCT006 BKN011 16/15 Q1006 NOSIG

(18:25 is UTC time, so 20:25 local time)

[Edited 2010-10-02 11:43:08]

User currently offlineTK787 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4381 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14691 times:

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 5):
Since the very beginning..

My sister flew them from Istanbul to Eindhoven and had to take ground transportation to AMS where she was staying few years back, that is why I asked.
But this was a AYT-AMS flight I think.

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 5):

Anyway, how could this happen?

Happens almost everyday. Weather a factor?


User currently offlinePHBUF From Netherlands, joined Mar 2009, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14674 times:

no the flight originated in DLM (Dalaman)

User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14574 times:

Quoting TK787 (Reply 7):
Happens almost everyday. Weather a factor?

I know this happens alot, just curious how this particular accident happened. Seems it happened at the end of the runway.. the weather is pretty bad, but not stormy or so.. the pilot could have underestimated the lenght of the runway, since its hardly used for civil aviation, and only is 2015 meters long, compared to 3400/3800 meters of the other runways.

Quoting TK787 (Reply 7):
no the flight originated in DLM (Dalaman)

  


User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9714 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14526 times:

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 9):
the pilot could have underestimated the lenght of the runway, since its hardly used for civil aviation, and only is 2015 meters long, compared to 3400/3800 meters of the other runways.

It seems you are mainly pointing to the pilot but maybe the ATC also shouldn't have send the aircraft to that runway under those stormy conditions(?). It could have well been an ATC error to begin with.

A388


User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14516 times:

Quoting A388 (Reply 10):
It seems you are mainly pointing to the pilot but maybe the ATC also shouldn't have send the aircraft to that runway under those stormy conditions(?). It could have well been an ATC error to begin with.

A388

i'm not saying it was a pilot error, could also be that the ATC just didnt gave enough info.. the only reason they would use this runway for civil aviation IS because of the winds..


User currently offlinepspfan From Netherlands, joined Mar 2008, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14501 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

FYI runway 04/22 at AMS can handle up to A321 aircraft and similar.

PSPfan



Fixit002Heavy
User currently offlineTK787 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4381 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14484 times:

Does anyone have more info about the usage of the runway for planes 737 or similar/bigger?
How many of them were asked to use it besides Corendon in that time period?

According to a statement from Corendon the flight had 166 pax ( pax + crew ???), no injuries, and it says the plane was off the runway by only 20 cm???
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/15925409.asp?gid=373 (in Turkish)

[Edited 2010-10-02 12:26:06]

Thanks pspfan,


[Edited 2010-10-02 12:26:52]

User currently offline76er From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 509 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14431 times:

According to Schiphol.nl the aircraft landed at 1903 local time, that's 1703z.


021725z 14007KT 110V170 3200 RADZ FEW003 SCT005 BKN007 16/15 Q1007 RERADZ
BECMG 6000=
021655z 14009KT 2500 DZ FEW004 SCT007 BKN011 16/15 Q1007 REDZ
TEMPO BKN007=


Not great, but not 'bad' either and definately not 'stormy'. Under these conditions many airlines recommend autoland when available, or at least an autocoupled approach followed by a manual landing. Even on a wet runway a 737 should come to a standstill well before all 2014m are behind the aircraft.

This wil be another interesting one for the Dutch Safety Board.

[Edited 2010-10-02 12:32:15]

User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 14432 times:

Quoting TK787 (Reply 13):
Does anyone have more info about the usage of the runway for planes 737 or similar/bigger?
How many of them were asked to use it besides Corendon in that time period?

Look at this rader site, http://casper.frontier.nl/eham/ , go to 19:03 and u can see the Corendon plane landing... u can clearly see the KL F70 behind it abording the landing procedure...

Before the Corendon plane, a private jet + F70 landed..

Quoting pspfan (Reply 12):

FYI runway 04/22 at AMS can handle up to A321 aircraft and similar.

PSPfan

FYI, i never say'd it couldn't   just that the pilot might have underestimated it, since they are used to land at 3300m+ runways at AMS

[Edited 2010-10-02 12:32:22]

[Edited 2010-10-02 12:33:28]

User currently offline76er From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 509 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14399 times:

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 15):
the pilot might have underestimated it

All he has to do is take a look at his airport chart..

edit:

It appears Corendon has already concluded its investigation and is blaming the weather. (Dutch TV-Teletekst)

[Edited 2010-10-02 12:39:49]

User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14379 times:

Quoting 76er (Reply 16):

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 15):
the pilot might have underestimated it

All he has to do is take a look at his airport chart..

That doesn't meen he couldn't have underestimated it  


User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14349 times:

Quoting A388 (Reply 10):
It seems you are mainly pointing to the pilot but maybe the ATC also shouldn't have send the aircraft to that runway under those stormy conditions(?). It could have well been an ATC error to begin with.

A388

With all due respect, 2015m is *plenty* sufficient for a 737. I've seen 738's use less than that. Perhaps blame a botched landing.

If there was a tail wind, missed the touchdown point, or they were unstable then a missed approach should have been executed...



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12408 posts, RR: 37
Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14316 times:

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 5):
Maybe they should check the FO's pilot licence :p

Exactly my thought when I read this!

Thankfully it's not too serious, no one injured!


User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14300 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 18):
Quoting A388 (Reply 10):
It seems you are mainly pointing to the pilot but maybe the ATC also shouldn't have send the aircraft to that runway under those stormy conditions(?). It could have well been an ATC error to begin with.

A388

With all due respect, 2015m is *plenty* sufficient for a 737. I've seen 738's use less than that. Perhaps blame a botched landing.

If there was a tail wind, missed the touchdown point, or they were unstable then a missed approach should have been executed...

Dunno what the min. runway lenght is for the 737-400 on landing, but i know that, when fully loaded, it needs +-2400 meters on take-off...

[Edited 2010-10-02 13:19:15]

User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14191 times:

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 20):
Dunno what the min. runway lenght is for the 737-400 on landing, but i know that, when fully loaded, it needs +-2400 meters...

Really?

I seem to recall otherwise... even with no reversers, on a wet runway with good braking action, it should stop in under 2015.
I know for MTOW (which is on take off, it needs more), but at MLW, it shouldn't...



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlinemauriceb From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14142 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 21):
Really?

I seem to recall otherwise... even with no reversers, on a wet runway with good braking action, it should stop in under 2015.
I know for MTOW (which is on take off, it needs more), but at MLW, it shouldn't...

Yeah i ment on take-off, my bad  


User currently offlinesandroZRH From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 3427 posts, RR: 50
Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14118 times:

Quoting A388 (Reply 10):
It seems you are mainly pointing to the pilot but maybe the ATC also shouldn't have send the aircraft to that runway under those stormy conditions(?). It could have well been an ATC error to begin with.

No.

The ultimate choice of runway lies with the flight crew and only the flight crew, so consequently its their responsibility that their runway of choice is adequate for safe operation. They are also responsible to gain enough knowledge and information to make such a decision, it's not ATCs responsibility to pass along information regarding performance related issues.


User currently offlineshamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4160 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14118 times:

Quoting mauriceb (Reply 20):
Dunno what the min. runway lenght is for the 737-400 on landing, but i know that, when fully loaded, it needs +-2400 meters on take-off...

Folks.. you can completely discount runway length as an issue (unless the PF thought he had another 1300 metres left...)

2000 metre runways are used plenty for 737 ops. Here in Ireland alone, Dublin's crosswind runway 16/34 is 2065 metres long, Cork Airport has 2100m, Kerry airport 2000m. In the UK, Bristol, Exeter, Southampton, Leeds and many others are all 737 bases and have runways around 2000m.....

It's really not an issue.



Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
25 A388 : Well, we must know what the exact conditions were to see if the landing was executed properly or the ATC made the right decision. It's one thing to s
26 mauriceb : According to Correndon it was due to bad weather conditions... the plane slipped like 4 meters behind the runway, into the mud. So i keep on saying, e
27 TK787 : Thanks for that, missed it by only 4 meters, oh well. I think 20 cm, is how deep it got stuck in mud, must have been a mis quote.
28 Post contains links mauriceb : First picture i found: http://www.telegraaf.nl/jsp/foto_win...9/corendon_769343d.jpg&caption=Het
29 Post contains images Speedbird128 : Mine too - apologies Misread. According to my training, mlw max manual braking = ~1600m...
30 mauriceb : Yeah i just found a chart here from school, says the same lol. Since the plane was fully loaded+bad weather conditions, 400m of spare runway seems tr
31 Post contains images virginblue4 : Southampton's runway is 1,723m and they even have the occasional 757 visit Jordan
32 Post contains images 76er : C'mon guys, READ the Metars. Low clouds? Yes. Rain? Yes. Strong winds? Definately not. Only the variable wind at 1725z may raise an eyebrow. Just ano
33 airbuseric : The fuel was mostly consumed on landing, so it was definitely not a 'full load' weight wise. Pax yes, luggage probably, fuel no. Was ILS 27 operation
34 Speedbird128 : Good advice then, reference this post of yours... RADZ with no reported gusts on the metar are hardly storm conditions. 80 degree crosswinds at 7 kno
35 Navigator : The Pilot in command is the one responsible for the safe handling of the plane itself. Also the pilots are responsible for knowing the exact runway l
36 Post contains images HansHubers : Even a 767 can land on that particular runway. I've seen it myself a while ago during very gusting winds
37 HansHubers : I don't get this...
38 Navigator : Pilots I know say that Amsterdam ATC seem to talk faster and be a bit less relaxed than many other ATC units in Europe. Though they are efficient the
39 thrufru : I really don't understand the comments about the F/O. I'm one that flies this aircraft as well as the -800. Most SOP's have the PIC assuming control o
40 A388 : What is your point with this remark? All I'm saying is that we don't know what happened yet so we can't say for sure who's to blame for this incident
41 rlwynn : The way you guys talk it seems that SNA should see daily incidents.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Cimber Sterling Airplane Off Runway At Bornholm posted Wed Jan 27 2010 10:39:49 by Tobseren
UTAir B737-500 Off-runway At VKO posted Sat Jan 16 2010 10:55:23 by Airbuseric
Iran Air A300 Off Runway At ARN posted Sat Jan 16 2010 06:47:00 by EBGARN
Plane Skids Off Runway At Prestwick posted Wed Dec 23 2009 01:41:45 by Vanguard
SA Airlink Plane Off Runway At PLZ posted Wed Nov 18 2009 08:22:28 by Jasondn
Plane Off Runway At YWG posted Sat Oct 10 2009 06:03:27 by ZBBYLW
AA Eagle ERJ Off Runway At SYR posted Mon Jan 5 2009 04:04:17 by Teneriffe77
Plane Off Runway At YVR posted Sun Jan 4 2009 18:03:56 by CO737800
CO Flight 1404 Off Runway At DEN - Part 2 posted Sun Dec 21 2008 20:58:50 by HB-IWC
CO Flight 1404 Off Runway At DEN posted Sat Dec 20 2008 18:05:32 by Bakersdozen
UAX Off Runway At ROC posted Thu Feb 23 2012 08:43:13 by Acey559
Plane Slips Off Runway At MSP posted Fri Dec 3 2010 23:15:09 by WALmsp
Mexicana Click Aircraft Off Runway At MTY posted Thu Feb 11 2010 19:18:16 by AR385
Cimber Sterling Airplane Off Runway At Bornholm posted Wed Jan 27 2010 10:39:49 by Tobseren
UTAir B737-500 Off-runway At VKO posted Sat Jan 16 2010 10:55:23 by Airbuseric
Iran Air A300 Off Runway At ARN posted Sat Jan 16 2010 06:47:00 by EBGARN
Plane Skids Off Runway At Prestwick posted Wed Dec 23 2009 01:41:45 by Vanguard
SA Airlink Plane Off Runway At PLZ posted Wed Nov 18 2009 08:22:28 by Jasondn
Plane Off Runway At YWG posted Sat Oct 10 2009 06:03:27 by ZBBYLW
AA Eagle ERJ Off Runway At SYR posted Mon Jan 5 2009 04:04:17 by Teneriffe77