Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
An-124 YQG Rwy Over-run (Dec 00') Report Released  
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Posted (14 years 3 months 1 week ago) and read 2053 times:

The Transportation Safety Board has released it's official report in regard to the December 18, 2000 incident in which an Antonov Airlines An-124 ran off the end of Rwy 25 at YQG.

At approximately 23:30 (EST) that night, the An-124 chartered by Air Foyle to deliver some 40 tons of auto parts from YQG (Windsor, Ontario) to OST (Ostend, Belgium), touched down on Rwy 25, that was at the time 7850 feet (2394 meters) long. Unable to stop, the a/c skidded for 340 feet past the edge of the runway, coming to a stop about 20 feet from the airport's fence. Immideatly behind the fence is a rail line, and right behind that are a bunch of private homes. The a/c was not damaged, although it did destroy an ILS antenna. It spent a couple of days in the snow before it could be extracted.

In short, the report distributes that blame between the a/c's crew, and the air traffic controllers (YQG's tower is closed between 22:30 and 06:30 local time, at that time a/c are advised by London RCO). Most of the runway was covered with snow and ice at the time, a fact that according to the report, the air traffic controlers failed to relay sufficiently to the 124's crew and/or the crew failed to understand due to the use of "non-standard" terms by the controllers to describe runway conditions, as well as the crew not being briefed as to the Canadian friction rating system. According to the latest runway tests performed before the 124's arrival, the runway was rated as ".30", a fact that the controllers failed to mention to the crew. In addition, it appears that it took the controller 30 seconds to realize that the mishap had occured and to alert emergency services.

The 124 came in too high on it's approach, and 6 knots faster than it's normal landing speed (151 instead of 145 knots), touching down 3400' (!!!) past the rwy's threshold, which left them 4450' of runway, more than enough for an empty An-124 on a dry runway, but not in those conditions, with a tail wind of 4 knots. One has to wonder why the a/c was landing on rwy 25 if it had a tail wind, instead of landing the other way (07) into the wind. The only possible explanation would have to be the fact that there are houses on the other edge of the runway. Still, I'm sure the residents would rather have the a/c fly overhead than be woken up by the roaring thrust reversers of an Antonov 124 heading straight for their house! Big grin

Needless to say, the residents got really pissed off (they probably didn't realize that they were buying a house that is located 500' from the edge of a runway  Yeah sure) and re-started whining about how they want the "big airplanes" gone etc. (I don't hear them complaining about the trains that routinely pass through their back yard, possibly carrying hazardous materials). If I had any money, I'd be more than happy to buy the houses from those losers, I'd build an observation deck or something...  Laugh out loud
Unfortunately, the city listened, and the 124's haven't been back since (don't know about the Il-76's). Now that the report has been published (and rwy 07-25 has been lengthened to 9000'), Alan Graham, the airport's manager has requested the city to lift the idiotic ban.

The TSB is unlikely to take any disciplinary action against any of the involved.


Any opinions, comments, who's to blame etc?


Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
8 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineCaptaingomes From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 6413 posts, RR: 54
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1993 times:

Hey, that's an interesting bit of information. It's such a shame that politicians still listen to the people who live around the airport, who 99% of the time moved after the airport was built, then after the fact they complain, and still get their way. There are plenty of other places to live!!! But of course, why would they have residential areas around an airport?

Anyways, that's too much to argue right now. Thanks for the article.  Smile

"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1989 times:

That article, BTW, seems to be the only piece of info on this issue on the internet so far, Nav Canada, the TSB etc. do not seem to have anything on their websites.

I guess politicians have to go with public opinion, since they are the voters. Lesson: Aviation enthusiasts need to start our own political movement!  Big thumbs up


Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16525 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1973 times:

You would think local residents would encourage flights by the AN-124 for the sake of the economy.

I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1948 times:

Those folks don't care about the economy, they are certain that if and when the "big planes" return to YQG, they will do all in their power to crash right into their houses!
Even if there was any kind of danger associated with heavy freighters operating from that runway due to the proximity to residential areas (which there isn't), it would make much more sense to remove the half dozen houses rather than the airport!


Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineRoyalDutch From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 1944 times:

Great post LY744! I really enjoyed it. And I don't see why people gripe about aircraft noise...I love it!!! Just get really good insulation in your house....what I wouldn't give to live at the end of a runway....!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 1941 times:

My feelings exactly, RoyalDutch!  Big thumbs up


Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineSabena 690 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 1940 times:

Very interesting!!  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineFallingeese From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 2097 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 1941 times:

Hilarious. If you move into a home by an airport you should expect to have planes landing there.

Mark McWhirter...Contrails Photography
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...
Polet An-124 @ YQG - Any Info? posted Fri Jan 17 2003 18:00:07 by LY744
Polet AN-124 At ORD posted Wed Nov 22 2006 23:20:33 by Airfinair
747 Runway Over Run (Video) posted Sun Nov 5 2006 08:19:09 by ZBBYLW
Volga-Dnepr An-124 Arriving At Kpae Tonight! posted Fri Oct 13 2006 01:49:50 by Beech19
Helios Accident Report Released posted Tue Oct 10 2006 12:22:17 by CV747
Cyeg AN-124 Heaven! posted Mon Oct 2 2006 20:55:34 by Wolsingerjet
AN 124 At Davis Monthan posted Sun Sep 24 2006 02:28:23 by StearmanNut
How Many AN 124 In Service? posted Sat Sep 16 2006 19:20:10 by A340-Fan
AN-124 At AKL, Jul 5 posted Wed Jul 5 2006 04:31:50 by NZ107
Why No AN-124 Competitor? posted Fri Jun 23 2006 20:41:16 by RichardPrice