777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:29 am

Since part 3 is now taking to long to serve on some peoples servers here is part 4.

May the victims rest in peace and may the AirTran pilot killed in the tragic crash continue to patrol the skys.
 
skgsjulax
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:39 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:32 am

Quoting SKGSJULAX (Reply 202):
Was the intersection of taxiway Alpha-5 and RWY 26 relocated/
rearranged recently (during the resurfacing)?

Quoting DeltaDC9
Yes, the taxiways and access roads are all part of the big 4 phase project
being worked on. It is not just a resurfacing project.


So there is a chance that they turned on to RWY26 thinking they were turning on the old "stub" taxiway (old A-6?) for takeoff.
Omnium curiositatum explorator
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:15 am

I noticed by looking at the aerial pictures of taxiway "A" at rwy 26 that the numbers would be off the the right of the airplane and the captain. Not that that is any reason for them to turn onto 26 but it's looking like perhaps a number of things may have contributed to the crash.

As the pilots approached runway 26 from taxiway A (if that is the route they took) there would have been no lighted red sign for the runway as there is no ILS for that runway. However I would think that there would have been a yellow sign surely lit up stating they were at 8-26. Now if the taxiway was moved recently was that sign moved to the proper position? If that sign was not in the proper position, the runway numbers were to the right and hard to see, and the runway was illuminated (and that's if) I can see how this mistake can be made.

I would like to see some pictures of taxiway A at rwy 26.
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:27 am

Does anyone know if the LEX 18 live news video feed is supposed to be up 24/7 or if this is a service that is only up on special occasions? I got this link from the original thread about this crash and spent all of last night (Swedish time that is) watching the unfolding of this crash, along with accounts of some of the people that sadly perished in this tragedy.

Just comes to show how small our world is getting when a guy on the other side of the world can with TV like quality follow live news from a local american news station.

I´m just wondering if that feed is supposed to be on still or if there´s something gone haywire in my connection/computer?

Here´s the link: http://www.wlextv.com/global/video/p...ory.asp%3FS%3D4827296&rnd=84547306


May god rest the souls lost in this tragic accident and may the co-pilot fighting for his life as we speak have a full recovery.
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:33 am

Quoting Mika (Reply 3):
I´m just wondering if that feed is supposed to be on still or if there´s something gone haywire in my connection/computer?

The link goes to recorded video and is working
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
Jamake1
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 2:30 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:33 am

Quoting Mika (Reply 3):
Just comes to show how small our world is getting when a guy on the other side of the world can with TV like quality follow live news from a local american news station.

I am inclined to agree. Who needs cable TV?
United's B747-400. "She's a a cruel lover."
 
FlyboySMF2GFK
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 6:13 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:39 am

Quoting DTW757 (Reply 2):
As the pilots approached runway 26 from taxiway A (if that is the route they took) there would have been no lighted red sign for the runway as there is no ILS for that runway.

Not true - there should be red, lighted signs at the runway 26 hold-short line at taxiway alpha. There does not need to be an ILS for that at all, however existence of an ILS may mandate an ILS hold, which is somewhat similarly marked and procedurally, when in effect, treated the same as a runway hold short line.
 
argiepilot
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:38 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:57 am

Hi to all! Also my first post here at A.Net though I have been enjoying many of the well argued and informed discussions at the forum.

In my opinion the Airline pilot profession has been suffering greatly since deregulation and will continue to do so in this downward trend line. Lower and lower wages, shorter rest times, shorter layovers, are all consequences of the survival desperation of the airlines in today's competitive business. Unfortunately, we shall continue seeing these kinds of accidents.

These two pilots were probably underpaid, tired, in a hurry, in a confusing scenario taking off from a "V" shape runway layout (with one of the RWYs being not suitable for the CRJs). If it weren�t these guys it would just have been for others to fall in the same trap. It�s just their working conditions. Something they can�t change.

The main question to me is WHY and WHO puts them to fly in that condition?

My sincere condolences for the families of all who died in the crash.
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:03 am

Quoting FlyboySMF2GFK (Reply 6):
Not true - there should be red, lighted signs at the runway 26 hold-short line at taxiway alpha. There does not need to be an ILS for that at all, however existence of an ILS may mandate an ILS hold, which is somewhat similarly marked and procedurally, when in effect, treated the same as a runway hold short line.

You are correct. Then the red sign should be at hold point for 8/26. I was thinking of the yellow signs on a taxiway that direct you to the runway.
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
n844aa
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 10:38 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:05 am

Quoting ARGIEPILOT (Reply 7):
In my opinion the Airline pilot profession has been suffering greatly since deregulation and will continue to do so in this downward trend line. Lower and lower wages, shorter rest times, shorter layovers, are all consequences of the survival desperation of the airlines in today's competitive business. Unfortunately, we shall continue seeing these kinds of accidents.

But see, I'm not sure that's the case. Air travel has been more or less "safe" since the dawn of the jet age, but even compared to already-low accident levels at that time, air travel today is vastly safer than compared to, say the 1960s.

I don't have the data at hand, but if you compare pre-deregulation accident rates to post-deregulation accident rates, I know I've seen charts that indicate the skies are safer today than ever before (at least in the U.S., anyway.) The industry's safety advances in the last twenty years have been remarkable, and by and large, we don't continue to see these kinds of accidents -- they've been hammered out by improvements in training and cockpit resource management, and don't happen with nearly the regularity that they used to.
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:10 am

Quoting ARGIEPILOT (Reply 7):
Hi to all! Also my first post here at A.Net though I have been enjoying many of the well argued and informed discussions at the forum.

Firstly Welcome to A.net!

Quoting ARGIEPILOT (Reply 7):
In my opinion the Airline pilot profession has been suffering greatly since deregulation and will continue to do so in this downward trend line. Lower and lower wages, shorter rest times, shorter layovers, are all consequences of the survival desperation of the airlines in today's competitive business. Unfortunately, we shall continue seeing these kinds of accidents.

These two pilots were probably underpaid, tired, in a hurry, in a confusing scenario taking off from a "V" shape runway layout (with one of the RWYs being not suitable for the CRJs). If it weren�t these guys it would just have been for others to fall in the same trap. It�s just their working conditions. Something they can�t change.

The main question to me is WHY and WHO puts them to fly in that condition?

Yes things are tougher since deregulation (particularly in the US).
As for the comments about the crew, that is pure speculation... however what I have heard so far is that this particular crew was in fact well rested and since the plane was parked there overnight there shouldn't have been an particular rush. I will agree that in other circumstances at other airports there is greater pressure on pilots now than in decades gone by.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
bonjourmoi44
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:40 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:25 am

I have now heard several recent reports that the N.T.S.B. confirmed that runway 8/26 lights were not on and that the taxi way had within only days been reconfigured for commercial flights.
 
RIXrat
Posts: 670
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:20 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:28 am

If you missed my post at the end of Chapter III, I said that according to the posts I've read and the links I've crossed, the crew had a 28-hour rest period before boarding the fateful CR-100.
 
axio
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:42 am

Since the other thread got closed can I please ask my question again...

Is the second runway at LEX necessary?

If the runway layout is the complicating factor, and I apologize if this sounds like a knee-jerk reaction, but would closing the cross-runway be an option?

My understanding of a cross-runway it that is would serve one of two purposes:
1. Allow lighter planes to take-off/land during large crosswinds against the main runway
2. Allow for more traffic.

Now, given the small heading seperation between the two runways, it hardly seems that the first option is the case. So unless the main runway gets so busy with other traffic, I'm not sure what the reason for having a second runway is.

ax
Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!
 
RL757PVD
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 1999 2:47 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:22 am

I wonder if they will be able to sync the ATC tapes and black boxes with the taxiing locations.

Many times at a small airport during periods of low activity, an aicraft will be given clearnance to takeoff prior to reaching the runway threshold.... given the proximity of the two thresholds, perhaps they got their t/o clearance on the taxi and had everything "ready to roll" prior to even reaching Runway 26?
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
 
gh123
Posts: 645
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:09 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:38 am

Another plane had just crashed in Kentucky - 7 dead.
 
gh123
Posts: 645
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:09 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:42 am

A small plane carrying seven people crashed in southeastern Kentucky on Monday, with no immediate word on the condition of those aboard.

Kathleen Bergen, spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration in Atlanta, said the twin-engine Cessna departed from Kickapoo Downtown Airport near Wichita Falls, Texas. She said she didn't know the destination because the pilot did not file a flight plan.

"The plane apparently crashed somewhere near Jackson, Kentucky," Bergen said. "I don't have anything more specific."

The crash happened in a remote and wooded area of Breathitt County around 2:45 p.m.

Monica Morris, manager of the city-owned Kickapoo Downtown Airport in Wichita Falls, confirmed that the flight originated from the small municipal facility but she had no further information on the pilot or passengers.

Rescue workers on all-terrain vehicles found the crash site with the help of a helicopter flying overhead, said Buddy Rogers, a spokesman for the Kentucky Division of Emergency Management.

Rogers said the passengers' conditions remained uncertain.
 
agpatel
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:54 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:12 am

Past few days seem have been a sad times in aviation...I am pretty sure the NTSB can sync up the tapes as all that is needed is to start the tapes at the time stamp...
-AnK
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:38 am

Quoting 777ER (Thread starter):
may the AirTran pilot killed in the tragic crash continue to patrol the skys.

Does anyone know who this guy was?
Puhdiddle
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:40 am

Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 18):
Does anyone know who this guy was?

See Part 2 . . . there's a newspaper story in there.

And see Non-Av, there's a thread in there.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
bakestar
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:35 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:55 am

How familiar were the crew at that particular field?

Who was in the ATC at the time?, are they new to the job?

Wouldn't the aircraft in question have data on the runways stored in it's Flight Management System, or other systems?

Was ANYONE aware that the runway might have been too short?

Was the pilot under pressure to take off?
fly'nhi
 
tvnewsguy08
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:19 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:42 am

Just a quick note to thank all of the people who got so active on this thread. As a journalist covering the plane crash (actually I'm in Knoxville, one bigger city to the South), I found that many of you gave me story ideas that I was able to follow up for use on air.

A lot of the facts (history of the plane, CRJ crashes, runway problems) I was able to then use your information, independently confirm it or expand on it, then use it to enhance my coverage.

One huge tip was the person who posted the info on the flight report in 1993 of a pilot who had done almost the same thing. I was able to independently confirm and it gave me an edge in my coverage.

Plus, I know CNN is reading, because they got the information, too.

I know there was a lot of grief from some, upset over the media coverage of the story, inaccuracies, etc, but when the media and aviation communities work together, the public is better informed.

Thanks for your thoughts (all unquoted, of course) and your ideas. They really helped me understand what people want to hear about and need to know.

Brian
 
jdl1527
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:55 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:14 am

Back to the CRJ-100 vs CRJ-200
here is what i have found

"The CRJ-100 series was then replaced in production by the "CRJ-200", which was much the same except for fit of GE CF34-3B1 turbofans with the same thrust levels as the CF34-3A1 but improved fuel consumption. Initial deliveries were in 1996." (http://www.vectorsite.net/avcrj.html)

to be exact the CRJ-100/200/440 are all the same airframe, just different motors and weight and certified pax capacity.

Bombardier will stamp what you want on it.
I can not confirm this but would in not make sense for OH to order the 100 variant just for the fact of commonality with their older fleet. Remember they were the NA Launch customer for the CRJ

for what i have seen OH operates 40 and 50 seat CRJs. OH could reconfigure the 40 pax back to 50 if they wanted as the 100 and 200 are certified as 50 pax, then you have Pinnacle and the crj440, this is a 200 just certified as 44 pax and lower weights. if Pinnacle wanted to put 50 seats in there they would have to retype the aircraft. $$$$

I do believe that this was a CRJ-100 just because the OH has a large fleet of older 100's

Flame as you may
 
jdl1527
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:55 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:19 am

ok heres what it was for sure
CL-600-2B19

hah
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7795
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:24 am

49 people die a horrific death by being burned to death and all some of us can talk about is what type of plane it was....??? CRJ100 or 200 it reallly doesn't matter...!! They are so close to being the same plane only a pilot or mechanic would really care or even be able to tell them a part.

[Edited 2006-08-29 04:34:26]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:35 am




Quoting EMBQA (Reply 24):
49 people die a horrific death by being burned to death and all some of us can talk about is what type of plane it was

It's a discussion forum EMBQA. People tend to discuss related information and sort out the facts.




2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:39 am

Quoting Jdl1527 (Reply 22):
I do believe that this was a CRJ-100 just because the OH has a large fleet of older 100's

The Comair President said in his news conference on the day of the crash . . . the aircraft was built/delivered in 2001. I can't imagine that qualifies it as an "older" aircraft.

Was Bombardier still building -100s in 2001?
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
gh123
Posts: 645
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:09 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:42 am

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/15383982.htm

Wife of 'incredible' pilot says crash not his fault
By Valarie Honeycutt Spears
HERALD-LEADER STAFF WRITER
The wife of the Comair 5191 captain said today that he was a “by-the-book” pilot who flew out of Blue Grass Airport frequently and was well-rested when he boarded the plane.

In the aftermath of the plane crash that killed pilot Jeffrey Clay and 48 other people Sunday, questions have arisen about why the plane took off from the wrong runway and whether the pilots were tired or compromised in some way.

But Amy Clay told the Herald-Leader today that Jeffrey Clay “was not fatigued” on Sunday morning and had been in Lexington since the afternoon before.

“My husband was not careless in any manner,” said Clay, a Paintsville native. “He was detail oriented. He was a wonderful man and an incredible pilot. The pilots who worked with him called him a 'by-the-book guy’.”

The FAA’s database shows that “neither pilot had any accidents, incidents or enforcement history,” said Kathleen Bergen, an FAA spokeswoman.

“I know in my heart that the people on that plane couldn’t have been in better hands than his,” said Amy Clay. Clay, 35, of Burlington in Northern Kentucky, and the plane’s sole flight attendant, Kelly Heyer, 28, of Cincinnati, were among those who died in the crash.
...................................... etc
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7795
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:46 am

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 25):
It's a discussion forum EMBQA.

Agreed... But as I added........they are so close to being the same plane, it really dosn't matter. I could put 90% of the A.netters in front of a 100 and 200 and give them an hour to crawl all over it and they could not tell them apart.....No fair peaking at the data tag.

....and if you go onto airliners-list the aircraft involved was a CRJ-100.....and that is backed up by the manufactures press release.

[Edited 2006-08-29 04:48:26]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
jdl1527
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:55 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:04 pm

i do agree but this is a discussion forum, in all respect is does not matter at all, but i would just like to sort out the facts. I appreciate the you input, but i definitely fell that what im talking about is not disrespectful at all. it was a horrific accident and it saddens me greatly.
 
aerobalance
Posts: 4308
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:35 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:13 pm

Quoting Tvnewsguy08 (Reply 21):
Brian

Your Welcome - not a problem. Glad to know that your looking for the facts.
"Sing a song, play guitar, make it snappy..."
 
jdl1527
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:55 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:43 pm

Quoting Gh123 (Reply 27):
Was Bombardier still building -100s in 2001?

I dont think that Bombardier ever stopped building it, its just that with the better engines on the -200 there would not be much demand for the -100 unless there was a good reason for buying it.

the majority of what OH operates is the -100 so thus that could be a reason that they would still buy the -100 even after the -200 was launched

the last -100 delivered was ship 7496 delivered 8/23/2001, from what it looks like all since have been -200 and -440
 
cltguy
Posts: 541
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:54 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:41 pm

Wow...so the lights were off on Rwy 26 and the pilots even made mention of the lights being out...and yet they took off anyways...in the dark, down an unlit runway. And the one that survived the crash was the one flying the plane. Hopefully he comes out of the hospital intact and can help shed some light on what happened.
 
n844aa
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 10:38 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:00 pm

New article up with apparently new details, which Cltguy alluded to:

Quote:
The [NTSB] member, Deborah Hersman, said that with the load it was carrying, the plane, a Bombardier Canadair jet, would have required 3,559 feet before the nose would swing upward, according to a calculation by the manufacturer. The runway was 3,500 feet long. However, the crew may not have begun the takeoff roll from the start of the pavement.

Ms. Hersman said the captain called for “rotation,’’ when the controls are used to lift the nose, but tire marks in the grass at the end of the runway showed the nose did not actually rise. The plane became airborne when it hit a berm 65 feet beyond the end of the runway; it struck the airport’s perimeter fence 390 feet beyond the runway, cleared a barbed wire fence about 920 feet off the end of the runway and struck trees beyond the fence.

There were no indications that crew members applied the brakes or the thrust reversers to slow down. The time from the beginning of the takeoff roll until impact was 29 seconds, and there was no warning from the lone tower controller on duty, Ms. Hersman said.

...

She also said that the runway they chose did not have its lights on; the runway they were supposed to use did have lights along the sides, although the center lights were out because it had been repaved days earlier. One of the pilots remarked during the takeoff roll that the runway lights were out, Ms. Hersman said. That would be the first indication that the crew might have known something was wrong.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/29/us/29crash.html

[Edited 2006-08-29 08:01:40]
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:23 pm

Quoting N844AA (Reply 33):
She also said that the runway they chose did not have its lights on; the runway they were supposed to use did have lights along the sides, although the center lights were out because it had been repaved days earlier. One of the pilots remarked during the takeoff roll that the runway lights were out, Ms. Hersman said. That would be the first indication that the crew might have known something was wrong.

So, some questions for pilots here:

a) Would there not have been a question raised if the lights on 26 were not illuminated, but the lights on 22 were on (even if the centerline lights were not)? Remember, 2 other flights departed immediately prior to the crash on Runway 22.

b) Would you - a pilot - not consider it a bit odd that you're lined up on an unlit runway in the dark (perhaps early morning dawn light)?

c) Would you not have asked the Tower for confirmation of your departure clearance? Runway for departure? To turn on the runway lights?

The transcript from the cockpit voice recorder will be interesting to read. As will the transcript from the controller.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
bonjourmoi44
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:40 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:32 pm

From the N.T.S.B. website:

Quote:

NTSB Identification: DCA06MA064
Scheduled 14 CFR Part 121: Air Carrier operation of COMAIR INC
Accident occurred Sunday, August 27, 2006 in Lexington, KY
Aircraft: Bombardier, Inc. CRJ-200, registration:
Injuries: 49 Fatal, 1 Serious.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.

On August 27, 2006, about 6:07 AM eastern daylight time, Comair flight 5191, a Bombardier CRJ-200, N431CA, crashed upon takeoff from Blue Grass Airport in Lexington, Kentucky. The ran off the end of Runway 26 and was destroyed by impact forces and post crash fire. The flight had been cleared to takeoff from Runway 22. Of the 47 passengers and 3 crewmembers onboard, 49 were fatally injured and one (the first officer) survived in critical condition. The flight was operating under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 and was en route to Atlanta, Georgia. A full go-team investigation is underway.
[quote]

source:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20060828X01244&key=1
 
n844aa
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 10:38 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:59 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 34):
b) Would you - a pilot - not consider it a bit odd that you're lined up on an unlit runway in the dark (perhaps early morning dawn light)?

I'm by no means a pilot, so pardon me for intruding on your question, but to engage in a little baseless speculation: what if the pilots had been informed that the lights were out on 22 -- as the centerline lights apparently were -- and took this to mean that darkened state of runway 26 was the expected state? Of course that ultimately might or might not square with the CVR transcript, though it's potentially reconcilable with the paraphrase presented in the New York Times article.

I'm also wondering if we know what the precise timing was as to the two previous departures. Were they immediately prior, i.e., the Comair flight had been lined up closely behind them at one point or another? Or were they sufficiently separated by time and distance that the pilots would have had no good indication that the prior flights had used the other runway?

Just trying to understand the situation the pilots had been presented with, based on what we currently know, about the only logical way I can see this chain of events occurring was if the pilots expected the runway lights to be out and failed to take the lack of lighting on 26 as their most immediate warning. It's difficult to understand why they would take off down a darkened runway when they had no reason to expect that the runway lights would be off; it's more plausible that they might not have taken all due care to determine exactly which runway lights were supposed to have been inoperative before proceeding with the takeoff.

[Edited 2006-08-29 09:03:59]
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
 
panamair
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:13 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 34):
Would there not have been a question raised if the lights on 26 were not illuminated, but the lights on 22 were on (even if the centerline lights were not)? Remember, 2 other flights departed immediately prior to the crash on Runway 22.

b) Would you - a pilot - not consider it a bit odd that you're lined up on an unlit runway in the dark (perhaps early morning dawn light)?

One theory currently being floated is that the pilots may have been confused because there was an advisory that part of the lights on runway 22 were out; however that advisory expired on Saturday. The co-pilot flew in to LEX on Friday evening (there goes any fatigue theory) when the lights on 22 were partially out. He may have been unaware or forgotten that the advisory had expired the previous night. This could make sense why he did not think that an unlit runway was odd...and since there was very little cockpit communication during the takeoff roll, it is entirely conceivable that the pilots believed they were on the right runway the entire time....

http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articl...07_N28212666&type=comktNews&rpc=44
 
ekgold
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:30 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:00 pm

Was it dark at takeoff or dawn? The reason i say this is that if the centre lights were out and daylight was beginning to appear, the lights at the edges of the runway may not have appeared too bright anyway and pilots could reasonably have expected reduced visibility of these lights, regardless of which runway they thought they were on. if it was completely pitch black then that is a different issue all together and lights would have expected to have been visible to the pilots.

As has been said many times, aircraft accidents are never one isolated event but a series of events that lead to catastrophic consequences. I would be hesitant to rule out weather conditions as a contributing factor to the entire series of events. It may have been dawn or approaching dawn, weather was known to be clearing, i read an account from someone in a previous post of humid conditions that could allow mist to form thus reducing vis.
 
bonjourmoi44
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:40 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:41 pm

Obviously I am not a professional investigator by any means, but with that being said I am looking at the old airport before repaving via google Earth and the new layout via CNN helicopter footage. It clearly looks like the route a plane would take from the terminal to runway 26 was unchanged. Runway 22/4 was completely repaved and looks as though a quarter of runway 26/8 was repaved, where it intersects with 22/4. If the pilots were at all familiar with the layout then I would believe that confusion would only occur after passing 26 and encountering the newly paved 22 with the new taxi way added. As I said, the route to 26 from the gate looks to be unchanged, so this incident could have occurred regardless of the repaving (of course I am sure repaving is certainly a factor in the chain of events somewhere).

I would also believe that the CRJ-200 is low enough to the ground that the pilots would have seen that the first part of 26 was not repaved, then after accelerating briefly they would encounter the repaved section, then leave it. Of course this all assumes they were familiar with the layout and such observations would be useful. We shall see.

Also interesting to note is that the chart for the airport shows only A7 as a taxi way to runway 22 and now there are indeed two taxi ways that lead to a take off position for runway 22. Perhaps the pilots saw on their chart only one taxi way for runway 22, and saw out the cockpit a runway with one taxi way leading to it, (i.e., runway 26) and used it. I wonder if they had a chart that was up to date that included the additional taxi way to runway 22? We shall see.

[Edited 2006-08-29 10:53:17]
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:52 pm

Hi!

I just connected this morning with CNN and they didn't a very interesting simulation what could have happened in the DL5191. What the aviation expert said was that they had a V1 bug speed for RN22, because they left from RN26 they probably found something was very wrong when they saw the runway end very close and they didn't have yet the right V1 speed....so according to this expert or they would try to break hard and of course crash the airplane at the end of the runway or try to fly it. They got the 2nd. option! In my humble opinion seeing the surroundings of the airport if he tried to break even in the end of the RN26 don't you think that some more people could have survived?
regards
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
VS239
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:29 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:39 pm

Just as a matter of interest, is it common practice for pilots to check the compass before taking off or not? In this case wouldn't a look at the compass before taking off indicate in which direction the aircraft is pointing and thus which runway it is lined up on? For example if the aircraft was using rwy 26 then the compass would be reading approximately 260 degrees. A huge difference from 220 degrees if using rwy 22.

I appreciate checking the compass would not show the difference between, for example 24L and 24R, at whichever airport has something like these but it would tell the difference between 220 degrees and 260.

Sorry if this has been discussed before but I couldn't bear wading through the other 3 threads.
Who...me??
 
curlyheadboy
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:48 pm

Quoting Bonjourmoi44 (Reply 39):
In my humble opinion seeing the surroundings of the airport if he tried to break even in the end of the RN26 don't you think that some more people could have survived?

Well, as the coroner said, the crash was survivable but most of the people onboard died of fire-related injuries. If pilots had aborted takeoff, they would have crashed through the perimeter fence. Impossible to tell if this would have started a fire as it did with the aircraft crashing after becoming airborne.
When data will be retrieved from the FDR, it will be interesting to see what inputs the control surfaces have been given, if they tried to rotate or not, if the airplane actually rotated or if it just went airborne as a consequence of the impact with elevated terrain at the end of the runway, as suggested by the tyre marks.
If God had wanted men to fly he would have given them more money...
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:56 pm

Quoting DTW757 (Reply 4):
The link goes to recorded video and is working

Thank you, that´s what i´m getting aswell so no probs with my equipment at least.

Quoting Jamake1 (Reply 5):
I am inclined to agree. Who needs cable TV?


Amen to that!

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 25):
It's a discussion forum EMBQA. People tend to discuss related information and sort out the facts.

And a an aviation discussion board at that.


I don´t know if this was posted in this thread already ( i couldnt find it up there at least) but it´s apparently a fact now that it was the first officer who was going to fly the leg out of LEX and hence were at the controls of the plane when it took of from rwy 26.

Full story here: http://www.wlextv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5337973
 
spacecadet
Posts: 2788
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:56 pm

Quoting Bonjourmoi44 (Reply 35):
source:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...key=1

Odd, the FAA disagrees:

http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/a...reliminary_data/media/B_0828_N.txt

"IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 431CA Make/Model: CRJ1 Description: CANADAIR CRJ-100, RJ-100 REGIONAL JET
Date: 08/27/2006 Time: 1007"

The FAA does keep a record of aircraft type but in this case, "CRJ-100" is not an official designation: http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNumSQL.asp?NNumbertxt=431CA

Do a Google search, though, and there are many web sites that reference this plane's manufacturer line # that call it a CRJ-100ER. So I'm inclined to go with the FAA on this one over the NTSB - the NTSB is coming in cold and trying to gather facts, whereas the FAA should already have this information on hand (it is part of the reason why they exist).
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:57 pm

Are there any news regarding the condition of the first officer by the way? Last i´ve heard is that he´s still in critical condition and being operated on.
 
727forever
Posts: 304
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:50 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:02 pm

Quoting CV990 (Reply 40):
They got the 2nd. option! In my humble opinion seeing the surroundings of the airport if he tried to break even in the end of the RN26 don't you think that some more people could have survived?
regards

Which aircraft type was the CNN expert using? This sounds like not only the format of but the type of information that the Airbus provides. In the CRJ the pilot must manually select the runway for departure in the FMS which will then be displayed on the MFD. It will show up as a magenta runway in the lower portion of the screen. The FMS does NOT provide you with V1 information on the CRJ. This is a manually calculated number that is derived from the speed cards with appropriate corrections based upon runway conditions.

As for the 2nd option. Once realizing, if they ever did, that they were on the wrong runway and running out of pavement quickly, the question of stopping power is a very good one. At that point your options are just as you said. However, your V1 calculation was for runway 22 at a specified speed (20:1 odds say that number was 133-135 kts). That V1 is no longer valid for this runway so you do not know if you have enough room to stop. Further more, you would look at your airspeed and acceleration rate and have to make a split decision. Our training is focused upon picking option 2. You have good acceleration, you are past what would be a reasonable V1 or accelerate stop point, the runway is wet with slick grass at the end. You won't stop. GO!!!

Quoting VS239 (Reply 41):
A huge difference from 220 degrees if using rwy 22.

Not on the CRJ it's not. The HSI gives you over 210 degrees of view in a tiny window. When you're making the turn onto the runway, completing the takeoff checklist, it's not that big a difference.

I've operated the CRJ out of KLEX many times in my career. I used to fly it for a different airline. I can vividly remember that area of the airport being very confusing. I can remember one time doing the takeoff brief and taxi checklist while taxiing out and seeing the hold short line for 26 and thinking that I had already crossed it and was holding short of 22. Upon stopping and noticing that something was amiss, I checked my airport diagram and realized that I wasn't where I thought I was. Further compounding this is the fact the KLEX tower has a habit of clearing you for takeoff on 22 before you ever reach runway 26. That intersection of taxiway A and 26 is much wider than the surrounding taxiways. The red runway threshold identification signs are for 26 are spread out quite a ways from the taxiway making them difficult to see.

The barbi-fun jet, aka CRJ, does have ground visibility issues. It sits rather low and can make vision of taxiways and signs difficult at times. The taxi/recog lights are at the wing root which is better than 40 feet behind the pilots. These things are pretty dim at night and totally useless if the surface is wet. Somebody stated that the pilots should have known that runway 22 had been repaved and that 26 was not freshly paved. It was wet and raining, all surfaces look freshly paved when they are wet. They are nice and shiney.

Another thing, I'm getting long winded I know, is that this new taxi route is just 'plane' bad. It requires a left turn following a short straight away that came after a short left turn. If you back up 1 short left turn, that puts you making your 90 degree left turn onto runway 26 instead of 22 (yes I know the turn is slightly more than 90 degrees for the flamers). When I saw this my jaw hit the table. That turn is totally unacceptable and combined with the fact that the rest of A had construction lights on it that look just like terminating bars when viewed in the rain.....well, it just sets up disaster.

I feel bad for the passengers and crew of this flight. The pilots messed up, no doubt there. They had an enormous amount of help in making their mistake from outside of that cockpit. God rest the soles of those who perished and I have total confidence that the NTSB will get to the bottom of this and making sweeping change recommendations.

727forever
727forever
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:17 pm

Quoting 727forever (Reply 46):
I've operated the CRJ out of KLEX many times in my career. I used to fly it for a different airline. I can vividly remember that area of the airport being very confusing. I can remember one time doing the takeoff brief and taxi checklist while taxiing out and seeing the hold short line for 26 and thinking that I had already crossed it and was holding short of 22. Upon stopping and noticing that something was amiss, I checked my airport diagram and realized that I wasn't where I thought I was. Further compounding this is the fact the KLEX tower has a habit of clearing you for takeoff on 22 before you ever reach runway 26. That intersection of taxiway A and 26 is much wider than the surrounding taxiways. The red runway threshold identification signs are for 26 are spread out quite a ways from the taxiway making them difficult to see.

The barbi-fun jet, aka CRJ, does have ground visibility issues. It sits rather low and can make vision of taxiways and signs difficult at times. The taxi/recog lights are at the wing root which is better than 40 feet behind the pilots. These things are pretty dim at night and totally useless if the surface is wet. Somebody stated that the pilots should have known that runway 22 had been repaved and that 26 was not freshly paved. It was wet and raining, all surfaces look freshly paved when they are wet. They are nice and shiney.

Another thing, I'm getting long winded I know, is that this new taxi route is just 'plane' bad. It requires a left turn following a short straight away that came after a short left turn. If you back up 1 short left turn, that puts you making your 90 degree left turn onto runway 26 instead of 22 (yes I know the turn is slightly more than 90 degrees for the flamers). When I saw this my jaw hit the table. That turn is totally unacceptable and combined with the fact that the rest of A had construction lights on it that look just like terminating bars when viewed in the rain.....well, it just sets up disaster.

I feel bad for the passengers and crew of this flight. The pilots messed up, no doubt there. They had an enormous amount of help in making their mistake from outside of that cockpit. God rest the soles of those who perished and I have total confidence that the NTSB will get to the bottom of this and making sweeping change recommendations.

Very good and informative post here. If someone like yourself who has actually operated commercial RJ flights out of this airport and have the experience to back your statements up say something like this, well, it makes it a whole lot easier for the laymen of us in here to understand how something like this could have happened.

Safety in airtravel is not all black and all white, yes, it is an inevitable fact that a pilot error has been comitted if a plane takes off from the wrong rwy, but that error would have been easier or harder to make depending on external circumstances such as the airport layout. We are all human beings that will make various mistakes during our life time, the key i think is to create an evironment where a mistake is less likely to be made but if it is made, that it wont lead to a catastrophic outcome.
 
RobertS975
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:17 am

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:45 pm

As I have previously posted, there is no doubt as to why this plane crashed. The key here is to understand why a crew like this made the mistakes that they did... why did good people screw up?
 
VS239
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:29 pm

RE: Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4

Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:50 pm

Quoting 727forever (Reply 46):

Good and informative post from someone who has been there. Many thanks
Who...me??

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aha, Baidu [Spider], ben175, CARST, chiad, EIASO, FarhanAzmi, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], Google [Bot], GRJGeorge, JeremyB, KarelXWB, KLA389, knope2001, LazarosK, MIflyer12, MrBren, mwalker89, olle, overcast, sassiciai, sccutler, SonOfABeech, speedbored, spiplane, SpoonNZ and 313 guests