Moderators: richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
pmk
Topic Author
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 10:07 am

BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 2:29 am

I've been pondering lately about the BAe-146 series. They are coming out of airline service and BAe is currently trying to re-market them as executive jets. The size and price are nice but from a mechanic's and pilot's point of view...how good is it?

PMK
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21779
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:41 am

I can't answer your question, but I never figured out why she had 4 holes. Seems like a lot of extra engine for such a little plane.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
TSS
Posts: 3549
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:52 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:06 pm



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Seems like a lot of extra engine for such a little plane.

Well, they were quite small engines.  Wink

Quoting Pmk (Thread starter):
The size and price are nice but from a mechanic's and pilot's point of view...how good is it?

There used to be a former BAe-146/Avro RJ pilot who was a regular poster here but I haven't seen him on lately, nor can I remember his nickname. I was hoping he'd see this thread and respond.
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
 
Mastropiero
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 9:24 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:30 pm

Surely you must be talking about Captain Click....  airplane 
 
DAL7e7
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:38 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:11 pm



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
I can't answer your question, but I never figured out why she had 4 holes. Seems like a lot of extra engine for such a little plane.

I'm no expert, but I thought she had 4 holes so she'd be a better STOL performer for places like LCY. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.

Quoting Pmk (Thread starter):
The size and price are nice

I agree. Very spacious interiors and quiet as well.

Are you considering buying one? If so, can I have a stake in it?  Wink

War Eagle!
Trey
DAL7e7 is wondering... Do pilots take crash courses?
 
midcon385
Posts: 467
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:26 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:21 pm

Anyone have an electronic copy of the AVRO RJ (or 146, whatever you have) flight manual? Any airline or the manufacturer issue is OK, I'd just like to have it as a reference for my own interest. It's not going to be used for flight ops, just learning about this aircraft. If you have such an item, please PM me.

Tim
MidContinent Airlines: We Know How To Fly!
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7858
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:24 pm

From a mechanics POV it was a POS
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
skysurfer
Posts: 1034
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 5:37 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:48 am

Back in August i was sightseeing in Prince Edward Island (Canada) and i saw 4 146's at Slemon Aiport. In my post i asked for the reg's of the aircraft and got the answers, but this raises another point. If the aircraft were in for engine overhauls (as was stated in the thread by a member), then who's paying for it and are there any parties out there that are interested in these birds? IIRC, there were 2 United machines, 1 NWA and an all white 146 sitting there.

Cheers

Stu
In the dark you can't see ugly, but you can feel fat
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 1:24 am

146 pilots I've spoken too like it a lot. I've only flown the simulator, but it's easy and fun to fly.

It had four engines to reduce noise. Two Speys (like the F.28) would have been too noisy. The ALF502 was quiet (high bypass ratio) but necessitated the quad layout.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
speedracer1407
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:02 am

Quoting Mastropiero (Reply 3):
Surely you must be talking about Captain Click.... airplane

Indeed. To the OP, do a search for posts by username SlamClick. He used to be a prolific poster around here as a retired airline captain, having flown quite a few different types. He rather liked the 146, but because he won't likely chime in (been absent for a good long while), I'll try to summarize some of his impressions of the plane that I remember:

• The avionics, and specifically the overhead panel was sensibly arranged and easy to use. As I recall, all buttons are toggle switches, and are uniformly unlit for "off" and lit for "on."

•It was not a STOL aircraft, as commonly assumed, but rather, more like a Long Takeoff Short Landing aircraft. Apparently, it used plenty of runway on takeoff, but could land and stop on a dime.

* Although it was pretty low and slow even by RJ standards, Slam once commented that this allowed him to fly flight plans in the low to mid 20,000ft range where virtually nobody else flew, thus getting more direct routes and beating much faster planes from airport to airport.

• The tail mounted air brake allowed for impossibly rapid descents when necessary, which made the plane feel like it was hanging from its tail. SlamClick recalled once when ATC asked him if he could descent to some unlikely altitude in some unlikely time. I can't remember exactly, but seem to recall Slam was able to loose the altitude by the time the radio exchange was over, to ATC's surprise.

•Slam had some pretty unfavorable things to say about the dispatch reliability of 146s at his airline.

That's a pretty lame recollection of SlamClick's impressions of the 146, as it's from my foggy memory, so it's definitely worthwhile spending some time with the search function to get the more colorful versions. Even if you struggle to find posts on the 146, you'll get a lot of fun stories on a range of other aircraft.

[Edited 2009-09-29 21:06:42]

[Edited 2009-09-29 21:09:47]
Dassault Mercure: the plane that has Boeing and Airbus shaking in their boots.
 
User avatar
BreninTW
Posts: 1701
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:31 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 6:22 am



Quoting Speedracer1407 (Reply 9):
The tail mounted air brake allowed for impossibly rapid descents when necessary, which made the plane feel like it was hanging from its tail. SlamClick recalled once when ATC asked him if he could descent to some unlikely altitude in some unlikely time. I can't remember exactly, but seem to recall Slam was able to loose the altitude by the time the radio exchange was over, to ATC's surprise.

That's one of my favorite SlamClick stories! You can read it here BAe 146 - Here To Stay? (by BoeingOnFinal Jul 22 2006 in Tech Ops)
 
User avatar
TZTriStar500
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 3:59 pm



Quoting Skysurfer (Reply 7):
Back in August i was sightseeing in Prince Edward Island (Canada) and i saw 4 146's at Slemon Aiport. In my post i asked for the reg's of the aircraft and got the answers, but this raises another point. If the aircraft were in for engine overhauls (as was stated in the thread by a member), then who's paying for it and are there any parties out there that are interested in these birds? IIRC, there were 2 United machines, 1 NWA and an all white 146 sitting there.

Actually those aircraft are in open storage, not there for engine overhauls. They are owned by a BAe146 lessor by the name of Tronosjet which is based at Slemon Park.
35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
 
BAE146QT
Posts: 981
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:58 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:34 pm

I don't have anything to add really, (other than to thank Brenintw for the nostalgia) but just wanted to say that wherever SlamClick is, I hope the skies are blue for him.



Oh - and long live the 146, despite the UK press's attempts to kill it and the 757.
Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
 
BMI727
Posts: 11300
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:58 pm



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
but I never figured out why she had 4 holes.

It was to keep the noise down I think. The engines were actually derived from the ones that power the Chinook.

Quoting Speedracer1407 (Reply 9):
I can't remember exactly, but seem to recall Slam was able to loose the altitude by the time the radio exchange was over, to ATC's surprise.

I remember reading a story of a 146 that was able to slow down something like 50 knots in one sweep of the radar.

Quoting Speedracer1407 (Reply 9):
Slam once commented that this allowed him to fly flight plans in the low to mid 20,000ft range where virtually nobody else flew, thus getting more direct routes and beating much faster planes from airport to airport.

The unique thing about the engines on the 146 was that they had little, or even negative efficiency gain for flying higher. Service ceiling was quite low, something like FL310 and I think that the limiting factor was time to descend.

Quoting DAL7e7 (Reply 4):
Very spacious interiors

If you don't go six wide.

Quoting Speedracer1407 (Reply 9):
Slam had some pretty unfavorable things to say about the dispatch reliability of 146s at his airline.

BAe - Bring Another Engine.
Also, the 146 had the bad habit of letting fumes in the cabin if the air conditioning packs were not started carefully.

Quoting Speedracer1407 (Reply 9):
As I recall, all buttons are toggle switches, and are uniformly unlit for "off" and lit for "on."

They were rocker switches (like the windows on most cars) that allow one to see if they are on or off at a glance, unlike pushbuttons.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 6:07 pm



Quoting Brenintw (Reply 10):
That's one of my favorite SlamClick stories!

 checkmark  One of many.

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 12):
wherever SlamClick is, I hope the skies are blue for him.

Indeed.

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 12):
Oh - and long live the 146, despite the UK press's attempts to kill it and the 757.

I wasn't wawre of that.  confused 
 
kappel
Posts: 1836
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:48 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 6:43 pm

How does the BAe 146 compare to the Avro RJ in the matters discussed above? More or less the same?
L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:33 pm



Quoting David L (Reply 14):
I wasn't wawre of that

 eyepopping  I meant "aware", of course.  embarrassed 
 
saab2000
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:19 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:48 pm

I work for an airline that operated it for years and used to work for LX, which also operated it for years. Still does I think, in Avro form.

The current airline I work for has many pilots who flew it, most of whom preferred it to the CRJ we now fly.

I can't really speak because I never flew it, but I did ride on the jumpseat a few times and saw it being flown.

It was slower than many, but still not a total slug. It'd do 300 knots. CRJs will do 330-335. It had a hard time climbing higher than about FL280 (like the CRJ-200). Had better handling characteristics than the CRJ. Made nicer landings.

The engines had a kind of synchronization which is better than the CRJ has.

I'm not an expert, but I can tell you it was a nicer airplane to ride on than a CRJ, comparable in many ways to an EMB-175 or 190, but not as modern in the cabin.
smrtrthnu
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7043
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:15 am

Quoting Speedracer1407 (Reply 9):
It was not a STOL aircraft, as commonly assumed, but rather, more like a Long Takeoff Short Landing aircraft. Apparently, it used plenty of runway on takeoff, but could land and stop on a dime.

It depends. It's correct when talking about the heaviest and longest stretch version and fueled for a long leg.

I have many times taken the LX ARJ from CPH to ZRH - a 500nm leg - and mostly on rush hour Friday afternoons. While all other planes were slowly moving forward in the take-off queue on their way to the runway end, then the ARJ (and occationally an F50) would wait for their turn on a taxiway half way or two third down the runway, and the ARJ would take off like a hot air balloon with plenty of congrete to spare.

The lighter and shorter versions, when fueled for a true regional leg only, are STOL planes. That's also the reason for Atlantic Airways to operate a six strong fleet of only BAe-146/ARJ planes (plus helicopters). Their home base, Vagar on the Faeroe Islands, has not only a short runway - 4,100 feet - but also a rather difficult landscape around the airport.

Atlantic Airways does not operate the heavy and long versions.

I don't think Atlantic Airways knows what to do on the day when the last 146/ARJ is worn out.

[Edited 2009-09-30 17:16:54]
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Fri Oct 02, 2009 4:50 pm



Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 18):

I don't think Atlantic Airways knows what to do on the day when the last 146/ARJ is worn out.

Maybe order more A319s or the A318.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
musang
Posts: 792
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 4:11 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:55 pm

Good Day All.

I flew RJ100s from Gatwick for a number of years before we were absorbed into a Big Airline and they were dispersed to regional bases. After 7 months training the new operators' pilots in the delights of the RJ I found myself on 737 Classics. Over the 146, the RJ series had FADEC, part EFIS, Cat III B Autoland (breathtaking), less of a fume problem, 33,000 or 35,000 ceilings, and 7,000 lb thrust engines. It could be ferried on three engines (I haven't operated 146s so am not sure if they can do this) and had an impressive autopilot windshear escape mode (likewise). Externally pretty much the same (as the 146-300) except for one antenna.

It was a bit maintenance-hungry. We were particularly irritated by the APUs, which had about 8 different auto-shutdown criteria, and demonstrated them often.

We considered it a STOL machine. Low approach speeds made the landings short, and various flap settings allowed short t/o aswell although we rarely had to use them. As a generalisation (for all types) one uses the highest speeds/smallest flap setting/lowest thrust for take off that the runway allows, thereby reducing engine wear, noise and fuel burn, whilst improving climb rate. Therefore, 146/RJs departing from long runways will not appear very spritely because they're taking advantage of the space, but their true capability will be seen at short strips (e.g. Vagar). Even at London City we sometimes used reduced thrust and flap 25 (Flap 33 being the norm for LCY departures IIRC).

Four engines were not preferred from a maintenance standpoint of course, but bearing in mind what the 146 was designed for, bus-stop services to small runways, the consequences of losing an engine (at, say LCY) are much less dramatic than with a twin. In the simulator, I'd fail an inboard engine on t/o with new trainees, and they wouldn't notice for some time. Not to catch them out, but to give them faith in its performance and ease of handling.

The trainees from Embraers took to it quite quickly, as the level of automation/technology was similar. The turboprop pilots liked it as it was so easy to handle, and was a great step up the ladder for them withourt being too complicated. The 737 drivers adjusted easily and liked it because of its relative stability/predictability, the similarity of the instrumentation and automation and the slightly advanced technology, and the Airbus pilots liked it because they felt more involved with it and had more control over it (no, lets not get into that discussion, I've never driven an Airbus so am not qualified to argue).

We routinely cruised ours at .70 and occasionally .71. I seem to recall Crossair used .72. And as mentioned, the descent rate was substantial. It could also slow down impressively on finals. 250 knots clean on the glideslope to 6 miles in no wind, or so I'm reliably told.

We used to fly the RJs very lucratively to Sion, Innsbruck, Salzburg, Chambery, Fagernes and Dagali, exciting mountain ski destinations, and took full loads back to Scotland with ease. My current employer stopped all but the Salzburg and Innsbruck flights, as 737 Classics couldn't do them without a payload penalty. The INN flights then ceased because our Classics didn't have GPS and company policy doesn't allow discretionary disregard of EGPWS warnings. No criticism of the 737 - it just wasn't appropriate for those operations, whereas the 146/RJ was designed for them.

The trailing arm suspension allowed consistent smooth landings, although the nosewheels would then crash down if you weren't paying attention. The autoland was spectacular. In a crosswind, coming down in a crab, it would rudder the nose straight and drop a wing, at 150 feet. It would then grease it on, into-wind wheels first, gently settle the other main gear, softly lower the nose gear and add aileron into wind as it slowed down while maintaining the localiser using rudder. The autopilot disengaged at 80 knots IIRC and manual control followed. In the sim I'd put in a rediculous crosswind and clear conditions as a demonstration. The trainees were often spellbound. The 737, in comparison, vaguely aims it in the general direction of the touchdown zone, does a carrier landing, and leaves me to disengage the autopilot immediately on main gear touchdown and coax it back to the centreline (no autopilot control of the rudder)! I hope the NGs do a better job!

The flight deck was spacious too, although the galleys weren't, and the seating was cramped at 6 abreast. I believe Crossair/Swiss and Lufthansa used to have 5 abreast. Our seat blocks were electrically adjustable from three to two so we could have 6, 5 or 4 abreast as far as about two thirds of the way down the cabin. Jersey European used to have larger seats in the premium cabin, can't remember whether they were 2 each side or 2 and 3.

The 146/RJ series was designed as a niche aircraft for a specialised market and in its intended role it excelled. Almost without exception my colleagues who flew it prefer it to the 737 from a handling POV. It was very stable, went where you pointed it and had no pitch/power couple (doesn't pitch up or down with thrust changes like with underslung engines). The brakes used to snatch though, until well bedded in.

I loved it!

Regards - musang
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2164
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:44 pm



Quoting David L (Reply 14):
Quoting Brenintw (Reply 10):
That's one of my favorite SlamClick stories!

One of many.

Agreed!


I was poking around Opa Locka airport in Miami yesterday after work and to my surprise I saw an un-liveried BAe-146 or Avro land and taxi in to Miami Executive FBO. Hadn't seen one in person since Presidential used to fly the 146 into Daytona Beach DAB in the 80's.
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:48 pm



Quoting Musang (Reply 20):
The autoland was spectacular. In a crosswind, coming down in a crab, it would rudder the nose straight and drop a wing, at 150 feet. It would then grease it on, into-wind wheels first, gently settle the other main gear, softly lower the nose gear and add aileron into wind as it slowed down while maintaining the localiser using rudder. The autopilot disengaged at 80 knots IIRC and manual control followed. In the sim I'd put in a rediculous crosswind and clear conditions as a demonstration. The trainees were often spellbound. The 737, in comparison, vaguely aims it in the general direction of the touchdown zone, does a carrier landing, and leaves me to disengage the autopilot immediately on main gear touchdown and coax it back to the centreline (no autopilot control of the rudder)!

This was one of the most entertaining and informative passages I've read in quite some time. Thanks for the great story, Musang.

2H4
Intentionally Left Blank
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7043
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Sat Oct 03, 2009 2:07 am



Quoting A342 (Reply 19):
Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 18):

I don't think Atlantic Airways knows what to do on the day when the last 146/ARJ is worn out.

Maybe order more A319s or the A318.

They have one 319 on order. I assume that it will be used mainly on the FAE-CPH shuttle.

In earlier days Maersk Air operated that route using B732, B735 and B73G. But that was with severe weight restrictions. Boeing salesmen braged that it was the shortest wunway with scheduled 737 ops. The 319 will suffer the same way.

The 146/ARJ really excells at this 4,100ft runway. Also because to most destinations today's traffic is really to much for turboprop planes.

Maybe on the day of the last 146/ARJ flight (may that day happen late) the Atlantic fleet will be a mixture of 318/319 and Dash-8-Q400 planes?

But nothing can beat the flexibility of the Atlantic all 146/ARJ fleet of 6 planes. That many planes are not needed at all times, but they are nice to have for Christmas, summer holidays and Monday morning / Friday evening rush hour business traffic. And at other times they are quite easily put to charter work from mainly Denmark to southern European sun- or skiing resorts. The latter will be less welcome with turboprop planes.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
mirrodie
Posts: 6794
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 3:33 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Sat Oct 03, 2009 2:47 am



Quoting Musang (Reply 20):
Good Day All.

Great read!

While not a pilot, I have jumpsat on it and also flew in one other time. It was a unique bird to the US, not seen at many local airports.

In my interview with the pilots flying, their sentiments echo Musang's. One pilot was a former P3 Orion pilot and raved about the 146.

Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 21):
I was poking around Opa Locka airport in Miami yesterday after work and to my surprise I saw an un-liveried BAe-146 or Avro land and taxi in to Miami Executive FBO. Hadn't seen one in person since Presidential used to fly the 146 into Daytona Beach DAB in the 80's.

Awesome. Is it based there?
Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2164
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Sat Oct 03, 2009 6:39 am



Quoting Mirrodie (Reply 24):
Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 21):
I was poking around Opa Locka airport in Miami yesterday after work and to my surprise I saw an un-liveried BAe-146 or Avro land and taxi in to Miami Executive FBO. Hadn't seen one in person since Presidential used to fly the 146 into Daytona Beach DAB in the 80's.

Awesome. Is it based there?I

Dunno, I'm not there often but have never seen it there before. As I said last time I saw a 146 was at DAB in the 80's.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Sat Oct 03, 2009 7:17 pm

Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7043
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:59 pm



Quoting A342 (Reply 26):
Have a look at these links. The short runway might be history soon:

Thanks A342, hopefully this explains the single A319 order.

These plans are, however nothing really new. They are probably as old as the airport - that means 45 years.

The cost for this 1800 feet runway extension (from 4,100 to 5,900 feet) and moving the terminal will - with usual cost overruns for such projects - be in the region of $100 million. That's a lot of money when there are only 50,000 souls in the country. That's $2,000 per capita! And that is of course what has delayed the project during all these years.

If all Germans had to pay the same amount of money for runway extensions, then it would be well over €100 billion. That's a lot of mone for the luxury to be able to fly to Copenhagen on a fairly well loaded A319 instead of a fully loaded ARJ-85.

We will see. I'm not convinced that we will see that runway in reality in our lifetime.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
dtswi
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:34 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:35 pm

Hi all  Smile

May I just suggest the following link: very impressive hard landing of Swiss Avro 85 in London City
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmT1MbhyBZE

This does tell about solidity of Avros -
What did the pilot do wrong according to you ? too low speed?

Thanks !

D.
 
musang
Posts: 792
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 4:11 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:53 pm

Hi.

"too low speed" could result in such an impact, however there could be other causes, direct or indirect. I love theorising about accident causes like we all do, but not in a public arena such as this. I haven't seen the official report on this one yet!

Regards - musang
 
dtswi
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:34 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Wed Oct 07, 2009 9:23 pm



Quoting Musang (Reply 29):

Thank you for correcting me. You are right of course!

Do you know when this incident happen? - and again sorry if this has already been discussed somewhere else extensively - I have been away from airliners a long time.

Thanks  Wink
 
musang
Posts: 792
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 4:11 am

RE: BAe-146 - How Was It From The A/P And Pilot POV?

Thu Oct 08, 2009 10:29 pm

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos