Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Citation from Shoreham crashed today in foggy Trier

again two pilots tried to land their Citation in 100-400m fog conditions on an airfield (EDTR) without instrument landing system:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20140112-0

EDxx, Germany

It appears to happen with monotonous regularity. I was embroiled in a fairly tense forum discussion, where a Cessna 310, 135 operator, in the States, drove it in short. Single pilot IFR, weather given as 200 feet base, .75 forward viz. I suggested he should have gone to an alternate, where I was berated for being naive, stupid, and lacking knowledge, due to the attitude of 135 freight dogs,

Apparently had he gone to an alternate, he would have been fired. What price a parcel eh?

There appears to be a lot of this of late, but perhaps the reporting mechanisms are such, we now here about all the crashes.

There were 4 people killed in this Citation, and you have to ask, what was the rational about the approach attempt?

Fly safe. I want this thing to land l...
EGPF Glasgow

This one departed my base, EGKA. I checked it wasn’t the Citation pilot I know.

I am not sure of the time of the crash but the wx for ELLX (not far away) appears below the ILS minima for Part 91.

There is nothing wrong with flying down to the published minima on an IAP even if the reported wx is “obviously” not landable (any RVR-based “approach ban” being an exception to that) and this is reasonable to do because the wx seen from wherever it is being reported from could easily be very different to the wx at the runway and on the final approach track.

However this airport has no IAP so they must have been thinking that they will fly some sort of DIY IAP and hope they get visual before some self-defined point. Evidently they set that point too low – way too low IMHO for any DIY IAP.

There might have been other factors e.g. a mis-set altimeter.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

There was fog the whole day. I had to cancel my flight to ELLX today because of this.

EDXQ

I have to say I am comfortable pushing fog etc on an instrument approach and seeing if I can get visual at the minima, but going really low not on an IAP (if that is what happened) is just a disaster waiting to happen.

EGTK Oxford

Presumably a EASA registered operator on an AoC would not have attempted this? A DIY instrument approach in a turbofan, even a straight wing slowtation, seems surreal. A tragedy for passengers and crew.

It may be wrong to jump to conclusions and the BfU might uncover mitigating circumstances.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

When I checked the METAR today at 1150 lcl I got this:

ELLX 121050Z VRB03KT 0100 R24/0125N FZFG BKN000 M01/M01 Q1023 2419//56 BECMG 3000 BR

EDXQ

…A DIY instrument approach in a turbofan, even a straight wing slowtation, seems surreal….

A DIY instument approach in anything into real bad weather seems surreal. But if my life depended on it, I would rather do it with a Citation than with a Pa28: Even if the jet is 30 or 40 knots faster, the very reliable autopilot plus two pairs of eyes for monitoring plus ground proximity warning makes it a lot easier. I wonder why they got no warning, maybe it is not a requirement for N-reg?

EDDS - Stuttgart

FAR 91.223

Last Edited by Neil at 12 Jan 21:45
Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)

I wonder why they got no warning, maybe it is not a requirement for N-reg?

Does bizjet GPWS work well enough for this purpose? I would think that, away from any IAP, all you get is the “five hundred” audio warning. In fact I get that on every published approach too (mine is the Garmin 496 TAWS, whose behaviour, Garmin claim, is modified on an IAP, though they won’t give details). There might be an additional warning off the radar altimeter? My view would be that the “five hundred” would be an obvious clue to the pilot to get out of there even in flat terrain but presumably these pilots were trying to land…

Presumably a EASA registered operator on an AoC would not have attempted this?

Sure there are additional safeguards on AOC ops, but I think you would be very suprised. A very similar type of approach in that case, though there was an IAP there. That was on a Spanish AOC, as some will be quick to point out.

I don’t think an AOC operator can fly IFR to a non IAP airport. Not with paying passengers, anyway. That’s why airports need to go through the charade of installing the perfunctory NDB (which everybody then laughs at) to legalise the more valuable business.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
66 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top