Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 31, 2016, 03:56:15 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: No coverage in your area? If you are near your local airport contact us to learn about becoming a volunteer


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  Colgan 3268 - May 12, 2009 - KEWR-KBUF - Lost Wheel on Landing - Dash 8-400
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Colgan 3268 - May 12, 2009 - KEWR-KBUF - Lost Wheel on Landing - Dash 8-400  (Read 61770 times)
kea001
Guest
« on: May 13, 2009, 11:10:31 AM »

A Colgan Air de Havilland Dash 8-400, registration N187WQ performing flight 9L-3268 from Newark,NJ to Buffalo,NY (USA), had landed on Buffalo's runway 23 and was taxiing to the ramp via taxiway Alpha, when the tower queried the crew, whether they had lost a tyre. After an affirmative reply from the crew emergency services inspected the taxiway and decided to also have a look onto the runway, then reported that fluid, possibly from hydraulics, was on the runway and a whole wheel had been located with debris around the intersections of runway 23, runway 32 and taxiway Alpha. Both runways were closed, runway 32 reopened about 10 minutes later.

Aviation Herald:
http://avherald.com/h?article=4198ce09&opt=1

KBUF - May 12, 2009 - 2200Z-2230Z

* KBUF-Colgan_3268.mp3 (497.55 KB - downloaded 1897 times.)
« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 11:13:05 AM by kea001 » Logged
atcman23
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 367



« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2009, 07:25:01 PM »

Someone forget a lugnut or two??  tongue  That's interesting as to how they would lose a tire.  I mean, they have a hard enough time replacing them and they wait until there is no tread left to replace them anyway!  KBUF has really been in the news this year.
Logged

Mark Spencer
kea001
Guest
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2009, 08:38:01 PM »





From: WGRZ Buffalo
http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=66765&provider=gnews
« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 09:02:28 PM by kea001 » Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2009, 09:40:46 PM »

It may just be the angle its at, and also the graininess of the photo(I am assuming this is a screen capture form a video), but it looks like the end of the axle is broken!

Here are a couple pics of complete Q400 main gear:

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/5/0/1415059.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/167/410801693_682969df18.jpg?v=0

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_OKdf8I_bxhI/SJVyxGbv1BI/AAAAAAAACZE/uIsRTfozZt0/s320/dash8%2Bwheel.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2174/2484230469_ab013993b1.jpg?v=0

And here is a crude drawing of the main landing gear...appropriately, missing a tire!  wink I am not failure with the Q400 gear, but I think the tire is held on the axle shaft with a large castle nut, witch is covered by a dust cap that snaps in place. Bearings are in between the halves, and slide over the axel. It would appear that the axle broke, allowing the tire to come off. The bolts around the rim you can see in the pics hold the two halves of the rim together. Most aircraft don't have "lugnuts" per say... wink

http://blog.flightstory.net/wp-content/uploads/sas_aal_investigation.gif

« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 09:51:33 PM by joeyb747 » Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
mhawke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2009, 10:25:09 PM »

From looking at the picture, it would almost appear that the outer bearings seized.  That overheats and the axle, causing it to snap off.  It also leads to blueing of the metal (although hard to see for sure in the picture, it looks like the axle has signs of heat damage to it).

Same thing will happen in your car if you don't repack the bearings on occasion.


Looks like some more bad press and investigations for Colgan air may be coming.....
Logged
flygirltammy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2009, 09:08:33 PM »

Video:
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/05/14/9460296.html
Logged

kea001
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2009, 10:02:21 PM »


Oh my freaking dog!

QUOTE: The passenger who shot the video, who didn’t want to be identified, said he “felt something was going to happen.” He and other passengers said they saw flames shooting from a right tire assembly when the plane took off just after 5 p.m.

“Quite a few passengers saw the flames on takeoff,” the passenger said. “The inside wheel on the right side literally sheered off on landing.”

My question is - Did any of these passengers bother to notify the cabin crew about what they saw on departure?

Unfortunately, I won't be able to find the time to go through the ATC archive of the departure to answer my question. Not for a week anyway. I suspect there won't be much there. 
« Last Edit: May 14, 2009, 10:11:16 PM by kea001 » Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2009, 10:04:08 PM »

From looking at the picture, it would almost appear that the outer bearings seized.  That overheats and the axle, causing it to snap off.  It also leads to blueing of the metal (although hard to see for sure in the picture, it looks like the axle has signs of heat damage to it).

Same thing will happen in your car if you don't repack the bearings on occasion.


Looks like some more bad press and investigations for Colgan air may be coming.....

I concur 100%. It was just hard to see the end of the axle from the pic, but that's what it looks like to me...
Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2009, 10:15:50 PM »


Oh my freaking dog!

QUOTE: The passenger who shot the video, who didn’t want to be identified, said he “felt something was going to happen.” He and other passengers said they saw flames shooting from a right tire assembly when the plane took off just after 5 p.m.

“Quite a few passengers saw the flames on takeoff,” the passenger said. “The inside wheel on the right side literally sheered off on landing.”

My question is - Did anyone bother to notify the cabin crew about what they saw on departure?

Probably not!  shocked Does anyone recall Aloha 243? The B737-200 that lost its roof after departing Hilo(PHTO)? Several passengers noticed cracks around the entry door while boarding in Hilo(PHTO) for the flight to Honolulu(PHNL), but didn't say a word to any member of the crew.

Here is the ATC tape from Maui(PHOG) if interested:

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/MP3s/rcvralo243.mp3

And the transcript:

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cvr880428.htm

Off the subject a bit, but one worth revisiting!  grin
Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
flygirltammy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2009, 11:56:02 PM »

Procedural question here; even if the pilots knew about it, is the only thing that could have been done was coming in as slow as possible? which would then being risking a stall? I know that if it was a known nose gear problem I could just hold it off as long as possible, but what do in this particular scenario?
Logged

fholbert
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 148



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2009, 01:33:32 AM »

My guess, the wheel wasn't loose, it was too tight.
Logged

Frank Holbert
http://160knots.com
atcman23
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 367



« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2009, 07:19:57 AM »

Another Q400 incident this year.  It's only a matter of time before this makes the national news!
Logged

Mark Spencer
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2009, 04:51:05 PM »

Procedural question here; even if the pilots knew about it, is the only thing that could have been done was coming in as slow as possible? which would then being risking a stall? I know that if it was a known nose gear problem I could just hold it off as long as possible, but what do in this particular scenario?

Basically, nothing different would be done.  Just make a normal, albeit as smoothe as you can, landing.  Obviously an emergency would have been declared and CFR on scene for the landing.
Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
fholbert
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 148



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2009, 12:23:34 AM »

Procedural question here; even if the pilots knew about it, is the only thing that could have been done was coming in as slow as possible? which would then being risking a stall? I know that if it was a known nose gear problem I could just hold it off as long as possible, but what do in this particular scenario?

Eject and let the passengers fend for them self.


Logged

Frank Holbert
http://160knots.com
dska22
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2009, 10:46:06 AM »

Interestingly, I had just gone back to listen to the Colgan 3407 ATC clip after reading the cockpit transcript, and the company dash-8 that went for the approach right after 3407 was 3268.  Not really relevant, but amusing.  I remember 3268 raised some eyebrows then for its very quick decision to land, despite being the first non-jet (and same aircraft type) to shoot the approach some 10-15 minutes after 3407.  In hindsight, there was no reason to wait, but on an icy night in the same aircraft, holding briefly to verify approach settings might have been a little less risky (note, they weren't picking up any more ice below 3500).
Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2009, 08:52:52 PM »

Since we are back on 3407 again...I found the NTSB...at least it says it is...Animation of the crash. It also has the CVR transcript synced on the screen...no audio thou...



I haven't seen it personally, but I heard the report was out on 3407...cause of crash blamed on crew error and fatigue. But that's just what I heard...I have not read the report, nor had time to look for it!   wink
All I could find on the NTSB website was the preliminary report.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 08:57:19 PM by joeyb747 » Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
dska22
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2009, 11:58:25 PM »

Since we are back on 3407 again...I found the NTSB...at least it says it is...Animation of the crash. It also has the CVR transcript synced on the screen...no audio thou...



I haven't seen it personally, but I heard the report was out on 3407...cause of crash blamed on crew error and fatigue. But that's just what I heard...I have not read the report, nor had time to look for it!   wink
All I could find on the NTSB website was the preliminary report.

I actually wasn't aware that the report was out yet.  I know the past few days they had hearings on the matter, but I think it still may be several more months until we here the last word about this one.
Logged
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2009, 12:04:58 AM »

That's a nice animation.  Pretty much sums up what happened.  There was 1 thing missing from it though....a stall recovery.
Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #18 on: May 18, 2009, 08:44:03 PM »

Since we are back on 3407 again...I found the NTSB...at least it says it is...Animation of the crash. It also has the CVR transcript synced on the screen...no audio thou...



I haven't seen it personally, but I heard the report was out on 3407...cause of crash blamed on crew error and fatigue. But that's just what I heard...I have not read the report, nor had time to look for it!   wink
All I could find on the NTSB website was the preliminary report.


I actually wasn't aware that the report was out yet.  I know the past few days they had hearings on the matter, but I think it still may be several more months until we here the last word about this one.

That's what I thought. The source I heard it from is not a reputable one as far as aviation goes! Just thought I'd throw it out there and see if anyone else heard the same thing.  wink
Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2009, 08:46:19 PM »

That's a nice animation.  Pretty much sums up what happened.  There was 1 thing missing from it though....a stall recovery.

Agreed.  cry

It really does help explain what happened...when this first happened, the first thing that stuck out to me was that the airplane was facing 180 degrees to the runway, heading away from the airport, when it crashed. That struck me as odd. The animation helps fill in the gaps.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2009, 08:51:04 PM by joeyb747 » Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
flygirltammy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2009, 11:26:20 PM »

Since we are back on 3407 again...I found the NTSB...at least it says it is...Animation of the crash. It also has the CVR transcript synced on the screen...no audio thou...



I haven't seen it personally, but I heard the report was out on 3407...cause of crash blamed on crew error and fatigue. But that's just what I heard...I have not read the report, nor had time to look for it!   wink
All I could find on the NTSB website was the preliminary report.

That was some extreme pitch and roll.......

I haven't flown in icing either. I am trying to use this as at least something to learn from.

Kinda sick that some people are posting theories like the captain crashed on purpose.
 
Logged

kea001
Guest
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2009, 11:34:47 PM »

Since we are back on 3407 again...I found the NTSB...at least it says it is...Animation of the crash. It also has the CVR transcript synced on the screen...no audio thou...



I haven't seen it personally, but I heard the report was out on 3407...cause of crash blamed on crew error and fatigue. But that's just what I heard...I have not read the report, nor had time to look for it!   wink
All I could find on the NTSB website was the preliminary report.

That was some extreme pitch and roll.......

I haven't flown in icing either. I am trying to use this as at least something to learn from.

Kinda sick that some people are posting theories like the captain crashed on purpose.
 

Certification of the Bombardier DHC-8-400 (Dash 8 Q400) For Flight In Icing Conditions National Transportation Safety Board Public HearingWashington, DC12-14 May 2009
http://www.ntsb.gov/events/2009/Buffalo-NY/Jim_Martin_presentation.pdf
Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1623


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #22 on: May 19, 2009, 06:25:11 PM »

Good find kea001! Good info! Thanks for posting that!  cool
Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
kea001
Guest
« Reply #23 on: May 19, 2009, 08:35:37 PM »

Greg Feith, Former NTSB Lead Investigator, Weighs in on Buffalo Crash

  • There is a piece of equipment that should have been installed on that airplane that probably would have prevented this accident—the slow-speed alerter. It was not required, but the NTSB has been recommending it.
  • ...these two crew members were not plugged in to the dynamic situation they were flying in, which was this icing condition. — they were off on their speeds by almost forty knots. They should have stayed focused on what they are doing because they were flying in ice. 
  • Pilot fatigue has been an issue for a very long time.
  • A lot of pilots have a “disqual.” There are so many aspects that they have to worry about and perform, if you miss one part of it, they send you back for retraining and then you come back and get recertified. So that isn’t necessarily a good evaluator of a pilot’s skills and knowledge.


http://www.petergreenberg.com/2009/05/19/greg-feith-former-ntsb-lead-investigator-weighs-in-on-buffalo-crash/
« Last Edit: May 19, 2009, 08:38:41 PM by kea001 » Logged
flygirltammy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #24 on: May 19, 2009, 08:40:50 PM »

Greg Feith, Former NTSB Lead Investigator, Weighs in on Buffalo Crash

  • There is a piece of equipment that should have been installed on that airplane that probably would have prevented this accident—the slow-speed alerter. It was not required, but the NTSB has been recommending it.
  • these two crew members were not plugged in to the dynamic situation they were flying in, which was this icing condition. — they were off on their speeds by almost forty knot
  • Pilot fatigue has been an issue for a very long time.
  • A lot of pilots have a “disqual.” There are so many aspects that they have to worry about and perform, if you miss one part of it, they send you back for retraining and then you come back and get recertified. So that isn’t necessarily a good evaluator of a pilot’s skills and knowledge.


http://www.petergreenberg.com/2009/05/19/greg-feith-former-ntsb-lead-investigator-weighs-in-on-buffalo-crash/


I was just about to post a question with the disclaimer "Pardon me if this is a stupid question", but you already answered it.

I was about to ask if my understanding of the report was that the aircraft should have been able to safely operate under the weather conditions they were in. The answer is yes???
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!