Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

https://coloradosun.com/2021/05/12/two-planes-collide-cherry-creek-reservoir/?fbclid=IwAR21gVUL3aqRWnC-n2YvwuIMKY7sXqVX6k-TvWKhUyM6RtKyrBl-gUGWu_A

So this happened today.

+1 for CAPS and +1000 for the kid flying the Metro.

Evidently the Cirrus pilot blew through his base to final turn even though he'd been told of the Metro on final for the parallel runway. 

My base to final turn nearly always involves traffic for the parallel runway. I either see it, or make damn sure I don't overshoot final. In fact I'll probably roll out lined up on the taxiway and then have to gently side step to actually land on the runway.

Glad everyone's ok, but no excuse for sloppy flying.

  • Like 8
Posted

I watched.  Maybe the Cirrus didn't need to pull the chute.  It could have been the first gear up landing in a Cirrus.  I'm glad everyone survived with no injuries.  Truly a miracle. 

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, exM20K said:

Metroliner pilot cool as a cucumber.  Bravo.

From the audio tape it appears the crew may not have even been aware (initially) of the midair.  Loss of an engine on short final might not have been perceived as a big threat.

So...either very cool, or oblivious.  I'm voting for cool and competent.

Edited by Mooneymite
  • Like 1
Posted

Possibly there will be day when we’ll be able to hear/see the Sewer Tube pilots reactions as he discovered the damage to his ship!  Holy cow, Batman, or stronger words beyond that !!:o

Posted (edited)

Can anyone tell me WTH happening with the new species of VFR flyers, the ones found at 800ft agl 3nm north of runway thresholds??!!!

Literally there is no need for IFR & VFR to see and avoid each other or even separated on final, a mid-air collision will not happen with IFR flying 3deg glide slope at 150kts on instrument approach while VFR is flying tight circuits with steep +4.5deg slopes at 90kts, it's just impossible unless slow Cub lands on top of B737 over threshold or hit him on ground roll (I can't draw a diagram but it's a mathematical truth)

If VFR is dragging their aircraft on shallow 2.5deg glide slopes or cross them on base/final leg they will get walked on by faster heavy metal, my felling this accident would not have happened even with an overshoot of runway axis if VFR was at 1000ft agl no more than 2nm or better 1.5nm for power off in glide range (maybe this is now ignored or people got spoiled by CAPS? or got normalized by IFR flying?) 

This guy has some answers

  

 

 

Edited by Ibra
Posted
19 minutes ago, Ibra said:

Can anyone tell me WTH happening with the new species of VFR flyers, the ones found at 800ft agl 3nm north of runway thresholds??!!!

People with more money then skill, flying a plane far above their capabilities require more room and time to get a stable approach. I've seen this in more then just aviation it exists within racing/track days as well. People show up with their 30k ducati, 50 foot trailer, starbucks, sanded down knee sliders, and then go into the fast groups and cause chaos. I've had the wonderful pleasure of coaching these people and its intolerable.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

When I raced it was in Clubman with a mostly stock GS500E, and a lawnmower trailer :)

But it was a lot of fun, very competitive and being mostly stock I got a lot of track time where the guys with big bucks were constantly tuning and not on the track 

Edited by A64Pilot
  • Like 1
Posted

I have yet had the opportunity of landing in a parallel runway environment (except at KBWI in 1970’s). If you are turning base to final and you have a tail wind , your course could drift off center encroaching the path of the perfectly centered straight in aircraft.

it’s a shame that ATC couldn’t have somehow spaced the timing to avoid this kind of collision hazard

Posted

Larry, it's really not a big deal. Definitely not as bad as you and many others who have never been to one and have commented on this accident imagine it to be. We learn to correct for the wind to fly a traffic pattern as student pilots, no matter where we learned to fly. This is no different. I don't recall thinking anything was special on my very first flight there when I moved to Denver from Massachusetts where I was based at a Connecticut airport with a single 1800' long runway. For  those who trained or are based at APA, it's just normal. And for newbies I have flown with, it was just taken in stride. Getting used to the pace of communications at an airport with almost 1,000 ops daily is a bigger deal for most than the parallel runways (not to mention the Cub doing touch and goes on the crosswind runway, 10/28, while all this was going on).

This was a one-off.

  • Like 3
Posted
2 hours ago, larrynimmo said:

I have yet had the opportunity of landing in a parallel runway environment (except at KBWI in 1970’s). If you are turning base to final and you have a tail wind , your course could drift off center encroaching the path of the perfectly centered straight in aircraft.

it’s a shame that ATC couldn’t have somehow spaced the timing to avoid this kind of collision hazard

I learned to fly at North Perry airport in Hollywood, FL with paralell runways.  It wasn't uncommon for them to stack 6-7 on final for both runways given the high student training activity.  Despite having 3k ft runways the airport had something like the 2nd or 3rd most operations in the state for smaller airports.  Despite these students being extremely green, I don't think there has ever been a mid-air collision.  occasionally someone would drift off runway center line and be reminded by the tower that they were a little north or south of course but I'm not sure how many just blew right through it.  At the speed this guy was going he probably would still have had difficultly making the turn for 17R.

  • Like 2
Posted
5 hours ago, larrynimmo said:

it’s a shame that ATC couldn’t have somehow spaced the timing to avoid this kind of collision hazard

I think that gets harder to manage when somebody is sustaining ~170 kts in the pattern.

Posted
3 hours ago, EricJ said:

I think that gets harder to manage when somebody is sustaining ~170 kts in the pattern.

That’s one of the reasons I don’t fly 170k in the pattern....another reason is the Mooney isn’t fast enough...and third, most importantly I know better

  • Thanks 1
Posted

The 10 - 28 runway at Centennial is one way out 10 and one way in 28. ALWAYS*

There are never T & Gs on it in either direction.

*On one occasion in 20 years based at APA the wind was absolutely howling straight out of the east, right down runway 28.
With both N S runways closed because of wind I was given 10 to land. Felt really weird, only runway there without a VASI.

The Cirrus driver was as bad, sloppy, ignorant, arrogant as possible. He made multiple errors in judgment. Hope they take away his ticket and never give it back. No one could accidentally flown as bad as this guy did. This guy was every bad Cirrus pilot stereotype there is.
 

If you follow the track of the Cirrus under the chute wind was barely blowing out of the north east.

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, RJBrown said:

The 10 - 28 runway at Centennial is one way out 10 and one way in 28. ALWAYS*

There are never T & Gs on it in either direction.

I guess you haven't listened to the full LiveATC audio for the time frame of this accident. While all this was going on there was a Piper Cub doing multiple TNGs on 10. Surprised the heck out of me. 

Like you, during  my 20 years there I only landed on 10 once. Same reason. Maybe it was the same day? :D (It wasn't. The NS runways were open when i did it.)
 

Edited by midlifeflyer
Posted
On 5/15/2021 at 8:21 PM, midlifeflyer said:

I guess you haven't listened to the full LiveATC audio for the time frame of this accident. While all this was going on there was a Piper Cub doing multiple TNGs on 10. Surprised the heck out of me.

Although not as busy as Denver Centennial, Albuquerque Sunport has a T-shaped runway configuration, with 9-27 being the main runway and 3-21 being the stem of the T. It is pretty common for smaller airplanes to circle the pattern on runway 3 while airliners use runway 9. Tower reminds not to overfly 9-27.

 

Posted
2 hours ago, zaitcev said:

Although not as busy as Denver Centennial, Albuquerque Sunport has a T-shaped runway configuration, with 9-27 being the main runway and 3-21 being the stem of the T. It is pretty common for smaller airplanes to circle the pattern on runway 3 while airliners use runway 9. Tower reminds not to overfly 9-27.

 

Yeah, but he's right. The activity on APA 10/28 99.9% of the time is limited to takeoffs on 10 and landings on 28. I quipped to a friend who is still there that the Cub was the most  shocking thing I heard in the LiveATC audio.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.