Video of good emergency procedure. C-130 Mishap

The crew of the C-130 did a classically good shutdown and egress. Fire and emergency crews did superb job.

Note: That the engines start shutting down just a few seconds after the gear failure. The crew egressed just a few seconds later. The fire crew had hoses on the fire a few seconds later.

Shows superb training.

Like they say if you think you might have an emergency on an airplane; as related to declaring an emergency. “When in doubt, call them out.”

The fire crews doused the fire so fast because they were alerted to the gear problems before the plane landed. Otherwise it would have been much worse.

Train/know/practice your emergency shutdown and egress procedures, so you know how to do them fast, well, so well you can do it in adverse conditions. Don’t be afraid to declare an emergency if you have real problems that might get bad.

C-130 Mishap

——–
This is one of many things that can happen if you don’t do proper shutdown procedures in an emergency.
Cessna Citation 2 Crash

Atlantic City Jet Brakes Check Out
Sun, 29 May ’05

Too Much Speed, Too Little Runway
Remember the Cessna Citation that ran off the end of the Bader Field’s runway and into the bay two weeks ago? The NTSB preliminary report says that the brakes and emergency brakes were working during the incident on Sunday, May 15th, 2005.

As reported on ANN, Erik Larsen, the pilot of the jet, told investigators that his brakes had failed after landing. Luckily, he and the other three people on board only suffered minor injuries from their trip into the bay.

Jet traffic has been banned from Bader Field for years, and is published in the Airport/Facility Directory. A few politicians are using this accident to threaten the future of the airport.

NTSB Report:

NTSB Identification: NYC05LA085
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, May 15, 2005 in Atlantic City, NJ
Aircraft: Cessna 525A, registration: OY-JET
Injuries: 1 Minor, 3 Uninjured.

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 May 15, 2005, at 1548 eastern daylight time, a Danish-registered (OY-JET), Cessna Citation 525A, was substantially damaged when it impacted water during landing at Atlantic City Municipal Airport/Bader Field (AIY), Atlantic City, New Jersey. The certificated private pilot received minor injuries, and three passengers received no injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was filed for the flight which originated at the Burlington International Airport (BTV), Burlington, Vermont. The business flight was conducted under 14 CFR Part 91.

The pilot reported to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector, that he performed “one circle” around the airport, observed the windsock, and then performed a landing on runway 11, a 2,948 foot-long, 100 foot-wide, asphalt runway. During the landing roll, approximately 2/3 down the runway, the pilot “lost the brakes,” and was unable to stop on the remaining runway. The airplane then continued off the departure end of the runway and impacted the water.

A witness reported that he observed the airplane make a “low pass down runway 29” and then return to land on runway 11. The witness stated the airplane touched down about half way down the runway, and then slowed as it impacted the water.

The airplane was examined by an FAA inspector after the accident. According to the inspector, the brake system and emergency brake system were functionally checked, and no abnormalities were noted. The anti-skid system could not be tested, due to salt water damage. Examination of the emergency brake system revealed it had not been used, and the nitrogen bottle gauge indicated 1,800 psi. The flap selector was in the “ground” position, but the indicator was in the 15 degree position. The left throttle lever was observed in idle cut off, and the right throttle lever was bent to the right at the idle stop.

Additionally, examination of the runway revealed tread marks beginning approximately two-thirds down the runway, and continuing off the departure end into the grass and dirt.

The winds reported at Atlantic City International Airport (ACY), 9 miles to the northwest, at 1554, were from 280 degrees at 9 knots.

A review of the FAA Airport/Facility Directory for the Northeast U.S., revealed the following notation listed in the Airport Remarks section of the Atlantic City/Bader Field Airport entry, “Arpt CLOSED to jet traffic.”

According to the Cessna 525A Landing Distance Chart, an airplane with a landing weight of 11,000 pounds required 2,930 feet of landing distance, in a no wind situation. With a 10 knot tailwind, the airplane required 3,500 feet of landing distance.

http://www.aero-news.net/EmailArticle.cfm?ContentBlockID=2bdd4d7a-71de-40a3-8f10-610728aa885a

The pilot performed “a low pass” over the runway, and then touched down approximately 1,000 feet beyond the approach end of the 2,948-foot long runway, with a tailwind of approximately 10 knots. After touchdown, the airplane continued off the end of the runway, and subsequently impacted water. According to the Cessna 525A Landing Distance Chart, an airplane with a landing weight of 11,400 pounds required 3,000 feet of landing distance, in a no wind situation. With a 10 knot tailwind, the airplane required 3,570 feet of landing distance. The published airport diagram for the airport, was observed attached to the pilot’s control column after the accident. A notation, which read, “airport closed to jet aircraft” was observed on the diagram. Additionally, the same notation, “Arpt CLOSED to jet traffic,” was observed in the FAA Airport/Facility Directory. Examination of the airplane revealed no mechanical deficiencies.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The pilot’s improper decision to plan a flight to a runway of insufficient length, his improper in-flight decision to land on that inadequate runway with a tailwind, and his failure to obtain the proper touchdown point. A factor in the accident was the tailwind condition.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050526X00676&key=1

If I understand the report properly and the implications, it looks like the right engine may have not been shut all the way down. (Though it does sound and look like the engine was stopped and restarted)

At Youtube someone claims someone started up the engines to try to get the aircraft to shore. However I am skeptical someone would be brazen enough to do this. I think it is particularly stupid since the point where the engine seems to start up is when watercraft (loaded with people) are tied to the nose of the aircraft, which would be an additional safety hazard. If the claim is true I would nominate the guy for a Darwin award.