Challenger Crashe at TEB

It looks like the Challenger skidded off the runway and crashed into a
warehouse at TEB. Isn't this the same kind of plane that crashed on
takeoff in Colorado? It looks like the plane remained intact so
hopefully the passengers and crew are OK.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,146112,00.html

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
'79 Mooney 201 4443H

"Jon Kraus" wrote in message
...
It looks like the Challenger skidded off the runway and crashed into a
warehouse at TEB. Isn't this the same kind of plane that crashed on
takeoff in Colorado? It looks like the plane remained intact so hopefully
the passengers and crew are OK.


There are no leading edge devices on a Challenger. Bombardier made it cheap
to buy, but that wing is very clean. I'm betting on an emergency AD for
winter operations.

Karl

In rec.aviation.owning kage wrote:

: There are no leading edge devices on a Challenger. Bombardier made it cheap
: to buy, but that wing is very clean. I'm betting on an emergency AD for
: winter operations.

Kind of like the DC-9-10 series, eh? What, 5% of the DC-9-10 fleet crashed
on take off because of wing contamination?
Even more similar to the Fokker F-28 series, a similar size & weight
aircraft (well, compared to a DC-9, anyway). Crashes at Dryden and La Guardia
because of wing contamination. The Fokker report says that one 1mm ice
particle per square centimeter of wing reduces lift coeficient by at least
22%.
--
Aaron C.

On 2-Feb-2005, Aaron Coolidge wrote:

Kind of like the DC-9-10 series, eh? What, 5% of the DC-9-10 fleet crashed
on take off because of wing contamination?
Even more similar to the Fokker F-28 series, a similar size & weight
aircraft (well, compared to a DC-9, anyway). Crashes at Dryden and La
Guardia because of wing contamination. The Fokker report says that one 1mm
ice
particle per square centimeter of wing reduces lift coeficient by at least
22%.


This is one of the few safety advantages of light piston singles. When you
reach takeoff speed in a single, pull back, but the plane doesn't want to
fly for whatever reason, you will most often have ample runway left to abort
the takeoff (assuming a runway of 3500 ft or longer). And if you do run off
the end, it will be at low speed, so chances are there will be no injuries.
In a jet, once you exceed V1 on takeoff you are committed. Then if the
plane won't fly at Vr, due to wing contamination or some other cause, you
are screwed unless you are on an exceptionally long runway.
--
-Elliott Drucker

wrote:
: This is one of the few safety advantages of light piston singles. When you
: reach takeoff speed in a single, pull back, but the plane doesn't want to
: fly for whatever reason, you will most often have ample runway left to abort
: the takeoff (assuming a runway of 3500 ft or longer). And if you do run off
: the end, it will be at low speed, so chances are there will be no injuries.
: In a jet, once you exceed V1 on takeoff you are committed. Then if the
: plane won't fly at Vr, due to wing contamination or some other cause, you
: are screwed unless you are on an exceptionally long runway.

You, sir, get the prize. With reduced thrust takeoffs the V1/Vr speed is set
so that an abort at V1 will use the entire remainder of the runway. An abort
beyond V1 guarantees a trip into the woods.

The airfoil shapes on aircraft with a top speed of less than 0.2 mach
really aren't all that sensitive to minor surface contamination such as one
1mm particle per square cm. I have seen many aircraft with paint worse than
that flying. There's even a 150 with *moss* on it's wings that flies
occasionally.
--
Aaron C.

"kage" wrote in message I'm betting on an emergency AD for
winter operations.

There was no visible moisture. The sky was crystal clear. The only wing
contamination possible would have been light frost on the bottom of the wing
where the fuel had cold-soaked after landing- if the plane had made a
quick-turn. No other aircraft had requested de-icing. I doubt that the cause
was wing ice.

D.

"Capt.Doug" wrote:

There was no visible moisture. The sky was crystal clear. The only wing
contamination possible would have been light frost on the bottom of the wing
where the fuel had cold-soaked after landing- if the plane had made a
quick-turn.

Interesting that I have read the "there was no visible moisture" point a
few times in relation to this crash. Based on my experience, no visible
moisture is no guarantee.

I only have about 750 hours of flying in the Northeast US, but during this
short time I have experienced three different situations where frost
appeared over top of the entire aircraft (twice in a C172 and once in a
Bonanza) within 10 minutes of landing in weather that was crystal clear, no
visible moisture.

This happened twice at Niagara Falls and once in Plattsburgh, NY. In all
cases, the sun had either just set or had been down a few hours and outside
temperatures were well below freezing (10 degrees F or so).

--
Peter







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Capt.Doug"
There was no visible moisture. The sky was crystal clear. The only wing
contamination possible would have been light frost on the bottom of the
wing
where the fuel had cold-soaked after landing- if the plane had made a
quick-turn. No other aircraft had requested de-icing. I doubt that the
cause
was wing ice.

Frost on top of the wings, and more importantly - on top of the T-tail is
highly likely. I have flown a T tail jet for 25 years and you can get frost
on top of the wings and tail very easily in the early morning with the right
conditions.

To Peter R. and Gary Mishler. Say for sake of argument that the pilots
missed a thin layer of frost. If discovered, are there any remedies short
of a full, formal deicing?

Joe Johnson wrote:

To Peter R. and Gary Mishler. Say for sake of argument that the pilots
missed a thin layer of frost. If discovered, are there any remedies short
of a full, formal deicing?

I am not qualified to answer as I have no experience in anything greater
than a single engine piston aircraft.

That said, when my aircraft was frosted over in those three incidents, my
only fly-able option was to request a complete aircraft deicing.

Fortunately, in all three cases the line crew was available, had the deice
fluid nearby, and did it for free. I tipped them generously.

If deicing were not an option, I would have had to get a hotel and wait
until the frost melted off the next day, or some liquid deicing were
available. In no case would I have attempted to take off with it on the
wing surface.

--
Peter







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----