Great Western Coffee Shop

Not good for those trying to get away for Christmas via Bristol Airport:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-42457193

The headlines across almost all media are a little misleading and sensationalist, suggesting this was a landing incident. It appears to have actually been a relatively minor taxiing incident.

The disruption is far more major than the incident itself.

Exactly, couldn’t agree more.

Latest is 19.00 at the earliest to reopen the runway. Really feel for those stuck there.

Sadly now 21.00 at the earliest.

The incident could hardly have happened at a worse time, coming as it did at one of the busiest times of the year at Bristol Airport. Twitter and the Post re full of the predictable questions - likehhow long does it take to move an aircraft from the side of the runway?

If only it were that simple! The Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) are sending a team to start an investigation, as confirmed on their page on GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-aaib-is-sending-a-team-to-bristol). They will want to examine the runway or taxyway and the aircraft in situ before handing over to whoever gets to lift some 15 tonnes of very expensive machinery off the grass, and tow it back to the terminal. The AAIB will want to get an idea of why such a routine manoeuvre went wrong, and will look for signs of equipment failure. Then the runway and taxyway will be examined in case there's a part of the Embraer lying out there waiting to puncture a tyre.

The accident happened at 1136. The latest estimate for reopening is 2100.

Reminds me of a holiday away with the children (7 and 12 at the time) so about 25 years ago ... due to fly out of Heathrow with one of the major  carriers to Los Angeles. Plan there was for the three of us to ski for a week; my first time, Kim's first time, Chris had been once with school.  Then for a second week my (then) wife and three grandparents were joining us for Christmas with cousins in LA.

Chaos at Heathrow; incoming plane diverted to Belfast due to weather.  Flights cancelled - "please queue on arrivals floor to rebook" and the queue ran the whole length of the terminal.  Kids are robust travellers / we used our heads / declined the initial offer of "they're cheap flights - next available flight at that price is after Christmas" and got out only a day late ... but really feel for those people at Bristol.   Mind you - a growing experience for the children ... just 24 hours later we we driving up through Lone Pine, Aberdeen and Bishop to Mammoth Lakes.  And because we had to be a day short there, we didn't burn the ski bug out ... gosh I could do that  again!

There's a BBC interview (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-bristol-42366271) with airport development officer Nigel Scott. That confirms that everything had to wait for the AAIB to arrive. The headline on the webpage talks of an "error" which, if true, will be highly embarrassing for crew and airline.

There was a time when the aeroplane in question would have been shoved off the runway, clear of landings and takings-off, and the day would have proceeded without further disruption. Not in 2017 though...   

Indeed, times have definitely changed.

Yes, I remember watching the film "Airport"^*.

The last time something similar happened at Bristol was when an Iberia Airbus A300 (containing King Constantine of Greece and Kevin Keegan amongst others) slid off the end of a rainy runway 27. The runway was closed for 3 days that time. That was some 30 years ago, before Health and Safety was invented.

Modern aircraft are very strong and extremely flimsy at the same time.They can manage some incredible stresses both in the air and on landing (especially), but are designed with each different stress in mind. So the wings can hold tonnes of fuel and lift an aircraft full of people to 7 miles high using some incredible power from engines slung under them, but still have "NO STEP" stencilled on various parts. Start shoving it with a convenient bulldozer and not only do you write off a multi-million pound asset, you also risk covering the area with shards of composite materials, bits of engine, and whatever fuel could not be pumped out of the tanks.

The airport were correct in doing this properly. Not only did they have to wait for the AAIB, it seems that specialist equipment had to be brought in. Someone will ask why it wasn't on site, but as this is the first incident in 30 years, I can see why. Aircraft have been known to come off the runway on landing then regain the asphalt - it was a relatively frequent affair in wet weather before Bristol's runway was re-grooved in 2007 - so the circumstances of this case must have made it impossible to move the aircraft safely under its own power, or simply fasten it to a tug. The AAIB report will tell us every detail. In the meantime, I hope all is normal by 13 January.

(^*I have also seen "Airplane", which was funnier, and probably more accurate.)

Is it me, or has anyone else noticed how the passengers all talk about 'planes, and yet all the professionals refer to 'aircraft?'.

Good point! I probably got the habit from learning to fly. The books all refer to "aircraft" abbreviated to "A/c", unless a different description is required.
But I am not, and never was, a professional.

'Aircraft leaving runway in an unexpected manner' is done rather more spectacularly elsewhere ... as in Turkey, for example.  From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42680238):


 ::)

I've heard of drivers who can't tell left from right. But a pilot who can't tell up from down??

That's a quote from a passenger, describing their position 'after the dust had settled', so to speak - rather than the original moment of contact between the aircraft and the runway.  ;) :D ;D

"Runway excursion incident"

Well done to the airline for stating the bleedin' obvious.

Now, what would cause such a deviation from the centre line?

Tyres being punctured or blow out upon landing?.

Choose from those, or asymmetric flaps, or thrust reverser issues, or failed aileron, or badly worn brakes, or a seized bearing, or a bird strike, or an unstable final approach, or wind shear, or unbalanced fuel load, or cargo shifting, or...

Air incidents usually involve at least three elements. Without wanting to sound prejudicial, what fool built a runway on an embankment by a sea?

Possibly the same fool who built the runway at Gibraltar: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibraltar_International_Airport#Accidents_and_incidents  ;)

How about Funchal, bit like landing on an aircraft carrier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristiano_Ronaldo_International_Airport

Although the runway locations are geographically less than ideal at both Funchal and Gib, it's the winds (caused by that geography) that create most of the issues. Plenty of YouTube evidence of interesting approaches, go-arounds, less than smooth landings etc.

The terrain also means that precision approaches (eg, following ILS radio beams to the threshold) are not possible, so manually flown, visual approaches are the order of the day. The associated increased minima (which in effect means that the pilots need to be able to see the runway from further out/higher up) mean diversions are more likely in bad weather.

This is not the case at Bristol (which has ILS at both ends of the runway), but it is an airport in a less than ideal location, on top of a hill - which means it's generally windier and it's in the clouds more often when the cloudbase is low. The geography also limits infrastructure development, such as extending the runway, which would be difficult and expensive at Bristol.

In England, Luton and Leeds-Bradford Airports have similar location issues, so it's not on it's own.

Funchal may be considered short now, but it was even shorter when we visited in around 1979.  We were on the left of the plane and the cockpit door was open.  It looked as though we were flying straight at the mountain; when we did a 90 left, a hard landing and stopped close to the sea at the other end.  It is the only plane I have been on which had spontaneous clapping when we stopped.

Returning to the UK they could only fuel the plane to Lisbon in order to reduce take off weight.

The approaches at Funchal are still the same, but the runway is now by no means short, at just over 9000ft. It can accept widebody aircraft and 747's have been there on a few occasions.

It was short until the portion on concrete stilts was built, a fuel uplift would usually be needed at nearby Porto Santo for flights back to the UK, for example. Porto Santo is also a regular diversion point when the Funchal weather precludes visual approaches or the wind is out of limits.

Gibraltar is short'ish at around 6000ft, and Airbus 320's are about the largest commercial aircraft that regularly visit on scheduled flights. RAF C17's do visit occasionally, but they are an aircraft with a lot of power and performance for their size.

I've been to both Funchal, where taking off can mean doing what you are told never to do, and Gibraltar, which is complicated by having to avoid Spanish airspace. Corfu is fun, too, with the pilot losing sight of the runway in parts of the circuit, before landing on a runway with a town at the end, rather than the more traditional golf course. I have the joy of landing a light aircraft at Ledbury, where the £5 landing fee goes in an honesty box, and the briefing includes going round if you see a double-deck bus approaching.

A piece in The i newspaper had a regular flyer suggesting that you should make a will before flying to the new airport at St Helena:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Helena_Airport
Inspires confidence. Apparently still not operating jets from UK, only smaller (turbo-props?) from South Africa.

Wellington, NZ is an airport with a single NE-SW runway with water at both ends of the runway, Wellington Harbour and Bay at the North end and the Tasman Sea at the South end. Been in and out of there a few times on internal NZ flights but only once on an international flight, to Melbourne as the runway length excluded non-stop destinations beyond the SE and E coasts of Australia and nearer Pacific Island Groups. Most International Flights serve Auckland and Christchurch and I have traveled via both to onward destinations in the country.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_International_Airport

Correct, no jets from the UK, but Embraer 190 Regional Jets from South Africa on I think a weekly basis. The runway that could be built at St Helena is not really suitable for long-haul/widebody ops.


Singapore Airlines are now operating 777's into Wellington, but only on a double-drop schedule from Singapore and Canberra, due I suspect to payload/range limitations off Wellington's runway. It's also known as "windy Wellington" and there are some great Youtube clips of unstable approaches and go-arounds to prove it.