Posted on 05/03/2019 8:46:12 PM PDT by PA Engineer
JACKSONVILLE, FL - A Department of Defense plane from Guantanamo Bay skidded off a runway into shallow water late Friday.
"At approximately 9:40 p.m. today, a Boeing 737 arriving from Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into Naval Air Station Jacksonville crashed into the St. Johns River at the end of the runway," Naval Air Station Jacksonville said in a statement. "Navy security and emergency response personnel are on the scene and monitoring the situation."
The mayor of Jacksonville, Lenny Curry, earlier tweeted it was a commercial plane, but it was actually a 737 contracted by the Department of Defense. He later said "all lives have been accounted for."
Authorities also said teams were working to control jet fuel which had leaked into the water. The plane skidded off the runway at Naval Air Station Jacksonville.
The FAA says two people received minor injuries.
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjax/KJAX-App-Dep-May-04-2019-0100Z.mp3
Listen for callsign “Biscayne 293”
Says a passenger quoted in the first article was “a prominent Chicago defense attorney”
I hope the NTSB report will not be redacted.
For the record, this is NOT a new Boeing 737! It is a 737-800, and was manufactured in 2001.
Lotta questions about this accident — need more info.
Full disclosure, my SIL is a B737 Captain - I’ll ask him about it.
please ask your SIL if he would have attempted this approach on THIS particular runway under this particular weather conditions. the pilot chose to “switch” from Runway 28 to Runway 10 based on the ATC “suggestion”.. my personal opinion is that he should have flown to an alternate airport and wait for the weather to improve. I don’t know what the required runway length would be under the circumstances including but not limited to the displaced threshold for Runway 10, the wet pavement and the wind direction and speed, not to mention the thunder/lighting and wind shear potential.. etc..etc.....etc
https://www.icao.int/NACC/Documents/Meetings/2013/ALACPA10/ALACPA10-P23.pdf
Noted: runway 10/28 at NAS JAX is not grooved
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microburst
Given the proximity of the weather to the runway and the flight path/speed of the aircraft it very well could be a classic “microburst” encounter.
There is that dilemma, is there not?
I’m waiting for his response to my initial question and will get back to you.
Definitely several factors to consider. I am a bit annoyed that the ATC audio has been edited on the public website. I am sure it is redacted for “good reason”.
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjax/KJAX-App-Dep-May-04-2019-0100Z.mp3
Last 3 mins of audio has been redacted and overwritten by previous transmissions
From time stamp 39:29-42:24 repeats same audio from prev 3 mins
Please add me to your aviation ping list
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjax/KJAX-App-Dep-May-04-2019-0130Z.mp3
Looks like it just overlapped 2 archive files
“This is not a 737 issue.”
No, it’s not a 737-800 making a crater. It’s a 737 piloted by a skilled aircrew who successfully landed all of their passengers under extremely adverse conditions.
Everyone walked away from the landing therefore it was a successful landing.
This is what pilots are paid for. They aren’t paid to fly, they are paid to handle situations such as this.
“A 9000’ runway is enough for the B-737 unless you are not paying attention.”
Or you land with a microburst on your tail that pushes your aircraft down the runway.
Amen. Well said!
9000 for 28 8000 for 10 due to displaced threshold
So many factors to consider. When JAX approach turned Biscayne 293 over to tower he naturally gave them the UHF frequency not the VHF, the pilot has previously stated that they were unable to get the “ATIS” which means they had no communication with NAS JAX to get live or recorded weather or airfield specific information wind speed etc.
It was only on short final to Rwy 10 that they ASKED approach control for the VHF frequency for NAS JAX. Reviewing the RNAV 10 approach clearly there is great cause for concern
https://resources.globalair.com/dtpp/globalair_00209R10.PDF
First thing that pops out at me for this particular approach is there is no published VHF ATIS that is Critical information that constitutes communication between an airport and arriving and departing aircraft
If Biscayne 293 does not have UHF radios (very few if any civilian planes do not nor are they allowed to because that frequency band is reserved for military aircraft) and there is no VHF alternative the pilot is REQUIRED to make contact with the tower and obtain thar ATIS information to plan for approach and get the most current real time weather and NOTAMS etc.
Since there is no public access to NAS JAX tower there is no publicly available radio traffic recording unless the NTSB chooses to release that recording from the CVR / black box. I for one would be interested in knowing if the pilot was actually cleared to LAND. Being cleared for an approach by ATC does NOT constitute LANDING clearance by an airport TOWER.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.