The Mystery Of The Missing Runway | United Express Flight 4933

[@doggonemess1]

My guess is that it wasn't reported because of the human tendency to think "they already know, someone else will take care of this". Which isn't supposed to happen in aviation.

[@NiHaoMike64]

Or maybe the pilots thought it was their aircraft that was malfunctioning?

[@savroi]

In aviation is where we see the most spectacular consequences but it happens everywhere, from household items to corporate structure. In some ways we are still mediaevals with complex toys and systems we don't ultimately understand.

[@doggonemess1]

@@savroi Hear, hear.

[@RadioactiveSherbet]

It could also be partly a jaded mindset of "they're not going to do anything about it, anyway."

[@savroi]

@@RadioactiveSherbet HAHAHA, That's normally an excuse for "I can't be bothered"

[@thepodcrashed669]

I do not envy pilots who need to make the quick decision whether to trust their senses or their instruments. So many aviation incidents boil down to choosing the wrong one.

[@AttilaAsztalos]

...and most of the time the correct answer would have been TRUST NEITHER. BAIL, NOW, IDIOT!

[@cdc3]

Several years ago, my jet pilot son in law taught me that virtually every such incident is the result of a chain of events and bad decisions leading up to the fatal moment, any one of which could have prevented such accidents if it had been changed. It is a kind of "accident gestalt" when the whole of it is considered.

[@edwardrichardson5567]

Never, ever trust your senses. Always trust the instruments especially in IMC.

[@edwardrichardson5567]

@@cdc3 yes, we are taught the Swiss Cheese hole effect from day one in ground school..

[@MechMK1]

If the pilots chose instruments over senses: "Trusting computers over their own brain, typical. No wonder they crashed." If the pilots chose senses over instruments: "They have all these high end instruments, which would have told them exactly what to do, and yet they flew by sight." You can't win sometimes.

[@flightmedic7634]

As a passenger I'd say that in addition to the rough ride of slamming into the ground and skidding along, seeing landing gear out your window, sticking out of the engine, would certainly provide some clues that the landing isn't proceeding as planned :)

[@ugiswrong]

This runway was racist

[@arandomcommenter412]

Nahhhh.

[@insertcognomen]

that's not where landing gears go when you're done with them?

[@flightmedic7634]

@@insertcognomen I mean it was convenient for the accident investigators to find :)

[@TheOtherNeutrino]

Passenger: Ah we're finally do- why is there a wheel outside my window?

[@Kr0noZ]

I have an idea why the misalignment wasn't reported earlier; two things might have come together: 1. if you notice something weird but noone else seems to, you may think that maybe you just made an error and you'll try to avoid drawing attention to that and 2. if the error you spotted concerns a thing you don't need right now, if may feel less relevant and once something else comes up, you just forget about it until you get reminded by a related occurrence. Since the last landings had worked out despite the misaligned localizer, the pilots probably had a good visual and didn't run into any issues because of that - so they simply forgot about it. The one time it was really relevant, it promptly led to an accident. The only way to prevent this sort of thing is training everyone to report anything out of the ordinary, no matter how insignificant, in all cases and follow it up; give feedback on the report once investigated so people know their observations are valued and NEVER make it feel like an unwelcome bother. That way, even small things can be caught before something unfortunate happens.

[@8bitorgy]

*guy next to chalkboard meme* "pilots trying to explain why flying isn't dangerous"

[@TheaSvendsen]

Very good assessment, in my opinion. I was definitely thinking the same in regards to the previous non-incident being in better weather so not cause for much concern ..at that time. Also, I genuinely hope that the aviation industry will implement something like your suggestion; that ANY and ALL unexpected behaviors of the aircraft, environment, or what have you, is both positively awarded and more focused upon in the future. Our lives literally depends on it. Even more so when you realize how tiny errors can and have lead to many fatalities.

[@NeoTechni]

Crowd mentality. It's something I warn my wife of anytime I see it in a tv show/movie to drive home that she needs to be on guard for it It's the mentality that if you see something like this (or someone in danger, particularly a woman being raped in public, which is why I warn her repeatedly), you assume someone else will or already has done something, and you go on with your life

[@jamespurs]

100% this

[@leahholland6272]

Agree. Hardest part is most flight crew only go into the airport once a day... so any anomaly cam easily be written off as "did we really see that?" And that these issues are presented in a busy time of flight, so by the time they land safely, taxi in icy conditions and unload, they may just completely forget as it wasn't fore front in their mind... just a "that was strange" or "did that happen?"

[@Phiyedough]

Imagine if emergency services required 2 phone calls before they would send out fire fighters, paramedics or police officers!

[@Milesco]

Yeah, this seems like a really weird rule.

[@briant7265]

In some less serious cases, they do require 2 reports.

[@Milesco]

@@briant7265 But it turned out to be pretty serious, didn't it?

[@NiHaoMike64]

Recently, in Texas, cops showed up at a school shooting but didn't do anything for over an hour.

[@antd8667]

Well said

[@hp2084]

I used to take your word for it when I hadn't watched mentor pilot videos. The same accident was covered by him and the details you miss or omit makes day and night difference between the quality of his and your videos. His research and explanation on this accident report was just remarkable.

[@hack1n8r]

Despite the misalignment issue, the blame rests squarely on both pilots. Since the F/O did not see the runway at the minima for the approach, the F/O should have immediately called for a missed approach / go around. No question. We tend to want to give others the benefit of the doubt, which is exactly what the F/O did when the captain said "Runway in sight". The F/O assumed that the captain had contact, even though the contact could not be confirmed. As a rule, if something doesn't seem or feel right, or feels slightly off-kilter while on approach -- even if the instruments seem ok, call for a missed approach and set up again, or just divert. It really doesn't take much to interfere with an ILS signal. Nearby puddles, snow, airport vehicles, and even planes on certain taxiways, can and do "warp" those ILS signals. Its exactly the same thing that happens that cause loss of cell tower signal when going through a tunnel or a mountain valley. As such, most airports have designated ILS hazard areas in which no vehicle, including aircraft. are allowed to encroach. Likewise, almost all airports with ILS have two hold-short lines at the ends of runways - the normal one at the runway's edge, and an ILS hold-short line much farther back (~100 to 500 feet into the taxiway). The latter must be observed whenever ILS approaches are active and in use. Glad that all made it out safely.

[@savroi]

They should have, no question about it. Still for me a basic unsophisticated equipment like the ILS that's feeding the pilots wrong information is thoroughly unacceptable. In the end, as you said, the decision lies on the pilots and on their judgement yet I can't put the blame on the pilots alone, this is not the mid XX century so either you have the equipment in running order, you state there's no ILS or you close. Having it transmitting the wrong information is a hundred times more dangerous. Can you imagine what that would have done in a much bigger airport? Of course not for in a bigger airport it would be either out of commission or running perfectly. That standard has to be applied to any landing space which means that in this case the airport, with that weather should have stayed closed. Not a popular decision I'm sure but a safe and honest one.

[@geoh7777]

Missed approach / go around and encounter the same problem again. What is gained by that? They merely needed to know where the runway was. They would have been better off to ask the airport personnel to park a vehicle in line with the runway and thus been guided to the runway by the vehicle's lights.

[@wcate8301]

@@savroi ILS systems have signal monitors that would sense a deviation such as this one. Those monitors don't do any good at an unattended airport, where no one's watching them. In remote areas, airport snow removal is often the responsibility of highway department plows, whose operators may not be aware or respectful of the niceties of airport snow removal. I remember once shooting the ILS to minimums twice at an unattended outlying airport, and twice going missed when the runway lights appeared out my side window. Third try (bingo fuel, trick or treat), I saw the runway from a higher altitude through a hole in the clouds and was able to sidestep to a landing. Once on the ground I discovered a highway department snowplow sitting on a taxiway in the ILS exclusion zone waiting for me to quit buzzing the field so they could go back to work. I wrote up a NASA safety report and cc'd it to state highway dept, aeronatics dept, airport manager, and my employer.

[@wcate8301]

@@geoh7777 You've clearly never shot an ILS approach at night in falling and blowing snow. Vehicle headlights are tiny pinpricks barely visible through the reflections of your landing lights upon falling snow. They would give you no usable guidance at all.

[@savroi]

@@wcate8301 Thanks for your experience! My father was a pilot during the fifties and sixties. I barely met him, he died as a passenger in an aircrash back 1971. This is what draw me to read and watch a lot about air-crashes and their causes. I am sometimes baffled by how much airport operations are underestimated in clear skies let alone under bad weather conditions. Airplanes are not buses, pilots are not drivers and last but not least flight attendants are not waitresses. My mother was a flight attendant during the fifties on DC-4's, DC-6's, DC-7's and DC-8's, she has loads of stories about bumpy landings having over ran the runway at least twice.

[@theMoerster]

I guess in northern Maine 5 feet can be described as a "tiny bit of snow"

[@RustyOpel]

Lol That's why the wife and I leave our lovely house in southern Maine around mid-late October and go back to coastal NC until May or so. 😄

[@ElGato1947]

Mini Air Crash Investigation is always thorough. And easy to understand. Even for us non-pilots. Thx!

[@commerce-usa]

More mini aircraft investigation is indeed always a good thing. Nice job on this one. The flight was extremely fortunate to have turned out as well as it did.

[@PatrickRyan147]

A pilot once told me, flying is simple. You just try to have as many landings as takeoffs 🤔😂🤣😅

[@clarsach29]

I chuckled at the Ryanair comment- for those outside Europe, Ryanair is known for its often hard and fast landings and very quick turnarounds....but, they've never had a serious incident, hull loss or loss of life to my knowledge

[@AdrianColley]

I still call them Valujet Europe because I'm waiting for their equivalent of the Everglades accident.

[@lordhung7013]

People love to hate on them but they still fill their jets up.

[@medicinaemdia4895]

Presque Isle is a tiny airport in Maine almost bordering Canada. The flight was not actually from Delta, but from a codeshare airline. These smaller airlines usually don’t pay their pilots well and pilot stress and fatigue end up being way harder.

[@savroi]

That's a good explanation that in no way serves as a justification for either the airport or the airline.

[@medicinaemdia4895]

@@savroi believe me I know …. But with deregulation happening in the usa that is what happened. There even is PBS special even talking about it.

[@savroi]

@@medicinaemdia4895 Right! But that's the point in the end, deregulation, at least in the way it was implemented meant and means "profit at any cost", exacerbating competition whilst giving the upper hand to bigger companies. This ends up creating pseudo monopolies in which low profit sectors are not cared for even if they are essential to the community it serves. This kind of politics never ends well, "the quick buck" economy generates long term passive debt: Infrastructure is the first victim, then services and finally every other form of commercial exchange. A few get richer while the immense majority can't even live up to the same standards the previous generation did. In the end down the drain goes the faith in the system. Believe me that's a tough mountain to climb back.

[@medicinaemdia4895]

@@savroi don’t you think I know about it ? You’re 100% right. It’s just a pit that this had to happen to the airline industry.

[@savroi]

@@medicinaemdia4895 Yes, it is in general but it is quite notable in the airline industry, one that at a point was the epitome of future and style.

[@dfuher968]

10:53 "More Mini Air Crash Investigation is always a good thing". Couldnt agree more 😁😁

[@RiftWalker111]

Not when people die

[@lordhung7013]

“It’s interesting when people die, they love dirty laundry”

[@buttersPbutters]

The nice thing about GPS-based LPV/RNP approaches is that the system self-detects any errors so the flight crew has a conclusive indication of whether the approach guidance is valid. The only way it can really go wrong deceptively is if the procedure is coded incorrectly into the FMS nav database. With ILS and other analog radio navaids, it's garbage-in garbage-out. There are certain airports internationally where pilots are warned not to couple the autopilot to the ILS glideslope too soon, because reflections off mountainous terrain can cause autopilot-coupled jets to pull 2g vertical load trying to chase a phantom glideslope reflection and then push over into a negative-g dive to get back on the real glideslope. The autopilot doesn't have the common sense to recognize when the ILS is BS, and even with human pilots, as in this case, common sense isn't always an adequate substitute for automated fault-detection.

[@islandlife756]

Well explained, especially for a non pilot like me. As I understand it, New Zealand's worst aviation disaster (Air New Zealand Flight 901 (TE-901), Mt Erebus, Antarctica, 28 November 1979) was caused by incorrect navigational coding the day before. And this was not initially known. The deceased pilot was exonerated years later.

[@davemould4638]

GPS is not as precise as ILS. You cannot use GPS to get you onto the runway, it can be out by 100m or more, so you need to be visual with the runway while still fairly high. Its altitude information is even worse, so you need to use the aircraft pressure altimeter or radar altimeter for height.

[@cflyin8]

@@islandlife756 the Air New Zealand flight was not during an approach. It was due to an error with the plane’s the INS that took them straight into Mt Erebus. The crew couldn’t see the mountain because of the white snow blending in with the white cloud cover. They were flying a site seeing flight that was supposed to start and end back in Auckland.

[@kukulkanlordofcas4931]

This is true, but CRJs are incapable of LPV approaches. They may have LNAV+V, but that's not an official glideslope and provides no guarantees of obstacle clearance. Irrespective, even an LNAV approach would provide guidence to the runway, or alternatively, inputting GPS waypoints and setting a bearing pointer to the GPS while the CDI is on ILS.

[@wcate8301]

@@kukulkanlordofcas4931 This was an ERJ, not a CRJ. Embraer, not Canadair.

[@christopherchilders1049]

You do a great job with these videos

[@michaelalexander2306]

If ILS had been replaced by MLS, as was planned in the 1970s, the accident probably wouldn't have happen because the microwave frequency would have been unaffected by the snow.

[@justcommenting4981]

GPS now. Main threat now is solar flare or a cosmic blast

[@wcate8301]

An airport a short distance from us had one of the first MLS units set up as part of a test program. A friend who had contract flight check experience was contracted to do check flights, and the FAA installed a temporary MLS receiver in his plane. I got to fly a few approaches in it outside of official testing time, and was not impressed. The MLS runway already had an ILS installed, and they were aligned to coincide, so comparison approaches could be flown. If you flew the ILS with a stabilized approach and centered needles, The MLS glide slope needle would wander up and down. If you flew the MLS, it was next to impossible to fly a stabilized approach as you had to constantly adjust pitch and sink rate to keep the glide slope needle on the dial, not to mention in the donut. Eventually it was determined that the wavy glide slope was caused by multi-path reception reflecting off the steep rocky terrain beneath the glide path, confusing the receiver. From outer marker to runway threshold the ground was seldom more than 450-500 feet below the glide path. In the end they decommissioned the MLS and moved the ILS to a different runway. FAIL!

[@michaelalexander2306]

@@wcate8301 I was quite interested to read about your experiences. The system you saw was almost certainly the US-sponsored Time Referenced Scanning Beam (TRSB) system, adopted by ICAO. this system was chosen under controversial circumstances. At the time of the meeting where the decision was made, TRSB simply did not work. The British-sponsored Commutated Doppler MLS (DMLS) demonstrably did. Politics and low skulduggery resulted in TRSB being adopted as the standard, which was never fully implemented, largely due to inherent problems with TRSB.

[@thedevilinthecircuit1414]

You know it's pretty bad when "Ryan Air" has become a universal punchline.

[@thelettuceconsumer]

Oh wow! I actually saw this aircraft after the accident while going to visit relatives! Thanks for covering it!

[@uzaiyaro]

I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a plane eating its own landing gear before. I know they cannibalise parts for different planes, but this is a new one.

[@sonjastarr1364]

I know people stick their foot in their mouth sometimes, i didn't know planes did.

[@lordhung7013]

It was a mobile order!

[@RajeshNarkhed]

wheels on meals perhaps...

[@TJ-USMC]

That's Crazy, you're taught "Trust your instruments" Not so in this instance, Glad everyone's OK !!

[@jimmiller5600]

"Trust your instruments" worked here. It's just that the next step is "confirm runway in-sight or go-around" at 200 ft. Unfortunately, the crew failed.

[@maxsmodels]

I used to be based at PQI. We all knew that this would eventually happen. It was even worse when it was a localizer only and then there is Mt. Katadin only a small number of miles off of the runway centerline.

[@AlwaysBolttheBird]

Every time you start a video and say “this is the story” my mind immediately says “all about how my life got flipped turned upside down” and it still fits haha

[@judefernandez9234]

Yeah dude that song SLAPS

[@megadavis5377]

This is a hugely vital lesson for all instrument pilots. Thanks.

[@DuckOfRubber]

8:22 2-5 feet is a “tiny bit of snow”? Even in places where that amount isn’t unusual, like northern Maine, it generally isn’t considered tiny.

[@edwardportell4955]

when you put up the picture of the airport, my immediate thought was "that's a post office"

[@BobbyGeneric145]

I've filed a report on the ils system in ktys. When you fly ils23L into Knoxville, the papi shows 4 white. Its not cheated. My company report resulted in faa flight test passing through.

[@corkcamden9878]

I like thinking back when you first started your channel. I could see the effort you exerted ; always striving to become more informed and certainly more self-assured. If this sounds to others like empty platitudes, those familiar with your channel know I am sincere. I believe in encouraging instead of discouraging. I apologize for any embarrassment I might have caused you, but you have become someone whose information is reliable, someone who asks for answers when he doesn't have them and just an all-around good egg. Best wishes and good health, sir, from the hills of Virginia. Cork

[@lebojay]

Strong airplane. Respect for the engineers.

[@GaryNumeroUno]

Hehehe... even Ryan Air did not escape a mention! Nice subtle dig in the ribs there.

[@pookatim]

What seems really odd is that after the first attempt, the captain did not take over for the second.

[@hrdley911]

I'd like to know with so many deficiencies in her past, why was she a captain? Why was she still employed?

[@BigBlueJake]

@@hrdley911 There is a shortage of pilots that has been getting worse for a long time. Regionals end up with new pilots trying to build hours to move to the major carriers and pilots who aren't good enough to make it at the major carriers.

[@vegasgeorge]

The problem probably wasn’t reported earlier because pilots knew from experience that most likely nothing would be done. Hurrah for bureaucracy!

[@Milesco]

Yeah, I'm a bit troubled by this rule that requires _two_ reports about defective navigation equipment before anything is done. 😕

[@islandlife756]

In such a case, reporting a problem does achieve at least one thing: It covers your ass.

[@andyrichardsvideovlogs8835]

Fascinating... fortunately everyone survived. But in a lot of respects you just have to blame "the system" for that one 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@ZentimeProductions]

The captain didn't look qualified, I'm surprised she was allowed to fly commercially. She twice said she saw a runway that wasn't there and continued descending below the decision altitude without seing the runway. It could have ended without any damage had she diverted, but it looks she really didn't want to do that.

[@vernonsmithee792]

@@ZentimeProductions "Women and machinery do not mix"--Quote from James Cameron's "Titanic"🙄

[@BobbyGeneric145]

Presque Isle is like Derry from all of Stephen Kings books. Creepy little town! Nice though.

[@stebjin]

Not the RyanAir roast 💀💀💀

[@MechaNintendoMast]

Also yet another airport with inept systems that are tolerated until a disaster actually happens.

[@ryanfrisby7389]

That’s crazy to think that there were so many different ways this could’ve been prevented.

[@jimmiller5600]

That's why the US has so few airliner fatalities -- there are multiple layers of safety checks built in. The crew failed the most critical one "is the runway in sight?" not "I think that's the runway".

[@karllung2649]

I am surprised that such a small airport got ILS. In fact it is not a good idea to have "advance" equipment if they are rarely used and you don't have proper person to do maintenance.

[@NedAndre]

It's probably because it's northern Maine. There's NOTHING out there for quite a while, so I bet it has been equipped because it may be called on in case of emergencies, national or single flight. It's a long way to Bangor from there, and a lot of international flights come down through Maine. I can sit outside and watch them come and go all day southwest to northeast and back again.

[@mal2ksc]

Instruments that lie are much worse than instruments that give no answer at all, unless the lie is something that can be interpreted and compensated for somehow. A clock that's 15 minutes fast is still useful, as long as you know it's 15 minutes fast.

[@afreightdogslife]

"That landing would have made Ryan Air landings absolutely divine," 🤣🤣🤣👌🏻

[@lilkc1]

10:35 lol. Shots fired at Ryan Air. You ain't lying though.

[@SimonTekConley]

I really enjoy your video's. I primarily like listening to these.

[@robr2389]

I concur with DogGone. The other pilots got down safely. Likely blew it off as a fluke or something. Or thought the misalignment had already been reported.

[@Boodieman72]

Pilot error, they should have done a go-around at the decision height and diverted.

[@CarloEspinosa-b3p]

I love your videos, but I know it’s probably the limitation of the airplane that you were using for the video, but 708SK is a SkyWest CRJ700 lol. Not a 145. I know because I’ve flown her haha But great video as always!!

[@MiniAirCrashInvestigation]

Yeah haha it’s hard coded into the livery. What a small world eh

[@thedevilinthecircuit1414]

You missed that in the first part of the briefing!

[@vincent412l7]

Yes it was indicated in the video.

[@marianodanielvillafanewagn1920]

didn't know snow could interfere with the ils. by the way, congrats for 22k+ visits in one day

[@raybruce9522]

Pretty simple explanation of what happened. Gross incompetence of the captain. If you don’t see the runway go around. There are a lot of approaches with offset approaches.

[@gwendolyndefelice4441]

We live in Presque Isle and fly out of PQI fairly frequently. We saw the plane after the bad landing (i.e. crash) witht eh wheels stuck in the engine. Ouch! Weekly we drive by the runway on the way to Mapleton.. and make sure the snow is cleared from essential equipment. You never know. We may need to fly in the winter. We did experience a rather exciting there go around due to wind last summer. Felt we were at a 35 degree angle. But we love our local airport!

[@SimonWallwork]

When I flew the Barbie (ERJ-145) we used to say their isn't a runway it hasn't gone off the end of. Great little jet though- 1200 built and no fatalities.

[@BigBlueJake]

Hmmm... sounds like a list of pilot nicknames for different models of civilian planes could be a fun read! I'm kinda short so ERJs and CRJs are the perfect scale - no climbing required to check if you can shoot a carry-on into an overhead luggage bin! The only bad part of flying "pipsqueak" airliners is you can't bring two pets with you like on a big plane (military, moving from one place to another).

[@stephenbritton9297]

It’s a subsided route, Essential Air Service.

[@cornishcat11]

another great video mate they just get better and better

[@blackandgold676]

Clipped the lightning rod??? Sweet JE-sus!

[@asteverino8569]

Thanks for this report. Also liked the Ryanair reference. 😂

[@kevin1873]

It's sounds as if the FO might have been aware of what was going on with the magneta and green lines on the PFD in regards to the navigation modes. The Magenta indication let's you know that the navigation mode is set to the FMC and the green indications let you know your are set to VOR navigation which is also what is used to tune the ILS of the runway as well.

[@AdrianColley]

10:35 is an unnecessary stab at Ryanair and I love it.

[@F-Man]

Nice thumbnail! 😃

[@m.t.vandersmookie1150]

I’m glad everyone survived

[@JamesWhite-sl2sb]

Man , they have to " FLY IN THAT STUFF ❄️

[@rodolfoayalajr.8589]

Great educational video friend. Amen 🙏.

[@isbestlizard]

Crazy that a bit snow could cause a *lateral* shift of the localiser by a few hundred feet.. like I could see how a reflection might change the angle, but surely it would still lead to the antenna, just at a slightly different angle?

[@jimbob5891]

It was still leading to the localizer antenna, like you said that angle of the beam was off. That leads to an increasing deviation from the lateral path the farther out from the antenna you go.

[@isbestlizard]

@@jimbob5891 Then by following it, they should have arrived at the threshold, just.. pointing 5 or 10 degrees or whatever from the runway heading, which they clearly didn't, as they were displaced from the threshold by a few hundred feet

[@jimbob5891]

@@isbestlizard A localizer doesn't tell you what heading your aircraft should be flying, it tells you where you are, either left or right, relative to the center line of the runway it is serving. If a snow pile is somehow redirecting the beam being emitted by the localizer antenna, you won't arrive at the runway threshold on the wrong heading, you will arrive at the threshold of an imaginary runway somewhere to the left or the right of the actual runway.

[@isbestlizard]

@@jimbob5891 I figured out why - the actual antenna of the localiser is at the FAR end of the runway, not the end you land at, so deviation by a few degrees is going to cause lateral offsets at the end you land at

[@markprange4386]

Runway 1 is long and has enough slope upward that it is preferred even with some tailwind. A tailwind during snowfall can pack onto the runway lights and even block sight of the VGSI (and the runway surface). In such a situation, even if a pilot can see where the runway is neither the runway edge lights, the runway, its markings, nor the VGSI are seen. Seeing at least one of these is needed for continuing the approach below Decision Altitude.

[@sparkplug1018]

Best guess why pilots hadn't reported it before was that they were flying in good weather. The ILS got them pretty damn close, saw the runway and made a slight correction, probably didn't think much of it. Possibly even equating it to their own error, oh I guess we didn't line up right on it, type of deal. Or, in the previous incidents, it wasn't that far off. Say maybe 20 feet off centerline, which would peak their curiosity, but again, easy enough to just make the slight correction and equate it to your own error.

[@boeingdriver29]

Sounds like the Captain should have chosen another career.

[@RussellGarvey]

First, in 42 years of flying, I have never experienced a misaligned LOC. That seems like a rare event. Second, the NFP should always call runway and direction in sight...in this case, "runway in sight, 11 o'clock." The FP would have known where to look...followed by a "landing" or "go-around" call out, as appropriate for the conditions.

[@lordhung7013]

She did call runway in sight at 12 o’clock.

[@RussellGarvey]

@@lordhung7013 it was the wrong call. The runway was not in that location.

[@lordhung7013]

@@RussellGarvey yeah, but your post implied she didn’t make the call.

[@rob737700]

Flew into Presque Isle many, many times back in the day. It can be done safely! Why was this "captain" allowed to keep flying after demonstrating such a lack of proficiency over and over again? These "pilots" need to be weeded out once and for all, it's not fair to the passengers (they buy a ticket, not a chance).

[@savroi]

You're probably right still ILS misinformation under the wrong weather conditions (which adds pressure and stress to whomever is piloting) is not a minor problem.

[@rob737700]

@@savroi Not ideal but it does happen out there. And definitely not an excuse to drive your jet into the ground.

[@savroi]

@@rob737700 You’re right. Management’s problems are on both sides:a company that allowed a scarce pilot to fly and an airport that didn’t know or care enough about a system that is crucial when landing with less than ideal weather. I doubt very much this would have happened had the pilot seen the runway. The pilot should have gone to the alternative airport.

[@FfejNS]

Great vid, man. Thanks!

[@reneedaniel2881]

Another great video 🙂

[@parrotraiser6541]

It's really hard to assign any blame to individuals in this case. Flying a perfect ILS approach and NOT seeing the runway is not a situation for which most people would have a trained reflex, (or even a theoretical consideration). The holes in the cheese just happened to line up, and it's fortunate that the main consequence was just a broken aeroplane.

[@SuperYellowsubmarin]

Absolutely, with hindsight it all sounds logical and easy but facing the problem in flight with adverse weather conditions is something else.

[@islandlife756]

That is true, but the Captain did have a less than stellar record.

[@Bren39]

Of course it's easy to say they should have done a go around... But years of training and experience have conditioned you that if you fly the approach perfectly.. The runway will be in front of you. I think the captain was in this wtf mode for a few more seconds that should have been. From 200 ft agl you've got about 10 seconds before you start hitting things.

[@danieljakubovic]

Great paralleled parking

[@dianericciardistewart2224]

Very interesting!! Thanks for sharing!! 👍✈✈👍

[@qstrian]

Reminds us why even rental car parking lots are designed to accommodate aircraft landings.

[@qwertyuiop3455]

3:51 No matter whether or not the ILS was erroneous; The crew had no business below approach minimums with none of the required runway environment in sight. If you are at 100' above ground, you must have already had the approach lighting in sight--Cannot descend below 100' without 1 of the 10 required items (which includes the runway itself, its markings, lighting, etc.).

[@Schwabby444]

This is a CRJ 700 flown by Skywest, not an EMB-145 flown by CommutAir. You might want to refer to the 'Pink needle' as the GPS instead of FMS for beginners. No pilots filed reports because: 1. Pilots hate paperwork and 2. Nothing bad came from those other situations/times where they landed when they noticed something off, so they didn't feel the need to report it.

[@torgeirbrandsnes1916]

Great vlog as always. I guess the captain lost her job… look into the accident of WF710 the 6th of May 1988. Keep up the good work!

[@hepphepps8356]

Yes! Do WF710! It would be really interesting with a good visualization of that one if the report is even available in english!

[@vladutnitoiu6370]

Awesome video!

[@colinpotter7764]

You cannot have a decision altitude above ground level, it must be decision height. The airfield elevation is over 500ft, there is a huge difference between the two.

[@PastorAaronEdwardsHall]

I blame everyone but mostly the captain. First off, what did she see? Clearly nothing. The first officer assumed he was missing something because of it. He still should have called a go around. At the end of the day, the captain gets the blame. I hope she has found a much safer career

[@lucad3869]

Instantly hired by Ryanair.

[@BillyAlabama]

Your videos are so good!

[@raylopez99]

The lights are on [off], but you're not home. Your mind is not your own. Your heart sweats, your body shakes...

[@stevebell4906]

You need to do a video of the commercial flight with passengers supposedly landing at Tampa International that actually landed at MacDill AFB Completely differed configuration of runways ..... No injuries....Plane surrounded by armed Security ...Giant SNAFU! As explained to me by a retired Navy Pilot with many years of experience....It is routine for highly qualified commercial pilots on instrument approach to call out ..."Runway In Sight"...at decision altitude altitude Before they can actually see the runway...and just keep on the glide path for a few more hundred feet...until they break out of the clouds...and when you actually see a runway in front of you land on it...In his assessment that is what these guys did and they landed at the wrong airport... Lets see this one debated?

[@curbyourshi1056]

I've flown Ryanair loads. Always been good, even letting me go pee after 5 or 6 pints just before take off. I won't hear a bad word said about them to be honest.

[@MarkPMus]

Bad procedures within the airline allowed a substandard pilot to be in charge of a plane. Bad procedure and poor facilities at the airport. Bad weather! Also, I remember years ago flying from Milan into Gatwick via RyanAir. It was the end of a short break I took with my ex. The day of the flight home, I came down with flu-like symptoms. As we were making our approach into LGW I came down with the most appalling migraine headache. I was in such pain, I screamed to my boyfriend, “Make it stop, make it stop!” It was the worst flight I’d ever had, and it put me off flying for a long time. I went to bed and didn’t get up for a week after that. The point being that I have every sympathy with the Co-pilot having such huge responsibility and still having symptoms of flu. So there were many factors, and it seems like it was only luck that saved the lives of those passengers. It would have been nice if you’d concluded with how procedures and training etc were improved after the accident.

[@Vonononie]

Why on earth would the pilot fly if he isn’t feeling well? Then he took the position of pilot flying in very challenging conditions. If he wasn’t 100% pilot monitoring would have been better (although the captain seemed like she would have made the same mistake)

[@michaeltrivette1728]

as a DCS player in the F-18, let this be a reminder to do your INS alignment people.

[@miggis]

Embraer: CRJ in flight sim: Am I a yoke to you?

[@GeoffInfield]

This is insane, literally attempted mass murder - they witnessed the ILS offset on the first approach, so knew they couldn't rely on instruments on their second approach. That's probably why they sensibly decided to divert if they didn't have the runway in sight at 200ft. Yes, the captain said 'runway in sight, 12 o'clock' at 200ft, but the first officer immediately replied "I'm staying on the flight director cos *"I don't see that yet"* but at 100ft we're told they BOTH "searched" for the runway and couldn't find it so... why did they fly it into the ground instead of diverting? They KNEW they couldn't trust the ILS - the captain even saw that they were lined up with the same tower they hit the first time?!!? Jail the pair of them. They can't be allowed to fly again.

[@paulwestmoreland8498]

Love this channel

[@Relkond]

2-5 feet of snow -> ‘that tiny bit of snow’. You sir, must be Canadian. For me ‘tiny bit of snow’ only applies if the snow is less than about 8 inches.

[@ronarnett4811]

I grew up in Canada and for me, seven inches of snow is a lot of snow especially if I am driving in it. While there, I worked in areas where we got seven feet of snow accumulation ever year but I would still have considered an overnight addition of seven inches of fresh snow to contend with to be a lot of snow.

[@logansaddler4399]

Flying along with a flashing master caution?

[@Ten80pete]

"2 to 5 feet of snow was obscuring the ILS beacon. That TINY amount of snow meant that..." Ah, I see you're a native of Buffalo or Siberia, good sir!

[@em1osmurf]

saw the teaser for this, immediately thot of old pollack joke: they skidded to a stop on landing, and the pilot sed: "jeez that was a short runway!" copiliot: "yeh, and really wide, too."

[@royoberon7151]

Thank God for the 1500 hour rule enacted in 2013 or this flight would have safely diverted to KBGR. ;P

[@rexrobo2512]

@Mini Air Crash Investigation I understand that embedding links of suggested videos in the video itself is a pretty cool option. Maybe you are not aware that people watching your video using mobile devices, not with the app, but with the mobile website, are UNABLE TO CLICK on links that are placed inside videos. Could you please include links to suggested videos in the description for those using the mobile website. Thank you Great video by the way!

[@davidb8185]

I'd like to second the suggestion to include the suggested links in the description. The links in the video don't work on some devices. Thanks.

[@savroi]

Letting aside the pilot's shortcomings the main issue for me is a system that's put in place to safely guide the airplane and it doesn't. This means that not only the airplane is not approaching the runway as it should but that the pilots are informed otherwise. Could the pilot's expertise have saved the plane? Probably, but that meant disregard the information instruments were feeding them either by going around again or deciding to divert to an alternative airport. For me, the latter would have been the sensible decision but we know what that means from an economical point of view don't we, so pilots are instructed to take that measure only if they believe there's no way in which they could have landed safely there. It also means a long scrutiny in the aftermath. A pilot that had the records this one had will try to avoid that at all costs. At any rate, an airport is an airport, no matter how small so, either you have adequate systems in place or you close. You're toying with lives here, you can't take it with levity. In some ways we still have a XIX century attitude: if it comes to that we can solve it with a hammer! Yeah, well, we can't and at this level of risk it is downright stupid. Thousands have died because of this "brave it up" attitude and unfortunately thousands more will still. This is above everything else a management problem that severely underestimates the tragic consequences of ill equipped airplanes and airports. This is the XXI century and air-crashes like the one featured here have no reason to happen but ill-management. My final rant: I believe many of this crashes are caused by "the probability of happening is negligible". I wonder if they would still adhere to that theory if a family member of any of these people had been on one of these types of aircrash, maybe they would and that worries me even more!

[@publicmail2]

Not exactly, they could go down to 100 AGL if on ILS proper if some indication is visual, like lights. These antennas are heated anti ice but failed in some way.

[@edwardrichardson5567]

Are you talking about a CAT II ILS Approach which has a DH of 100ft.

[@jimwarden6419]

@@edwardrichardson5567 I don’t think this is in regards to cat 2. I think they meant that if you have some part of the runway environment in sight (the long list of lights, markings etc) you can descend to 100 feet above touchdown zone elevation (not 100 agl, even though that may coincide in some cases).

[@stephenbland7461]

Love the dig at Ryan Air….🤣🤣🤣

[@kevinbarry71]

With most airlines under such adverse conditions, the captain is required to do the landing

[@michaelwallace8612]

I can tell you why. It's part of the common problem affecting everything. It's called , " it's not my job so not my problem!" That is until it causes a death or multiple deaths. I used to work for a medium to large health network. With rising costs and increasing responsibilities, ways to accomplish tasks of any sort needed solutions. One solution was to farm out different departments and services to "Mc Corporations" . This would mean that these areas were farmed out to businesses that specialized in that medical field or support services. A Corporation could buy supplies at a super bulk amount and distribute through there own businesses. They should also be able to manage and run these areas because that's all they did. Then the original business would terminate and rehire all the employees. New workers would be required to have certified skills and requirements that weeded out the worst & best employees. Best meaning those people who have managed their job and the equivalent of two others. These people don't typically get rehired because they should be doing something else for less effort and money. Benefits would cost these Corporations less because all employees are new so their benefits cost less. It also weeds out the worst employees. These are people who are hired because their nephew third removed son/ daughter in law needed a job. These people didn't do a lot but they did something. That doesn't work as well in Corporations. So all new employees are tasked with certain measurable tasks in their job description. If it's not on their job description, they are responsible and it becomes not their problem. Then there is the issue that all businesses do not work well or at all with a corporate business model but they are forced to. Lots of things get missed and have you ever tried to change a corporate policy? You basically have to do a cost & effort analysis. In some cases with people's lives in danger are not addressed because it's cheaper to pay off a lawsuit because it's too expensive to change a procedure.

[@dollyhadbraces9361]

This... ...is the story

[@Perich29]

Pilot: where is the runway? Tower: I burry it.

[@davidorth4906]

I saw a video of 2 Mirage fighter jets taking off on an asphalt runway in Africa.It was missing afterward, or afterburner. But...