“Firefighters were forced to use a ladder to make their way into the cockpit of an Amazon cargo plane that overshot a runway and collided with cars, killing five people and leaving five others injured.

Video from Miami International Airport showed emergency crews trying to reach inside the Boeing 767-300, which appeared charred on the bottom, as fuel leaked from the back of the aircraft.

The plane was landing from San Juan, Puerto Rico, when it overran the runway on Sunday at around 2pm and 'struck multiple vehicles,' Miami-Dade Fire Rescue told the Daily Mail.

When crews arrived, they found people trapped inside their vehicles, fire chief Raied Jadallah said at a news conference Sunday evening.

The Boeing 767-300 was on fire, with heavy flames and smoke. At least five people were killed, while three others remain in critical condition at a trauma center. …”

https://mol.im/a/16110645

There's video online that was shot from the airport that shows the plane coming in for landing way too fast, and and touching down way too late.

https://www.reddit.com/r/aviat...ast_and_late_at_mia/

They were reportedly still going ~115 knots/~130 mph when they ran out of runway.

Appears to be pilot error, trying to force a bad landing when they should have aborted the landing and gone around for a better attempt.

Video looks like they came in hot/too fast (& heavy) and floated down the runway for about half distance in ground effects.
There are reports of bad weather in the area, so we'll see once more scientific analysis is disclosed.

I’m thinking that it’s not going to be easy to get the hulk of that plane off of the highway.

Dang he came in high and hot. You could see his left wing pull the left gear off the runway.
That was a go around as soon as it ballooned up.

There was a significant quartering tailwind from the left, which would facilitate floating down the runway and also that lifting of the left main gear after touchdown. From the video it appears he was in a steeper than normal descent, though video can be quite deceiving sometimes.

Whatever was the cause of touching down so far down the runway, a go around should have been initiated when it was obvious they would not touch down in the first portion of the runway.

They were moving fast at the end of the runway. It brings up questions about braking capability, too.

They'll have answers pretty quickly on this one.

It'll be interesting to see what the experience level and quals were for the pilot(s).

That was a huge storm in he background, I wonder if that had anything to do with the landing.

Juan does his usual good analysis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mu9fPuew9zg

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Morgan:
That was a huge storm in he background, I wonder if that had anything to do with the landing.

Could have been heavy outflow. That can introduce a heavy tailwind component with little warning when an aircraft has already obtained a stable approach, and in the final phase of the landing, it can be difficult to realize as it impacts the final approach.

If both main gear do not compress to the point the Weight on Wheels (WOW/Squat switches) are activated, the spoilers will not deploy, nor will "thrust reversers" deploy.

And the video shows, the left main landing gear was not on the ground until very late.

An abort/go around should have been initiated, but from the POV of the aircrew, it may not have been obvious to them, that they were destabilized near the touchdown point until it was too late.

Or they thought they could "salvage" the landing. (almost never a good decision)

Do we know if the crew survived, or are they among the deceased?

NTSB said the aircraft’s crew survived.

quote:

Juan does his usual good analysis:

Comment from a different video:

“Dammit, if I have to sit through yet another Blancolirio lecture about the importance of a stabilized approach, I'm going to be grumpy.“

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

If both main gear do not compress to the point the Weight on Wheels (WOW/Squat switches) are activated, the spoilers will not deploy, nor will "thrust reversers" deploy.

And the video shows, the left main landing gear was not on the ground until very late.

An abort/go around should have been initiated, but from the POV of the aircrew, it may not have been obvious to them, that they were destabilized near the touchdown point until it was too late.

Second point first: This was the 3rd flight of the day for the aircraft. If it was the same crew, fatigue starts to become a factor in decision making. Get-home-itis may have been a contributing factor if they'd had a long day. Our company SOP required touch down within the touchdown zone or the first 1/3 of the runway, or a go around is mandatory, regardless if the approach was stabilized.

This is certainly a change from decades past and from turboprop ops in the airlines, but in the freight world there can be a cowboy attitude. In my freight days I flew with guys that were proud to be a Freight Dog, with a significant cowboy attitude. The CVR transcript may reveal interesting human factors.

First point: The transport aircraft I've flown have two criteria for enabling braking. One is both main gear WoW for 2 (or 3?) seconds, the other is wheel speed > 50kts. It's an either/or. Thus a faulty WoW sensor won't disable braking if only one main gear signals the aircraft is on the ground. It appeared the left main wheels did touch down then lifted.

It will be interesting to see the detailed report of when braking was available.

Reports are that MIA doesn't have an EMAS setup at the end of it's runways, that could have mitigated the problem with the Jet overshooting to some degree.

Read there were also 30 knot gusts coming in behind the plane, which might explain why it touched down late.

Of course it's all speculation at this point until the boxes are out and reviewed as to what the pilots and crew were thinking/saying during the landing.

quote:

The CVR transcript may reveal interesting human factors.

Will that be publicly available?

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
[QUOTE]
First point: The transport aircraft I've flown have two criteria for enabling braking. One is both main gear WoW for 2 (or 3?) seconds, the other is wheel speed > 50kts. It's an either/or. Thus a faulty WoW sensor won't disable braking if only one main gear signals the aircraft is on the ground. It appeared the left main wheels did touch down then lifted.

It will be interesting to see the detailed report of when braking was available.

That seems logical. Is there a reason to not have the spoilers automatically deploy if one of the main gear is down while the other is not?

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
Reports are that MIA doesn't have an EMAS setup at the end of it's runways, that could have mitigated the problem with the Jet overshooting to some degree.

Read there were also 30 knot gusts coming in behind the plane, which might explain why it touched down late.

Of course it's all speculation at this point until the boxes are out and reviewed as to what the pilots and crew were thinking/saying during the landing.

Juan addresses both points in his video that has been posted twice in this thread. No on both points.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:

That seems logical. Is there a reason to not have the spoilers automatically deploy if one of the main gear is down while the other is not?

No. If one main gear is firmly on the ground and wheel speed has spun up, the only explanation is a landing is happening. In fact, in a situation with one main gear not firmly on the ground, spoilers will be highly desired to get it on the ground. Braking capability depends on the tires being fully weighted down onto the ground so that they don't skid. This is why there are two ways to trigger automatic spoiler activation: weight on both main gear or wheel speed spins up >50 kts. If the spoilers do not automatically deploy, the pilot can pull the spoiler handle and force them to deploy. I have done that several times.

The spoilers automatically retract if the power levers are pushed up for a go around. (That is unless the spoiler handle was pulled to manually force the spoilers to deploy. In more modern airliners there is a big warning that flashes if this happens. There was a terrible accident decades ago when the crew went around with spoilers up and didn't realize it.)

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

The CVR transcript may reveal interesting human factors.

Will that be publicly available?

The relevant things will be made public. Non-relevant conversation will not be in a transcript.