FAO 3WE
Moderators: FrankM, el, Dmmoore
FAO 3WE
Your local airport is weird... or used to be! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rq8oK7b25JI
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.
Re: FAO 3WE
Yes, I am locally biased, and very familiar with this crash and can go big-time Gabriel on it.
3BS was in college then. I have read the final report a few times and probably even referred to this crash once or twice on obscure aviation fora.
It was textbook swiss cheese.
If you use Google Earth's "time feature" you can find the "taxiway" painted up as Runway 13-31.
STL was sort-of a 2-runway airport and suffered from congestion problems. 3SS used to have much enjoyment listening to "squeeze plays" on the tower frequency. I forget the exact term- but planes were paired side by side on approach, and it was fairly common to hear the words "immediate takeoff", make an s-term for spacing and to see one plane flaring while one was rotating....and yeah, sometimes even a g around (Fortunately all the MD-80's/DC-9's don't suffer from underslung engines/mild sarcasm). Footnote (it was not a "takeoff runway/landing runway affair" takeoffs and landings happened on both runways with lots of frequency.
STL had lots of turboprop traffic shuttling folks to lots of smaller Midwest cities in MO, IL, IA, AR and even KY. Apparently "declaring" the taxiway "Runway 13-31" alleviated some of the congestion (it was predominately used by turboprops)
It is extremely close to 12L-30R and 1) The ATIS would warn landing traffic to use caution not to align with the wrong runway. Also, ATC would tend to say, "Belchfire 123, are you familiar with runway 13-31" before letting folks land there.
Anyway, the cowboy monkey lighter plane guy was NOT familiar with 13-31 and instead ventured onto 12L-30R and held in position t a taxiway intersection. I believe this happened on a different frequency from the TWA plane- AND that the plane was not overly visible to the TWA dudes nor the tower. (Pretty sure this was before STL had ground-based radar).
The MD-80 took the top off of the Cessna (and I believe the occupants, too).
20 years later, we destroy Berkely MO to build runway 11-29. (At least this runway sits relatively separate from the pair of 12s.) But 9/11 and the destruction of TWA happened and STL has 50% more runways for 66% less traffic.
While STL is by no means a "big airport", I always have a tiny shred of sympathy when a pilot messes up and lands on the wrong strip of concrete when there are 6 parallel ones available.
I am actually surprised how much they use 11-29....I guess it offers some extremely minor taxi advantages to Western gates and sometimes they even stick SWA planes on it (even though they are on the far East of the airport.
3BS was in college then. I have read the final report a few times and probably even referred to this crash once or twice on obscure aviation fora.
It was textbook swiss cheese.
If you use Google Earth's "time feature" you can find the "taxiway" painted up as Runway 13-31.
STL was sort-of a 2-runway airport and suffered from congestion problems. 3SS used to have much enjoyment listening to "squeeze plays" on the tower frequency. I forget the exact term- but planes were paired side by side on approach, and it was fairly common to hear the words "immediate takeoff", make an s-term for spacing and to see one plane flaring while one was rotating....and yeah, sometimes even a g around (Fortunately all the MD-80's/DC-9's don't suffer from underslung engines/mild sarcasm). Footnote (it was not a "takeoff runway/landing runway affair" takeoffs and landings happened on both runways with lots of frequency.
STL had lots of turboprop traffic shuttling folks to lots of smaller Midwest cities in MO, IL, IA, AR and even KY. Apparently "declaring" the taxiway "Runway 13-31" alleviated some of the congestion (it was predominately used by turboprops)
It is extremely close to 12L-30R and 1) The ATIS would warn landing traffic to use caution not to align with the wrong runway. Also, ATC would tend to say, "Belchfire 123, are you familiar with runway 13-31" before letting folks land there.
Anyway, the cowboy monkey lighter plane guy was NOT familiar with 13-31 and instead ventured onto 12L-30R and held in position t a taxiway intersection. I believe this happened on a different frequency from the TWA plane- AND that the plane was not overly visible to the TWA dudes nor the tower. (Pretty sure this was before STL had ground-based radar).
The MD-80 took the top off of the Cessna (and I believe the occupants, too).
20 years later, we destroy Berkely MO to build runway 11-29. (At least this runway sits relatively separate from the pair of 12s.) But 9/11 and the destruction of TWA happened and STL has 50% more runways for 66% less traffic.
While STL is by no means a "big airport", I always have a tiny shred of sympathy when a pilot messes up and lands on the wrong strip of concrete when there are 6 parallel ones available.
I am actually surprised how much they use 11-29....I guess it offers some extremely minor taxi advantages to Western gates and sometimes they even stick SWA planes on it (even though they are on the far East of the airport.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Re: FAO 3WE
A few nit picky inaccuracies:
This runway was used by airliners- I think it was 6000 feet and adequate for most regional turboprops.
12R-30L is 200 ft wide
12l-30R is 150 ft wide
Interesting that after landing, the taxi instructions should be been “cross Runway 31”
This runway was used by airliners- I think it was 6000 feet and adequate for most regional turboprops.
12R-30L is 200 ft wide
12l-30R is 150 ft wide
Interesting that after landing, the taxi instructions should be been “cross Runway 31”
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Re: FAO 3WE
Interesting discussion. I didn't even remember this crash when I watched the video. Seems like, as most crashes, there were many little things that combined to make one big thing.
I went to prison for murder, but I stayed for the chili!
Re: FAO 3WE
There are lots of little subtleties here...
Runway 13-31 was not on the ATIS as active.The taxi-in instructions did not indicate it as a runway.
In those days, the airport was busy, but I think it was on the verge of the evening slow down when this happened.
And for all my procedure bashing- I think it was wise when (after this crash) ATC used to say, “Are you familiar with runway 13-31”.
Also of note was a LAHSO on runway 24 for 30L-12R.
I was window perving (with multi-band radio) once when a landing plane (cleared for LAHS) was zooming down 24...With an Ozark Fairchild 224 cleared for takeoff on 30L....”Belchfire 123, you going to be able to hold short?...Negative...Ozark 237, abort your takeoff”...oh the cowboy improvisation...
https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2008/00360AD.PDF
Runway 13-31 was not on the ATIS as active.The taxi-in instructions did not indicate it as a runway.
In those days, the airport was busy, but I think it was on the verge of the evening slow down when this happened.
And for all my procedure bashing- I think it was wise when (after this crash) ATC used to say, “Are you familiar with runway 13-31”.
Also of note was a LAHSO on runway 24 for 30L-12R.
I was window perving (with multi-band radio) once when a landing plane (cleared for LAHS) was zooming down 24...With an Ozark Fairchild 224 cleared for takeoff on 30L....”Belchfire 123, you going to be able to hold short?...Negative...Ozark 237, abort your takeoff”...oh the cowboy improvisation...
https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2008/00360AD.PDF
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Re: FAO Eric
Any thoughts or comments on your post?
I sort of wish it was still the 80s...there were -9s and 727s and trimotor jumbos and a few 707s...and I was younger.
I sort of wish it was still the 80s...there were -9s and 727s and trimotor jumbos and a few 707s...and I was younger.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Re: FAO 3WE
Well I'm 110% with you on the "younger" thing! 
And the planes... yeah, I'm kind of a tech geek so I like all the cool automation and engine design advances etc. etc. in the newer planes*, but as I think has been stated elsewhere (and maybe here?), the "two high-bypass turbofans on a wing" thing gets a little boring after a while.
One of the sad things for me is I've never actually flown on a 747, and now it looks like I never will. I did manage to ride on some of those 3-engine beauties though... ironically my very first flight on an airliner (other than as an infant which I don't remember) was on a DC-10, it wasn't *that* long after they had all the issues with getting explody in mid-air and engines trying to navigate for themselves, and it was from BOS to some airport I don't recall the name of in Hawaii. Questionable airplane, lots of ocean, but still enjoyed it (Hawaii too).
Re the airport, honestly it blows my mind they'd use a taxiway as a runway. *So* much potential for trouble! It's amazing there weren't more problems, but I guess you gotta do what you gotta do.
* Crackerbox composites, I'm not so sure about those. I used to be heavily into windsurfing and one day I was screaming across the intracoastal waterway near Stuart, FL and the board stopped like it had just hit a wall. Turns out the damn thing had delaminated "in flight"! It was not fun. I'm fairly sure an aluminum board would not have done that.
And the planes... yeah, I'm kind of a tech geek so I like all the cool automation and engine design advances etc. etc. in the newer planes*, but as I think has been stated elsewhere (and maybe here?), the "two high-bypass turbofans on a wing" thing gets a little boring after a while.
One of the sad things for me is I've never actually flown on a 747, and now it looks like I never will. I did manage to ride on some of those 3-engine beauties though... ironically my very first flight on an airliner (other than as an infant which I don't remember) was on a DC-10, it wasn't *that* long after they had all the issues with getting explody in mid-air and engines trying to navigate for themselves, and it was from BOS to some airport I don't recall the name of in Hawaii. Questionable airplane, lots of ocean, but still enjoyed it (Hawaii too).
Re the airport, honestly it blows my mind they'd use a taxiway as a runway. *So* much potential for trouble! It's amazing there weren't more problems, but I guess you gotta do what you gotta do.
* Crackerbox composites, I'm not so sure about those. I used to be heavily into windsurfing and one day I was screaming across the intracoastal waterway near Stuart, FL and the board stopped like it had just hit a wall. Turns out the damn thing had delaminated "in flight"! It was not fun. I'm fairly sure an aluminum board would not have done that.
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.
Re: FAO 3WE
From fence and window perving it didn’t seem like that big of deal and I think it existed into the 2000s...
Re the airport, honestly it blows my mind they'd use a taxiway as a runway. *So* much potential for trouble! It's amazing there weren't more problems, but I guess you gotta do what you gotta do.
If you were a propeller aircraft you might be sent to 13-31 for takeoff or landing, while 12-30s were used by big iron. For a year or Flyover was the 8th busiest airport in the US (in terms of operations, NOT_passengers.)- and only two runways and change. Many of those operations were regional turboprops where a 6000 ft runway is plenty.
When fence perving, they’d send the occasional turboprop there...not all of them.
This incident did not_lead to 13-31 going away.
Still- a sad deal as the tower ass-umed the pilot would back taxi on 31, and the pilot ass-umed he was in the right place, and it was dark and a sea of light bulbs...
It would be interesting to see if Dummy or Flyboy remembered this and would share thoughts.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests
