CRW UPS Crash

There's a 360 outfit based at the field. One of theirs?

Edit: It doesnt look like on of theirs. RIP
 
Last edited:
I didn't know the Captain personally but saw him a lot during the sort. The F/O was on her first or second day off of initial training (not sure about the gender and that has nothing to do with this).

http://avherald.com/h?article=4a88f341&opt=0
RIP to the crew...
An Air Cargo Carriers Short SD-330 on behalf of UPS, registration N334AC performing flight 2Q-1260 from Louisville,KY to Charleston,WV (USA) with 2 crew, performed a VOR-A approach to and was on final approach to Charleston Chuck Yeager Airport's runway 05 at 06:53L (10:53Z) when the aircraft impacted trees and went down the hill to the left of the runway located on top of the hill. The aircraft was destroyed. Both crew perished in the crash.

The airport reported it appeared one of the aircraft's wings hit the runway surface and the aircraft went off to the left of the runway into a hill. It was difficult to reach the aircraft, tail number N334AC, due to the steep terrain. The aircraft did not burst into flames.

The FAA reported the aircraft struck its left wing onto runway 05 and veered off the runway. The NTSB have opened an investigation.

The NTSB reported they are investigating the crash of a Short 330 at Charleston Airport. Six investigators plus support staff have been dispatched to Charleston.

Emergency Services reported, Barlow Drive (north of the aerodrome, left of and parallel to the runway) and Keystone Drive (short of runway 05) remaine closed.

Tower advised emergency services after issuing the crash alert, that the aircraft had hit runway 05 and the fuselage had gone off the left side of the runway. Emergency services reported debris on the runway. Emergency services were crossing runway 05 to access the crash site mainly via taxiway A3.

Related NOTAM:
05/022 - AD AP CLSD. 05 MAY 11:28 2017 UNTIL 06 MAY 11:27 2017. CREATED: 05 MAY 11:28 2017

Metars:
KCRW 051254Z 20005KT 10SM SCT008 SCT070 SCT150 17/14 A2941 RMK AO2 SLP952 T01670139=
KCRW 051154Z 00000KT 10SM FEW000 SCT011 BKN060 16/14 A2942 RMK AO2 SLP956 FG FEW000 60024 70046 T01560144 10156 20139 55017=
KCRW 051144Z 20003KT 10SM FEW000 SCT011 BKN060 15/14 A2943 RMK AO2 FG FEW000 T01500139=
KCRW 051059Z 00000KT 10SM FEW001 OVC005 14/13 A2940 RMK AO2 T01440133=
KCRW 051054Z 23003KT 10SM FEW001 OVC005 14/13 A2941 RMK AO2 SLP952 VLY FG T01440133=
KCRW 051030Z 17004KT 10SM FEW001 OVC005 14/13 A2940 RMK AO2 VLY FG T01390133 $=
KCRW 050954Z 08011KT 10SM SCT007 BKN013 OVC031 14/13 A2938 RMK AO2 RAE46 PRESFR SLP943 P0001 T01390133 $=
KCRW 050946Z 06010KT 10SM SCT007 BKN013 OVC031 14/13 A2940 RMK AO2 RAE46 PRESFR P0001 T01390133 $=
KCRW 050854Z 13003KT 6SM -RA BR SCT004 BKN021 OVC048 14/13 A2947 RMK AO2 SLP974 VLY FG P0004 60023 T01390133 56013 $=
KCRW 050848Z 10003KT 6SM -RA BR SCT004 BKN021 OVC048 14/13 A2947 RMK AO2 VLY FG P0004 $=
KCRW 050754Z 07006KT 5SM RA BR FEW001 BKN048 OVC070 14/13 A2948 RMK AO2 SLP978 VLY FG P0016 T01440133 $=
KCRW 050703Z 07007KT 7SM RA FEW001 SCT031 OVC055 14/13 A2950 RMK AO2 VLY FG P0000 T01440133 $=

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/SNC1260/history...
 
Very bizarre. You'd have to have quite an unusual attitude to strike the wing on a Shorts. METAR seems pretty benign.
 
Shorts 330..??? Thought those were looooong gone. Like, thought they were gone 30 years ago.

RIP for the crew
 
Kritchlow said:
Shorts 330..??? Thought those were looooong gone. Like, thought they were gone 30 years ago.

RIP for the crew
Click to expand...
They're still using them in Afghanistan. There are a bunch down at ISM getting refurbed.
 
Fearless Tower said:
They're still using them in Afghanistan. There are a bunch down at ISM getting refurbed.
Click to expand...
I'm more familiar with the 360's... kinda cool machines.
The 330's probably carry a decent load, but probably no faster than a Navajo.
There was an even earlier model... don't know the numeric designation, but I believe it was the Skyvan? Skywagon???
 
Kritchlow said:
There was an even earlier model... don't know the numeric designation, but I believe it was the Skyvan? Skywagon???
Click to expand...
A lot of drop zones are still using the short ones.

There is one based here at Suffolk and they occasionally bring in an additional from out of town when super busy with Navy stuff.
 
Fearless Tower said:
A lot of drop zones are still using the short ones.

There is one based here at Suffolk and they occasionally bring in an additional from out of town when super busy with Navy stuff.
Click to expand...
With the twin tail....??
 
Wait... 330 had the twin tail also.
 
Took my checkrides at CRW. Going good down that hillside would be unpleasant, I'd not even want to walk down it. Two hilltops were flattened out for clearance to Runway 23, but the approach to 5 is pretty open, over the Kanawha River and the city, right up to the Ridge the airport sits atop. My first Drive up there was interesting . . .
 
Indeed. Perris Valley Skydiving her in So Cal has i think 5 of them along with the twin otters.

Fearless Tower said:
A lot of drop zones are still using the short ones.

There is one based here at Suffolk and they occasionally bring in an additional from out of town when super busy with Navy stuff.
Click to expand...
 
I'm blown away like when I heard two UPS pilots killed. Not that's any less of a tagedy, but they were not UPS pilots.
Any loss of life is tragic, don't get me wrong. It's just that when an airliner crashes it's a bigger deal. Maybe it shouldn't be, but it is. Possibly because of the assumed experience, redundant systems, and increased training.
Anyway you slice it it's a bad deal.
 
Kritchlow said:
I'm blown away like when I heard two UPS pilots killed. Not that's any less of a tagedy, but they were not UPS pilots.
Click to expand...

Interesting how sometimes the news gets it right, and everyone even outside of aviation calls it the "Colgan crash" instead of associating it with the mainline who's logo was on the tail...

And sometimes they get it wrong, and it's a "UPS crash", as in this case, when it was a similar contractor.

Other crashes will be called "A FedEx contractor..."

Code-shares and contractors and paint jobs and marketing, sure confuse the heck out of the non-aviation crowd.

Anyway, it's a side topic, and RIP to the pilots.
 
I'm good friends with a couple of people who knew the Captain. He was loved, and respected by his peers. RIP.
 
DavidWhite said:
I'm good friends with a couple of people who knew the Captain. He was loved, and respected by his peers. RIP.
Click to expand...

Sometimes ... hell, almost all the time... this business is too small. Sorry DW. It just sucks every time you know someone or are only one degree of separation away from these.
 
denverpilot said:
Sometimes ... hell, almost all the time... this business is too small. Sorry DW. It just sucks every time you know someone or are only one degree of separation away from these.
Click to expand...

**** I lost (another) buddy in a Caravan crash two days ago. That'll be my 5th since I started flying professionally. It doesn't even shock me any more. I'm tired of losing friends, and watching friends lose friends.
 
DavidWhite said:
I'm good friends with a couple of people who knew the Captain. He was loved, and respected by his peers.
Click to expand...

A friend of mine (A&P/IA) in SE Alaska owned and ran a maintenance shop. A couple of years ago a friend (Tom) who worked for him as an A&P had the cargo shift on him during take off in a Beech 18. Cargo was a load of cedar shingles bound for a lodge in Taku Inlet. The Beech stalled and my friend was killed in the crash. Larry, the owner of the shop said "I've lost to many friends in this business do to crashes I'm closing the shop and moving South)

Tom the pilot was very nice and would help anyone out without hesitation. I often wonder if the saying is correct that "the good die young.".
 
Last edited:
We are starting to get just a bit more info. This is from one of my fellow pilots.

This was a high-threat operation. VOR-A approach that had circling mins only. Low overcast with an underlying "scattered" deck of 100'. The approach requires a left turn to line-up for runway 5. They hit the runway with the left wing, probably after maneuvering around that low scattered deck.

The sickening thing is that runway 5 is also served by an RNAV approach with straight-in LPV or LNAV/VNAV minimums. I'll bet $500 that the airplane wasn't equipped for RNAV because it wasn't required and cost too much. Sound familiar? Well, just like the reckoning that is coming for UPS cargo cutouts and other safety cost avoidance decisions, the money saved will be paid a thousand times over because of this accident. But the decision makers rarely die. They send flowers.
 
MD11Pilot said:
We are starting to get just a bit more info. This is from one of my fellow pilots.

This was a high-threat operation. VOR-A approach that had circling mins only. Low overcast with an underlying "scattered" deck of 100'. The approach requires a left turn to line-up for runway 5. They hit the runway with the left wing, probably after maneuvering around that low scattered deck.

The sickening thing is that runway 5 is also served by an RNAV approach with straight-in LPV or LNAV/VNAV minimums. I'll bet $500 that the airplane wasn't equipped for RNAV because it wasn't required and cost too much. Sound familiar? Well, just like the reckoning that is coming for UPS cargo cutouts and other safety cost avoidance decisions, the money saved will be paid a thousand times over because of this accident. But the decision makers rarely die. They send flowers.
Click to expand...

What cutouts for 135 are you talking about? Nobody died on the ground, congress doesn't even know this happened. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Like it or not, its the way life is in the UPS feed world. UPS cares about 1 thing, who can do the flying the cheapest.
 
MD11Pilot said:
This was a high-threat operation. VOR-A approach that had circling mins only. Low overcast with an underlying "scattered" deck of 100'. The approach requires a left turn to line-up for runway 5. They hit the runway with the left wing, probably after maneuvering around that low scattered deck.
Click to expand...

And all so the novelty socks and fresh flowers someone ordered on amazon at 7pm the night before make it to their recipients before 10am.
 
Cargo Cutout is a 121 thing. The post was a copy of an internal to my pilot group post showing that unless forced, a company expects Cat 3 performance on Cat 1 equipment. Most of the private aircraft flown here have better capabilities than the 135 planes that fly the freight. For want of GPS capability to shoot an GPS approach but having to do VOR circle that put them into a situation that cost them everything.
 
Kritchlow said:
Shorts 330..??? Thought those were looooong gone. Like, thought they were gone 30 years ago.

RIP for the crew
Click to expand...

Shorts are no where near obsolete, especially with how they load, might not be ideal for flying some rich folks to the hamptons, but it's a working airplane for sure.

My thought is why didn't they shoot the LPV? I'd imagine a real cargo operator would at least have a WAAS box in that plane.


IMG_1452.png



Ether way RIP
 
You're trying a little too hard if you're dragging a wingtip on a runway to make a circling approach work out.

Sorry, but if that's the theory, wow.

Even more nuts would be a PNF going along with such a maneuver.

I'm not really buying it, for now. That's way off the "are you kidding me?" chart.
 
Last edited:
Why didn't they shoot the LPV? They weren't equipped to do so because a WAAS GPS is not required piece of equipment. They only had the VOR-A.
I am friends with the Captain of the sister flight that night and he said they do not have GPS. In 1978, while flying a Twin Otter commuter, I had a Branif Airlines Captain ask me where our flight director was and I told him we didn't have one. He asked what our minimums were and I said 200 feet and a half mile. I remember we were excited to get a Collins PN-101 HSI.

I personally have never flown into that airport but in talking with those that have say it is mountainous, black hole etc. This was on Friday morning also, so it meant they had been flying all week on the backside of the clock. The Captain usually didn't sleep in a recliner and the F/O was brand new and it takes a while to adapt to the night freight way of life. Initial reports is that this was the F/O's first or second day out of training. Was it part of this company's training program to actually fly a VOR A circle to land at night? Probably the very first time they had ever encountered this type of approach. If they didn't have a GPS in the aircraft, I can guarantee you the company did not have a simulator to train in...again not required because it costs money.

Just trying to point out that most of you have much more capability with your airplanes today than is required for a lot of commercial flying. I have radar on my MD11 that allows me to see a few miles ahead...my Bonanza has ADSB, Traffic, WX and Lightening detection. I have a better over all picture of the entire weather in my Bonanza vs. my MD11. You have more computing power in your Smart Phone than the entire NASA program did to put a man on the moon and bring them home.

Did they screw up? Obviously but there are so many factors involved that it is way too early to know now.
 
James331 said:
My thought is why didn't they shoot the LPV? I'd imagine a real cargo operator would at least have a WAAS box in that plane.
Click to expand...
That's where your wrong. A lot of the freight airplanes are running around without RNAV or WAAS, because the operators don't want to spend the money.

The average GA aircraft is better equipped.
 
Is there not an ILS 5 approach? Used to be one there years ago. Why would they choose to circle, winds were within limits according to post 4 above.

Looks like it's just a LOC5 approach now according to Airnav, and the EMAS has been decommissioned for runway 23. Crazy.
 
Last edited:
Bozo said:
Is there not an ILS 5 approach? Used to be one there years ago. Why would they choose to circle, winds were within limits according to post 4 above.
Click to expand...

Who knows? There are so many factors involved. Fatigue...they fly all night, are NOT ALLOWED a sleep room and have to sit for fours during the sort. The Zero Groundspeed committee will come up with some "bulletins and reg changes" and all will be right with the world...until the next crash.
 
Fearless Tower said:
That's where your wrong. A lot of the freight airplanes are running around without RNAV or WAAS, because the operators don't want to spend the money.

The average GA aircraft is better equipped.
Click to expand...

My CFII was a Delta commuter pilot. On one flight, an airliner was coming into HTS (~20 mins west of CRW) and asked for the ILS to find the airport in decent visibility. I made a comment, and was told in no uncertain terms that, in 2009, my WAAS GPS was much better equipment than many airlines have installed, and that she routinely flew VOR to VOR for the airlines.

That was a sobering thought.

Last month, flying ATL to Frankfort, it sure looked like we made turns right over the VORs that I remember training on, too.
 
Hank S said:
My CFII was a Delta commuter pilot. On one flight, an airliner was coming into HTS (~20 mins west of CRW) and asked for the ILS to find the airport in decent visibility. I made a comment, and was told in no uncertain terms that, in 2009, my WAAS GPS was much better equipment than many airlines have installed, and that she routinely flew VOR to VOR for the airlines.

That was a sobering thought.

Last month, flying ATL to Frankfort, it sure looked like we made turns right over the VORs that I remember training on, too.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. We are only certified for LNAV mins for RNAV approaches. The Cirrus I instruct in has more technology than the jet I fly.
 
Oh geez - people commonly overestimate the kind of tech we have in many of our airliners. I mean hell, we have 757s that don't even have GPS. America West operated Airbuses (Airbii?) without GPS as well, although I think those are all gone by now.
 
People often overestimate the equipment in older business jets and turboprops too.
 
WAITWAITWAIT. Are you telling me that all airplanes don't look like this?

001_pilatus_PC12_cockpit-3mb-1.jpeg
 
Fearless Tower said:
That's where your wrong. A lot of the freight airplanes are running around without RNAV or WAAS, because the operators don't want to spend the money.

The average GA aircraft is better equipped.
Click to expand...

Didn't save them a lot of money on that one now did it.

Yeah, people just need to just refuse to fly crap equipment, nowadays just take the next job listing in a properly equipped plane

Heck depending on what part of the country you're in, you really limit your options and weather minimums not having a WAAS ship, I can't see how flying IFR for hire NOT having WAAS SAVES MONEY.


I mean for a VFR only operation, yeah sure, or if you're just working a location that is CAVU 90% of the year, but man having folks do a circle to land in crap weather, with probably little sleep, little pay and high stress, all because you're cheap, F' that.




jordane93 said:
Space shuttle or Pilatus?
Click to expand...

Is there a difference? ;)
 
Damn, that's sickening to look at. I flew the 330's back in the early 90's. That is the company that bought our two when we went out of business.

RIP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top