http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2012/jul/20/6/huge-air-force-cargo-plane-lands-at-davis-islands--ar-437276/ (http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2012/jul/20/6/huge-air-force-cargo-plane-lands-at-davis-islands--ar-437276/)
Major Oops!!
Happens every once in awhile: embarrassed flight deck crew. No damage done. I imagine that the Aircraft Commander will be a passenger on the trip back to McGuire. The key information is that the runway that he landed on is the same orientation as the runway at McDill.
When I flew out of Moffett Naval Air Station in the SF Bay Area, we occasionally had an airliner line up to land, when they really thought that they were landing at San Jose International. Runways had almost the same orientation and there were two parallels. Big difference between SJC and NUQ were the three blimp hangars alongside the runways at NUQ.
Yeah, the entire crew is going to get some intense attention from the Stan-Eval folks.
Anybody who was on the flight deck is basically screwed.
Considering that AMC aircraft carrying passengers are required to fly a precision approach, aka an ILS, it makes you wonder if they ever identified the localizer before they shot the approach.
Like I said, all of the pilots who were on the flight deck will be fighting for their careers.
Ironically the 305th had a large change of command ceremony today at JB MDL, where Col. Paul Murphy handed the wing off to Col. Richard Williamson Jr. Our whole encampment staff was honored to be in formation at the ceremony too.
Anyway, not a great way to start off! :-\
Wow. My home airport is about 10,000ft and one I routinely land at is about 3500. I dont see how you wouldnt notice. And being on ILS too? Interesting to read the after action report.
There are three Airports on an almost straight line in Tampa Bay. Knight, MacDill, and one on the St Pete side. In addition you also have Tampa Int A/P 3 miles to the North and St Pete Intl A/P slightly WNW across the bay from MacDill. I guess the Pilot just took the first one in line. Not as bad as the Delta pilot that landed in P'cola bay on a direct approach to the airport a few years ago.
There is also the Clearwater Air Park nor far from Clearwater/ St Pete International. A lot of landing strips in very close proximity to each other and within 3 city limits.
Quote from: PHall on July 21, 2012, 12:50:16 AM
Yeah, the entire crew is going to get some intense attention from the Stan-Eval folks.
Anybody who was on the flight deck is basically screwed.
Considering that AMC aircraft carrying passengers are required to fly a precision approach, aka an ILS, it makes you wonder if they ever identified the localizer before they shot the approach.
Like I said, all of the pilots who were on the flight deck will be fighting for their careers.
Well also the Control Tower personnel at MacDill are not off the hook either. Generally when aircraft are landing (cleared to land) tower personnel watch the aircraft and also have surveillance radar in the tower that would indicate the aircraft's altitude and position.
RM
On the news video around the 1:14 mark: "You mean this isn't an Air Force base?"
There's TPA, PIE, MCF, CLW, SPG, VDF and a smattering of other smaller airports across the Tampa Bay area. Throw in SRQ to the south of the bay (and it falls under Tampa control) and you see the skies over Tampa Bay can be a little crowded. Largest (most populous) metro area in the state, to boot, and its most densely populated.
And a airplane with three Flight Management Computer systems on board and you don't know where you're at? :o
Time to hand in those wings...
I have a feeling there's more to this story than "oops, we landed at the wrong airport." Remember, the Republican National Convention's in town in mere days. It's a national security event. Not to put the tinfoil hat on or anything, but it's possible that there's more to this story. And this stuff about the runway being too short, I'm not buying. C-17s are capable of short-field takeoffs.
QuoteThe C-17 is designed to operate from runways as short as 3,500 ft (1,064 m) and as narrow as 90 ft (27 m). In addition, the C-17 can operate from unpaved, unimproved runways (although with greater chance of damage to the aircraft).
Quote4/22 3,405 ft 1,038 m Asphalt
Yes, a cause for concern.
Quote from: SarDragon on July 23, 2012, 01:22:48 AM
QuoteThe C-17 is designed to operate from runways as short as 3,500 ft (1,064 m) and as narrow as 90 ft (27 m). In addition, the C-17 can operate from unpaved, unimproved runways (although with greater chance of damage to the aircraft).
Quote4/22 3,405 ft 1,038 m Asphalt
Yes, a cause for concern.
A cause for concern alright, but not for the runway length. The weight bearing capacity of the runway would be my concern.
Runways like that are usually limited to 12,500 pounds max.
That is so ironic, I'm in Tampa right now.
Welcome to the Tampa Bay area. It doesn't usually rain like this. I'm in St. Petersburg right now.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on July 23, 2012, 02:11:05 AM
Welcome to the Tampa Bay area. It doesn't usually rain like this. I'm in St. Petersburg right now.
spent a couple spring breaks in high school in St. Pete.
I flew in earlier coming back from HGA and it started pouring torrential rain at TPA about 15 minutes after I landed. Good to be home ::)
During World War II, Peter O Knight was used as an auxiliary field for MacDill Field and Drew Field (both Tampa) for B-26 and B-17 aircraft. So chances are the runmway could support a C-17.
Quote from: Garibaldi on July 23, 2012, 02:12:19 AM
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on July 23, 2012, 02:11:05 AM
Welcome to the Tampa Bay area. It doesn't usually rain like this. I'm in St. Petersburg right now.
Thanks! And yeah, I looked up the weather and noticed the next few days would be rain, we're at St. Pete beach :(
Quote from: BillB on July 23, 2012, 11:53:45 AM
During World War II, Peter O Knight was used as an auxiliary field for MacDill Field and Drew Field (both Tampa) for B-26 and B-17 aircraft. So chances are the runmway could support a C-17.
I dunno...a C-17 probably weighs as much as a B-17 and B-29 put together...
The C-17 could do it from 3,000 feet pretty easily from what I've seen before at airshows and AFB visits. They're so agile that I'm surprised (not really) that they don't throw missiles on the wings and bombs in the belly and make it the worlds largest fighter bomber. They're a beauty to watch fly. Now if it was a C-5M, that'd be a different story >:D
Quote from: Garibaldi on July 23, 2012, 01:57:35 PM
Quote from: BillB on July 23, 2012, 11:53:45 AM
During World War II, Peter O Knight was used as an auxiliary field for MacDill Field and Drew Field (both Tampa) for B-26 and B-17 aircraft. So chances are the runmway could support a C-17.
I dunno...a C-17 probably weighs as much as a B-17 and B-29 put together...
One c-17 equals two B-29s plus three B-17s plus a little bit extra.
As for runway loading, the C-17 spreads its weight out over 14 wheels, instead of the 3 on the bombers.
Quote from: SarDragon on July 23, 2012, 07:18:45 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on July 23, 2012, 01:57:35 PM
Quote from: BillB on July 23, 2012, 11:53:45 AM
During World War II, Peter O Knight was used as an auxiliary field for MacDill Field and Drew Field (both Tampa) for B-26 and B-17 aircraft. So chances are the runmway could support a C-17.
I dunno...a C-17 probably weighs as much as a B-17 and B-29 put together...
One c-17 equals two B-29s plus three B-17s plus a little bit extra.
As for runway loading, the C-17 spreads its weight out over 14 wheels, instead of the 3 on the bombers.
Yeah, 14 HIGH PRESSURE tires vs 3 LOW PRESSURE balloon tires. The concentrated weight on the C-17 is the problem.