https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1726959824905130348

DIVERSITY: Shortly after a Navy P-8A overshot the runway and landed in Kaneohe Bay (everyone survived)

I'm no aviation expert but I'd wager that photo was shot before the plane crashed in the bay.

diversity? looks like all women to me ,guess they could not decide which runway to use till last minuite kind of like eating out

Makes ya wonder what that crew's "personal pronouns" are, doesn't it. Less muff diving and more attention to flying the plane might be in order, if any of them ever get the opportunity to get off the ground again. If I was in charge of them, I'd probably reassign the whole bunch to working in the chow hall!

There were 9 people aboard so that photo obviously isn't the same crew that crashed. There's no mention of who was aboard so it could have been any combination of men/women/whites/blacks/mixed pronouns.

MCAS Kaneohe Bay only has one runway... but yeah, I guess they wanted to go swimming rather than make a go around.

Click below to read the replies if you're not a twatter user.

https://nitter.net/amuse/status/1726959824905130348

That's a crack crew.

So the plane crashed for no other reason than a all-female crew? Yeah right!

And now you know why the front of the plane is called the "cockpit".

I would like to be the token male crew chief on that bird. Even if it means an occasional dunk in Kaneohe bay.

kwg

They landed with a 16 knot tailwind, max approved was 12 knots. IMC conditions, the other runway didn't have an approach.

Women smell other women and synchronize mensuration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_synchrony

The whole crew was on the rag.

Are you sure you aren't an aviation expert? Sounds like you could be.

I've heard of a "Shavetail Lieutenant" but I believe in this case it's a "Splittail Lieutenant"

No...
It's a Cockpit when occupied by a male crew. When the aircrew is female it's a Box Office.

I think P-3Cs were about 25 million a copy when I was in the Nav. I'll take a WAG: about 160 million?

What's $160,000,000 these days?

If they indeed were forced to land with a 16-knot tailwind, it is no surprise at all that they weren't able to stop in time. No matter what the pilot's "plumbing" is.

I don't know anything about aviation, but common sense would suggest that landing from the opposite direction would turn that tailwind into a headwind???

Okay...I'm no pilot so please be gentle, but why in hell wouldn't you approach the runway from the opposite direction and land with a 16-knot headwind?

That could be a good reason.

Now we know the real reason for the f uckup!!

Can't they approach the same runway from the opposite direction? It would appear that approach would have been over water.

As I posted earlier...IMC conditions, and the other runway did not have an approach. Smart thing to do was tell Approach "Unable" and go to your alternate.

...Gee sir, I guess that promotion is out of the question!

There are some world class smart ass remarks in this thread. Keep 'em coming!!!

I had to look that up.

We call it IFR or VFR.

Didn't know IMC.

I checked out the K-Bay airfield on google maps.

I can see where there is no space for an approach from the SW. And it looks like only the one runway is long enough for a plane that big.

.
No more drive aeroplane for you !

IMC is instrument meteorological conditions. I'm beginning to see there are no instrument rated pilots here.

I just looked using Google Earth, why couldn't they land on the other end of the runway. I don't see obstructions.

Here is the metar.
PHNG 210019Z COR 07014G21KT 1 1/2SM -RA BR SCT018 BKN026 OVC035 25/22 A2995 RMK A02 SFC VIS 4 VIS SW 1 1/2SM P0000 T02500222 COR 0046

Why wouldn't a go-around be an option once it became obvious that yelling "WHOA, YOU SUMBITCH!" wasn't working?

https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/11c9r5k/whoa_horse_whoa/

Not sure how it is now, back in the old days command post had to approve of any operations above the charted maximums. I'd wouldn't be surprised if someone above the cockpit crew approved the landing attempt...

Should have not been attempted in the first place. Yes, a go around would have been smart. But many people aint that smart.

We do not know if the weather was improving or getting worse. We do not know their fuel state or if there were any reachable divert airports. In short, we have no grounds for second guessing any of this.

We do know that its required to file an alternate and have 30 minutes extra fuel. Hard requirements, every aircraft landing in US controlled territory must do this. PHNL is 12 miles away with plenty runways.

Where do you want to land?

I don’t know, where do you want to land?

I picked last time, it’s your turn.

Yes but last time I picked you didn’t like it.

I did too, just not as much as you liked it.

You’re always minimizing my feelings, I know you didn’t like it, just be honest.

I am being honest, why do you always accuse me of hiding my feelings.

Splash

They could have easily landed here.

https://www.airnav.com/airport/PHNL
8L would have been easy.

you either can fly or not. Lord knows no males have ever messed up though....

Yep....both cock and cont do stupid things every day..

I’d be most interested in how far from the runway threshold that bird touched down. Knowing the trailing wind and weight of the craft one would think that point would’ve been awfully tight?
With the same conditions In mind the window for pulling up for a go around would be mighty small as well.

Osky

Half were licking clits most likely!

Hickham and the old Barber’s Point have runways suitable for them. A lot of times the wind call from the controller doesn’t really register and it goes in one ear and out the other. As mentioned above, the key is, if you’re not making your line speeds, you just take it around. That’s hard to get across to some. Once you’re back in the air you have time to think about it and come up with a plan.

Very seldom do you HAVE to land/stop on THIS pass! If you’re out of gas or have a really pressing emergency, the rules change.

Unless they really screwed up their fuel plan, a P-8 shouldn’t even come close to being fuel critical.

Charlie has the correct responses!

I just read that they have recovered the black box.

Al that was recorded on it was , "whoooooooooooo-EEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeee".

At least in the Navy tactical arena, they would only be talking to “Base radio” if they were trying to sort out some system malfunction.

this no accident .they faking this .They testing out new Navy secret weapon ..a airplane -submarine .able to do both .Navy hiding the fact like they Air Force claimed F-117 stealth was not real when people claimed to see it flying in early 80's

It was probably..”Uh oh………O $hiiit!”

I see 13 back seat drivers.

We came very close to crashing in Hawaii on landing about 10 years ago. Visibility was low and when we came through the cloud we were right above a field very low and the runway wasn't there. The pilot poured on the power and headed up again then circled until we were getting low on fuel so we went to a neighboring island to refuel and then comeback later.

I was telling my friend about it who's an airline pilot and said to him when the pilot came over the intercom you could hear how shaken she was in her voice. He said, oh that explains it. I asked what? He said I firmly believe women should not be allowed to fly and then he went on with a whole list of reasons why.

I told him I was sure some women were better pilots than some men and he said those men shouldn't be allowed to fly either and then went off about how much easier they'd made it to become an airline pilot only for diversity and the said it's even worse what they've done for the requirements for air traffic controller. He said I wouldn't believe the number of close calls there are these days because of incompetent controllers.

Bb

I"m sure it was the two Asian chic flying it....

Ho Lee Fook,

and

Wee No Slow.

Looking at the name tags I think I see at least three, maybe four aviators with the others being NFOs.

👌
One IFE comes to mind, we were going to have to divert to Zaragoza due to crosswinds getting too high due to the condition of the aircraft. The gear was already lowered, couldn't be retracted. We couldn't make Zaragoza with the fuel on board and the aircraft being dirty. So an air refueling was called for. That brought on new complications. We couldn't hit the minimum speed for the AR, we also couldn't climb to the minimum altitude for the AR. SAC HHQ had to approve the deviations so we could take on fuel. We still had to have the tankers make a wide sweeping turn so that we could catch up to them for the hook up.
The tanker was ordered to pump all of the fuel they could afford to give us and then divert to the nearest base.

Maybe the plane was scheduled to be washed?

Sounds like the wind only blows from one direction on Kenohoe Bay. I didn’t realize runways are one way. Do they have those little spike thingys like at the airport parking lot? Why would someone build a runway where you couldn’t land from either end? Affirmative action engineers?

There is an airport on the south end of the ranch. I cross it often going to the ranch. No one way signs that I have seen. I see planes land from both directions. Med evac helicopters refuel there. They land and take off straight up and down. Airport manager told me the pilot is responsible to make sure the runway is clear.

Insert "Typical Women Drivers" joke here.....

Or maybe they were having a wet T-shirt contest....

Thanks for your service Clark. Which branch were you in?

If there was a man involved in any of this landing, in the tower, on the radio, or just the person driving the luggage tugger, that poor SOB gonna get the blame for it.

OR, shoot the approach and circle to land.

Fact.

The oppressive male dominated military hierarchy, forced these strong, brave, independent women to land in unimaginable condition. If notfor the love of their cats they would of never made it through this harrowing experience.


The Disney movie of these 14 stunning and brave lesbians will be released next year.

Or, four women sitting at a 4 way stop, not one of them can make a decision, so they all just sit there.

Kaneohe doesn’t have ANY instrument approach procedures. And with 2 mile vis, I sure wouldn’t be landing there VFR in anything but a small, slow airplane. There are 2800’ mountains 4 miles SW so an approach from that direction in any weather ain’t gonna work for a jet like that.

Back in the 1960's I operated a KC-135 fLT Sim. Pilots vary greatly in their abilities !! In this "day & time" I'm sure there is lots of pressure to "get some women qualified" to fly the HEAVIES !!

Are you sure it wasn't.... yes yes , don't stop, more, more... oh Jesus?

There is some amount of human error on almost every landing. Most planes fly so damn well it doesn't matter. The margin of error between a great job getting it down and should have gone around is pretty slim in IMC tailwind conditions. Don't envy them at all trying to land in that.

These days I mostly stick to my super cub and let it do all the work. It's pretty hard to screw up enough for anyone else to know.

The trade winds in the islands are normally from the northeast. When the “Kona winds” come they’re from the southwest. At K-bay the Pali, the mountain range on the eastern side of the island, is only about 3 miles west of runway.

K-bay has always had pretty weird course rules, at least from the mid-70s when I was stationed over at Barber’s Point (now I think it’s named Ewa Beach). At Kaneohe the VFR arrival IIRC required a 270 degree “break” or overhead pattern relative to the runway due to noise abatement. There’s nothing except local course rules that would prohibit landing in either direction.

If you’re in extremis you do what you gotta do and if it requires violating course rules so be it. Use the magic words…” I’m declaring an emergency” and then you can do just about anything you need to do to get on the ground safely. I can explain it later.

Good example…..I was leading a new squadron mate in another F-4 on a familiarization flight out of Atsugi, Japan. On the way home the other aircraft had a Utility hydraulic malfunction that required an arrested landing. So I led them back to Atsugi, they got their landing gear down ok and landed on the south end of the N-S runway with an arrested landing or “trap”.

Usually the crash and rescue crews get an aircraft clear of the arresting gear within a few minutes. I was holding overhead burning about 100 pounds of fuel a minute and watching for the crash crew and no one making any moves to get my wingman out of the gear. We called the tower and asked how long it would be.

The Japanese controller said, “oooh, approximately 30 minutes.”

Uh oh. We don’t have that kind of gas. I told my RIO, ok check the weather over at Yokota. Yokota had gone to zero-zero. Ok, check Chitose….same answer 0-0. What about Kagoshima? Same, 0-0. None of that was forecast for another three hours! Sonofa…

Ok, I’ve got an idea. I had a baby (new) RIO with me and I knew this would confuse the controller so I was gonna have to do the talking.

“Tower, Switch 204”

“Go ahead” (heavy Japanese accent)

“Tower, Switch 204, request”

“Go ahead”

“Tower, Switch 204, I would like to do an arrested landing on the north end of the runway. If I miss the gear, I will go around and try again “.

“Oooh Switch 204, unable, we have F-4 in arresting gear on the south end of runway” (remember heavy Japanes accent)

“Roger that Tower. Again if I miss the wire I will have enough room to take off again.”

“Oooh, unable, we have F-4 in arresting gear runway 01”.

No $hit Sherlock I can see him. 😁

“Tower, Switch 204 I don’t have enough fuel to divert so if the crash crew doesn’t get my wingman clear, I’m either going to crash or I’m going to trap on 19”.

Finally the American controller got on the radio and I explained I would trap on the north end and have plenty of room to go around beforereaching the other aircraft.

“Switch 204, Tower, at pilot’s discretion you are cleared to land, arrested landing runway19.

Roger, Tower, thanks.

I put the hook down and we trapped on the other end of the runway, several thousand feet from and, beak to beak with my wingman. 😁

After the whole thing was over, the un-forcast weather threw us a curve and figured what I should have done was land first and leave the runway for my wingman.

Or the old Barbers Point that the USCG flies out of. Either 10 minutes away. Sounds like gethomeitis and poor judgment have teamed up again.

Takeoffs are optional, landings are mandatory.

Any landing that you can walk (or swim) away from is a good landing. 🤣

There are a lot of unknowns. Landing with a tailwind is never a desirable thing but sometimes you have to do it. Also, the tailwind “limit” is not a hard limit but it is the limit for computing stopping data information. The Navy may have developed that data though. My question is why they did not divert to Hickam AFB that is not very far away.

I landed a C-9 with a 22 knot tailwind after diverting from Lajes AB to Santa Maria island. My choices were to ditch in the ocean, fly an ILS with a 22 knot tailwind or try to circle below minimums (at 250 feet above the water) to the other end of the runway. There were no other airports and mountains were close. I chose to land with a 22 knot tailwind and everything worked out fine.

That's a shame.

The second part, that is.

Passenger on a company charter flight into CVG one evening 30 years ago. Female PIC. Flew directly into a developing Midwest Thunder Storm. Back when they could keep the cockpit door open. Aircraft bouncing all over, all the way to the ground. Watching over her shoulder. She nailed it. Mucho respect.

Their tailwind limit may be based on tire speed …

Loaded question - Wikipedia
A loaded question is a form of complex question that contains a controversial assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt). Such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.

I worked on
the F15 radar warning design
the F16 general aviation computer design
the F15 chaff dispenser design and program management
the B1B antenna selector design and program management
the martin marietta ICBM guidance design.
the Arcjet thruster concept
Attack helicopter night vision design
Designing electronics to meet mil-std-461
Designing electronics to meet mil-std-883
Shaking hands with the Blue Angels

There's no doubt, the plane was properly piloted at all times.

After all, alla the clams' flight grades are available for all to see.

Thanks for being brave enough to assume all of the risk associated with that work.

Take away all the speculative BS and they probably did a hell of a job for whatever circumstances existed at the time.

The 737-800 tire speed in 196 IIRC. Even with a high approach speed in the 160s there should be plenty of margin.

With the P8 being nothing more than a modified 737-800, I would assume it’s certfied to the same FAA Part 25 standard as the civilian version of the 737. If this is the case, the maximum allowable tailwind componet would be 10 knots,per Part 25 certification rules. Therefore, the aircraft manufacturer only provides landing data for up to a max 10 kt tailwind componet(unless the Navy requested more?). Landing with anything greater makes you a test pilot essentially. As a point of reference, a 10kt tailwind component typically increases your landing distance by appx 20%. Now, throw in a wet runway, which will increase landing distance by an additional 30%(or greater), and you can see why there was a runway excursion/overrun.

you can measure that....

It’s a file photo not the crew that went swimming.

Yes, I know that.

It's been a long time and I am a Private Pilot, but if I am reading this right, the winds were from 070 degrees at 14 knots, GUSTING to 21. There were scattered clouds at 1800 feet, a broken overcast (more than 50% coverage) at 2600 and a solid overcast at 3500 feet. Visibility a mile and a half, so you probably could not see one end of the runway from the other. Clearly IFR conditions.

With mountains at one end and water at the other, I wouldn't be surprised if the runway was sloped down. Someone said a 10kt tailwind would add 20% to the landing run and a wet runway adds another 30%. So how much more for the downward slope and a 14-21kt tailwind gust?

So they don't touch down on the numbers, but a little long maybe, and cannot see well enough to judge how little runway they have left...until too late for a go-around decision. It's easy for us to question why they didn't divert to Honolulu or Hickam, where precision approaches, longer runways and maybe different weather may have been available. The crew made a judgment call, as flight crews do constantly.

So, as in most other aviation accidents, there was a collection of factors that all contributed to cause this. The pilots thought they could make it, and they almost did!

Well, at least they didn't have to worry about hot brakes... 🤭

Simple, the PIC f ucked up. Should have realized the problem by merely looking at the distance (in feet) remaining boards, check airspeed, go to MRT and just go the f uck around and divert.

...We know the wx conditions, the length of the runway (7771') Hypothetically, let's assume the a/c weight was 150,000# and the approach speed was 145kts. Touchdown at the 1,000' mark, speed brakes deploy one second after touch down, reversers fully deploy and are effective 3-4 seconds later, followed by max brake/anti-skid. Touchdown speed of 145kts, plus 16kts tailwind component which is 161kts which is 185mph. In the 5 seconds after touchdown the a/c has traveled approximately 1355'. Total r/w length is 7771' minus touchdown 1,000', minus 1355'runout leaves 5416' of usable (?) r/w remaining. Now add the tailwind component of 16kt, and the wet r/w penalty of 30%. Not much margin for error to remain, FEET DRY. PPP=PPP


"

Hickam AFB, which shares runways with Honolulu Intl, and Barbers Point NAS are about 5 minutes to the west. Both have plenty of length, direction, and ability to handle a diversion. Even if the weather was down both have ample approaches and would be a better shot than a downwind approach and landing.

Once I went into KCXO (Conroe Texas) , was going to land on 32. It is 7501 feet. I was in my 182. Several jets coming in, and the tower kept saying "keep your speed up". Well I did. Across the numbers I was at about 130 knots. I had my head waaayyy up my ass. At about 1/2 way down the runway I told the tower 'I've got to go around". It was very humbling. Very humbling. But, I made the pattern, got the speed right, and made the first exit. Lesson learned.
Charlie

Got told to keep the speed up in the cub once. I was doing all it could do, in a slight dive. I asked if they thought I could get out and push.

I see people here land all over the runway as if they have no idea where they will actually touch down. Maybe a long runway induces some amount of complacency. I try to hit my spot every time, regardless of how much runway I have so hopefully when it does matter I don't have an over run.

It was during the '76~'77 time frame MAC lost a C-141 at Thule AFB Greenland. The runway has a pretty big up slope to it, you can get the illusion that you're closer to the end of the runway that you really are. The 141 touched down at the normal point, the pilot must of felt that they landed too long and wouldn't be able to stop in time. He went to full power on the engines, lifted off at the correct speed and crashed into the face of the glacier that was just past the end of the runway. The crew was a few hours past the normal duty day, they blamed the crash on pilot fatigue. The same day another 141 was shooting an approach into RAF Mildenhall when it flew into a thunderstorm. They were hit by a wind shear. The right wing that had a previously cracked wing spar that went undected broke off, the aircraft crashed with 18 SOB. Not a good day for McGuire AFB.
Mildenhall Crash