A few days ago, we saw a United Boeing 767 hit a truck and light pole on the New Jersey Turnpike while on final approach to runway 29 at Newark Airport (EWR). Fortunately no one was seriously injured, so hopefully there’s a lesson to be learned here, to prevent something similar in the future. Along those lines…
In this post:
Newark Airport’s runway 29 is sort of a problem
There’s quite a bit of discussion going on regarding what could cause an accident like this to happen, because suffice it to say, commercial aircraft shouldn’t be clipping cars on the interstate.
While the above footage (from Sunday’s incident) is obviously the wildest, the reality is that there have been quite a few very low approach landing videos from this runway over time.
What’s going on here? Well, runway 29 is used as needed for landings based on the winds. Here’s the issue:
- The runway is only 6,725 feet long, and for wide body aircraft, that’s very close to the minimum runway length they need; this means the room for error is limited, so pilots are going to try to land toward the beginning of the touchdown zone
- It seems utterly moronic to have an elevated interstate right at the edge of such a short runway, for obvious reasons (see all of the above videos!)
- There’s no ILS approach for runway 29, but just a series of RNAV approaches that go as low as 490 feet, at which point it becomes a visual segment
When you add in all of these factors, plus you see the above videos, it’s not difficult to think “oh, that could end very badly.” The United pilots and truck driver got really lucky here, as I see it. If the plane had instead been just feet lower, and had impacted that perimeter wall, I imagine this could’ve ended much worse.
Is there a practical solution to this runway issue?
Newark Airport is already known for constantly being congested, so any additional restrictions on runways will complicate things further. But of course safety is paramount, and can’t be overlooked in the name of operational efficiency.
It’s not that runway 29 needs to be shut down, but maybe investigators should look into whether restrictions should at least be placed on wide bodies landing there. Yes, pilots manage to safely land here day in and day out, but the safety margins just might not be there.
I’ve seen some people suggest that this portion of the interstate should simply be closed, but I don’t view that as a reasonable or practical solution.
Bottom line
On Sunday, a United Boeing 767 clipped a truck and light pole while on approach to Newark Airport’s runway 29. While that absolutely shouldn’t happen, when you look at the circumstances, you can kind of see what might’ve contributed to this.
Runway 29 is rather short (especially for wide body aircraft), and there’s an elevated interstate right at the approach end of it. When you consider that this is a visual approach, this all just seems rather risky. Also, in terms of plane spotting, the New Jersey Turnpike shouldn’t feel like Maho Beach, in my opinion.
Do you think we’ll see any new rules related to Newark’s runway 29? Or do you think this incident will be forgotten in a week?
Nothing needs to be done. The Stadium Visual 29 at EWR has been used for many years without incident, generally when crosswinds on the 22s are high. This was pilot error all the way- they were not monitoring the PAPI nor observing visual clues indicating they were too low.
It seems the runway is absolutely necessary. So put the freeway underground. That should buy a lot of extra distance. Expensive? You bet. Worth it? Depends how badly the airport needs to land big planes on that runway. The easy way to find out is for the FAA to add plane restrictions on that runway
Nothing, probably.
thank you for echoing what I have said
"investigators should look into whether restrictions should at least be placed on wide bodies landing there. Yes, pilots manage to safely land here day in and day out, but the safety margins just might not be there."
EWR is simply not capable of handling the volume and type of traffic that UA pushes through its highest revenue hub.
Narrowbodies and RJs can very likely land...
thank you for echoing what I have said
"investigators should look into whether restrictions should at least be placed on wide bodies landing there. Yes, pilots manage to safely land here day in and day out, but the safety margins just might not be there."
EWR is simply not capable of handling the volume and type of traffic that UA pushes through its highest revenue hub.
Narrowbodies and RJs can very likely land safety there; widebodies not so much.
Having 30 plus widebody arrivals/hour at certain times of day is just too much and forces the use of 29.
"thank you for echoing what I have said"
You never said squat. You're just taking Ben's insights and claiming credit for them, something gaslighters always do.
as usual, it is you that blab first at the expense of gathering facts.
In Ben's article about the incident that starts with the title "Yikes..."
I said
"Easy fix. Just cut EWR capacity further.
No widebody landings on 29
the airport was never designed for the operation that UA is trying to push through it"
and then said it several times in other comments.
I know the UA fan club and Scott Kirby...
as usual, it is you that blab first at the expense of gathering facts.
In Ben's article about the incident that starts with the title "Yikes..."
I said
"Easy fix. Just cut EWR capacity further.
No widebody landings on 29
the airport was never designed for the operation that UA is trying to push through it"
and then said it several times in other comments.
I know the UA fan club and Scott Kirby have cardiologists on standby but there is the real possibility that the FAA will recommend what I and be have said should be done for safety - restrict 29 arrivals to non-widebodies.
Yes, there are instrument landing systems on that runway that should have indicated that the flight was too low but the margin for error is not enough on a runway where there is an urge to get the plane on the runway at the first opportunity because the runway length is so short.
I consistently recognize solutions and reality which you and others don't want to admit. We get it.
in this case, it is just not personal.
It is simply reality that EWR was never capable of handling the amount of traffic that CO pushed through it.
UA has increased what CO did by adding more widebodies
All of those that tout how great UA's share in NYC is and how having a single hub at EWR is such a masterstroke might find out that they are simply wrong if the FAA makes the prudent decision to restrict the type of aircraft that can land on 29.
Thank you Mr Mitty …. You ‘dun’ it again Walter …. added your click to Ben’s tally …. :-)
Maybe it was a girl co-pilot who was a little impatient for her tickle .
Sheesh, you're a real gem
Talk about a misogynist. From your constant "girl food" comments to this, you really do let your incel flag fly. You should be banned from OMAAT; you add nothing but depression and desperation.
Newark is a mess of an airport. Caps on arrivals and departures may have helped improve its on-time performance a bit, but the airport is prone to weather delays and has an unforgiving layout that when at full schedule, results in delays because so many aircraft need to be ferried around the field to get to their gates. The airport was a backwater until the arrival of PeoplExpress, and since PE was folded into Texas...
Newark is a mess of an airport. Caps on arrivals and departures may have helped improve its on-time performance a bit, but the airport is prone to weather delays and has an unforgiving layout that when at full schedule, results in delays because so many aircraft need to be ferried around the field to get to their gates. The airport was a backwater until the arrival of PeoplExpress, and since PE was folded into Texas Air/Continental in 1986, it grew to become a major hub, with an enviable network but there's little to nothing that can be done to ameliorate what has to be one of America's worst airports. Development and highways surround it. The airspace is shared with the area's other big airports.
The Walter Mitty’s will be out in force very soon Ben, a high click count can be guaranteed …. :-)