CRJ900 accident in Toronto, Canada

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Darn it - no link to the actual report and I hate newspaper and ambulance chaser interpretations of any report. I will see if I can find it tomorrow - too tired now.
 
The Canadian Transportation Security Board published this page:


But their web design is practically falling apart. Going off what I could see from the assets that loaded, the rate of descent was too fast and the right gear collapsed.

A Admiral Beez and cammerjeff (and myself) were right about the rate of descent being too fast. But certainly there were other conditions which caused the collapse of the landing gear. Ice and snowy conditions are known to specifically make landing more problematic because they can lead to faster descent rates.
 
Thanks for the link. An excellent prelim report. Why they were landing at 150% of max decent rate with one wing low is yet to come. I am thinking that if they had landed on both mains simultaneously it is possible there would not have been any survivors.
 
Last edited:
Good video thank you for sharing! The comments are brutalizing the pilot and co-pilot, but I wonder what came out of their debriefings because as said in the video, their instrumentation may or may not have given accurate readings.

The only real critique to me was the crew's missing the sink-rate issue, because Lemoine praised their performance otherwise. And I think missing +500' sink rate on an approach is fair to critique.
 
Good video thank you for sharing! The comments are brutalizing the pilot and co-pilot, but I wonder what came out of their debriefings because as said in the video, their instrumentation may or may not have given accurate readings.

Instrumentation should not be an issue as the critical instruments are duplicated and totally independent as in what the Capt sees and the FO sees come from two different sources. That way if one source fails the crew should quickly pick that variation in readings up and then follow the appropriate checklist. In an aircraft this modern the BITE system should throw an alert if the instruments are out by more than a minor amount.
 
That makes a lot of sense as to why so many people are saying that inexperience may have caused the crash. Most of them are pointing out that the captain had 3,500 hours of flight time and 700 hours in type and the copilot had only 70 in type. Complex flying conditions + inexperience + bad day = crash.

But the timing is strange. Right around when FAA inspectors are being fired and air traffic controllers are being threatened with being fired. I've got to think that someone skipped something on the ground.
 
Darn it - no link to the actual report and I hate newspaper and ambulance chaser interpretations of any report. I will see if I can find it tomorrow - too tired now.
Here's the report and a good professional summary.



View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mvOrn8yJc-w&pp=0gcJCWIABgo59PVc
 
In other news, Air China is returning to Canada after 33 years.


Flights from Canada to the US were down 70% in March 2025 vs. March 2024, and bookings from Canada to the US from April to August 2025 are down over 70%. So, I guess we'll be going elsewhere.

 
I've read that private equity/capital equity have become involved in improving the profitability of the repair of aircraft. I think this alone could lead to a growing rate of crashes and accidents. capital equity typically erodes an industry by requiring year-over-year increases in return on investment. When there isn't growth, they start selling off assets that have value and cutting corners on everything. In today's lax regulatory environment, this can only lead to crashes.

 
I saw the start of it in the mid 1990's to 2005. My employer started contracting out the Heavy C & D checks of out older aircraft types. At the time that would have been the 727 and DC-10 fleets. The results were predictable, decreased availability, and some questionable results. I remember having to take the DC-10's out of service to check the passenger O2 mask installations. This was after we had a DC-10 that was on a ferry flight from a contract maintenance facility loose pressurization on the way to Detroit. When the O2 masks deployed from the overhead bins the length of the O2 hoses were mixed up. The overhead PSU panels were not reinstalled in the same positions. The center seats should have long O2 hosed as the distance from the PSU panel to the seat in 6 to 8 feet. The outside seat positions should have shorter 4 feet hoses. If there would have been passengers on board would have had to stand to put on there O2 masks, or could not have put them on at all.
We found that the other DC-10's they had worked on had the same issue, plus we found about 20% of the oxygen generators still had the safety pins installed! So even if those passengers could have but on the masks, no O2 would have been available to them. But all the paperwork was signed off by both a A&P Mechanic, and an IA ( Maintenance Inspector )
The end result was a discount on future D check inspections, and supposedly more oversight. We had some other issues but that was the one that still stick in my mind.

I remember that most of the Airline Employed Mechanic's took great pride and thought of the planes as "theirs' they also could fly non revenue on those same planes, and got to know the flight crews that flew them. After the Strike at my Former Employer I worked as a contract Mechanic for a few months for a low cost airline. About 50% of the A&P Mechanic's working for that airline were contractors. Most of them traveled from city to city on month to month contracts. They had very little pride in there work and as they would have to buy a ticket to fly on any airlines planes they really didn't seem to care about the quality of work. They seemed more concerned about trying drag the nighty work out so they could get a hour or 2 of overtime. That experience was a big factor in me getting out of the aircraft maintenance business. And I never considered flying that low cost airline after experience.

I would hope that a modern version would be better, but people being people, and having an investment company running the maintenance operation scare the S%*t out of me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread