CRJ900 accident in Toronto, Canada (1 Viewer)

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 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.
 
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.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back