9 Sept: crash avoided at BRU ? ? ?

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 12 Sep 2004, 17:13

BUTV = those guys who have bought a cheap house near BRU, and now want the airport to be closed between 21h00 and 09h00. They now say that a crash was only just avoided last Thursday at 23h05, when an Airbus on appro (or on final ?) onto 02/20 had to interrupt his landing.

Are there any details ? Please don't give them if BUTV can use your information!

This is their story, as published in Het Nieuwsblad online:
Op de luchthaven van Zaventem is afgelopen donderdag nipt een ongeval vermeden, zo meldt het actiecomité Belgische Unie tegen Vliegtuighinder (BUTV) vandaag. Het comité klaagt meteen de vermeende onveiligheid aan die de toepassing van het plan Anciaux met zich meebrengt. Volgens het communiqué "is op donderdag 9 september omstreeks 23.05 uur een Airbus bijna gecrasht bij het naderen van landingsbaan 02. De landingsprocedure van het toestel was mislukt en de Airbus kon slechts nipt een crash vermijden". Jacques Vandenhaute, voorzitter van de BUTV, klaagt het gebruik van piste 02/20, in het kader van het spreidingsplan, aan. Hij verwijst naar de studie van professor Kanpuis die bevestigt dat de piste 02/20 een herstellingspiste moet blijven, die enkel gebruikt mag worden bij noordenwind. Hij herinnert eraan dat de bewuste studie werd uitgevoerd in opdracht van BIAC, de uitbater van de luchthaven, en zegt verbaasd te zijn over de reacties van minister van Mobiliteit Renaat Landuyt en Belgocontrol, "die de feiten bestrijden". Volgens de voorzitter van het actiecomité "wordt er om louter politieke en communautaire redenen gespeeld met de veiligheid van de buurtbewoners en van de passagiers door gebruik te maken van kortere en gevaarlijkere pistes".

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 12 Sep 2004, 17:31

small justification:

source of the story is "Het Laatste Nieuws", not "Het Nieuwsblad".

blackhawk · Post by **blackhawk** » 12 Sep 2004, 17:43

We all know the reputation of "Het Laatste Nieuws" and their sensational stories, just like VTM. So chance that "near crash" into a go-around.
Give the people living near the airport what they want, blame BRU for everything that goes wrong, and you'll have a lot of new readers and that is what "Het Laagste Nieuws" wants.

B737229 · Post by **B737229** » 12 Sep 2004, 17:50

just reading the contents of the article gives and idea about their reporting standard!

any way you can always use HLN to clean your windows at home! works well !

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 12 Sep 2004, 18:14

LX-LGX wrote:small justification: source of the story is "Het Laatste Nieuws", not "Het Nieuwsblad".

I read that too. The source is "Volgens het communiqué" of BUTV, and that's not a TV station. (Belgische Unie tegen Vliegtuighinder (BUTV) = Belgian Union against Aircraftnuisance).
A self declared union of cheap house owners (the word landlords would be a misfit) under the airport area as LX-LGX calls them.
These people are against something they went to live nearby. Imagine you live near the North Sea, and you don't like the gusts nor the breezes. What do you do?

Post by **Apuneger** » 12 Sep 2004, 18:36

All I can do is laugh with that sort of aviation news.If we use their standars for 'almost crashed', I wonder how many aircraft 'almost crashed' that day worldwide...

Belgian Union Against Aircraft Nuisance...Bwah

Ivan

Robin_Bamps · Post by **Robin_Bamps** » 12 Sep 2004, 19:21

So chance that "near crash" into a go-around.

Indeed, it will have been a go-around probably. On Monday 6th September I saw an FQ A320 making a go-around, also at RWY 02.

Regards, Robin Bamps.

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 13 Sep 2004, 01:29

Wow, so also a near crash! If I would be those people I would already have moved because a near crash in their opinion happens daily then!! What will those people be when they become old people, almost have a hearthattack every time a plane flys over?

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:17

Funny story.

Just because they see an airplane doing a go-around doesn't mean it nearly crashed. Sometimes I'm really asking myself, how stupid those guys can be.

In addition to that on sep 09 if I remember well (I was at the airport as well) the runway use wasn't due to the dispersion plan but because of the North-easterly winds.

Chris

JM · Post by JM » 13 Sep 2004, 17:52

Remember when minister of defence landed a few weeks ago in BAF EMB145 ? According to 'het laatste nieuws' the plane almost crashed, but it just made a go around... Quote :' The plane was about to land when suddenly another plane crossed the runway' Come on, do we really have to buy that ? That newspaper is totally useless ! It's only target is to bring entertainment, or tell the news in a chocking way. The biggest, and best selling newspaper in Flanders, I got one for it : ' niveau ! '. The only good thing I ever read in it was about Fly-air: that many pax were filing complaints ! (Finally !)

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 13 Sep 2004, 23:13

And you know what the worst part is off all off this? Well that the people believe everything what is said in the newspaper. They don't think anymore, they just absorb and reproduce what they read. This is getting more and more like in the United States where people believe everythin they see on CNN or in the newspapers.

Pittsboy · Post by **Pittsboy** » 14 Sep 2004, 03:43

to Robin: The FQ320 go around on 6/09 runway 02 was me (didn't you see me waiving?). Thanks but no thanks to the F100 blocking the runway: expedite means hurry up.

For the record: it was nowhere near a crash..

Robin_Bamps · Post by **Robin_Bamps** » 14 Sep 2004, 05:28

Hi Pittsboy,

to Robin: The FQ320 go around on 6/09 runway 02 was me (didn't you see me waiving?).

At the moment that I saw the go-around, I was at the playground of my school (1km away from the runway), so it was impossible to see you waving from that distance.

Regards, Robin Bamps.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 14 Sep 2004, 10:31

I've been spotting for some years now and only saw one go-around (SLR B767) so far.

Pittsboy,

as a pilot, do you know if it happens often in BRU. Or at least how many times do you need to do go-arounds per months or per year ?

Greetz
Chris

SAB021 · Post by **SAB021** » 14 Sep 2004, 11:49

On sunday almost two weeks ago (september 5) I saw another go-arround. It was a Lufthansa 737, and I heard the pilot say on my scanner he was to high on approach (rwy25L), so he had to try it again. But it was absolutely not a "near-crash"

Greetz,

Pittsboy · Post by **Pittsboy** » 14 Sep 2004, 12:39

Avro: go arounds are rather uncommon. And as far as I know they don't happen more often in BRU than elsewhere. I know people that are flying for 3-4 years now without a single go around, imagine... 8O

People shouldn't fear go-arounds. It is a perfectly normal and safe maneuver.

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 14 Sep 2004, 13:09

Thanks for your answer Pittsboy.

Pittsboy wrote: People shouldn't fear go-arounds. It is a perfectly normal and safe maneuver.

Don't worry I don't fear them

Chris
8)

5Y-KQV · Post by **5Y-KQV** » 15 Sep 2004, 15:42

Hi all,

Just for laughs, I know a couple of african languages that do not have a word for "Landing" in their woordenshcat (vocabulary). Instead they use the words "Crash or Fall Down". Since the pilot did a go-around, then may accurately say that "it almost crashed or fell down" since he did not "crash or fall down" (land)

I remember Het Laatste Neiuws from my student days in Leuven and I remember lots of complaints from my Belgian colleagues that they were never serious abt whatever they printed. Hell, they should be banned from reporting on aviation strories.

Cheers,

Walter.

Aviation24.be

9 Sept: crash avoided at BRU ? ? ?

9 Sept: crash avoided at BRU ? ? ?

pfff !