Ground the Q400

[LowlyPropCapt]

double post sorry

 

[Balou]

http://aircrafticing.grc.nasa.gov/courses.html

Heres a link to a free course on icing if anyone is interested.

 

[belchfire]

If what people are saying is true, then this airplane is unsafe and needs to be grounded immediately.

What people?

You? Ahhhyeah...Purdue has the highest number of astronauts of any college. You're an expert. You got a well rounded liberal education. Trained as a reactionary alarmist with excellent kneejerk reaction time! Too bad you have to wait another nearly four years to vote for a different kind of "change"!

The talking heads on CNN? Yeah, they're experts just like you ...

An NTSB guy that's talking out of turn? Sheesh, he of all people should know better. I hope he ends up having to eat some of Obama's government cheese while he looks for a new job...


I haven't even heard if all the de/anti icing equipment was fully functional or if the crew was using it properly!

Why don't you just pissoff and wait for the NTSB to finish their investigation?

BTW, wasn't it Colgan (along with Mesa) that dumped a 1900 because of a mis-rigged pitch trim system? Not saying that was the case, I'm saying there are a lot of other things that could be in play here...

Q-400 has been running around for quite some time and I'm not aware of another thing like this happening. Couple of main gear issues-particularly in Europe, but nothing like this. The best icing conditions in the world are found in Western Washington where Horizon flies the heck out of these things!

But no, the experts (like you) here on flyfo know better...

uke:

I'm sorry if any of the friends or families of the passengers or crew end up reading this. All y'all have my condolences and I apologize for Flypurdue's breach of common sense.

 

[RJP]

Let's take a look at Q400 operators that just probably fly in crap/icy weather before we jump on this stupid grounding bandwagon.

Q400 Operators:
Air Baltic
Windroe (Norway)
Austrian
ANA
Croatia
Fly Baboo (Swiss)
FlyBe (UK)
Hydro Quebec
Porter (Canada)

There's more and some are fun and sun only locations but these guys fly in some rubbish weather and continue to do so safely like Lynx and Horizon.

This was an ACCIDENT. Not a reason to ground an airframe.

 

[RJP]

www.q400.com

 

[RJPilott]

Let's take a look at Q400 operators that just probably fly in crap/icy weather before we jump on this stupid grounding bandwagon.

There's more and some are fun and sun only locations but these guys fly in some rubbish weather and continue to do so safely like Lynx and Horizon.

This was an ACCIDENT. Not a reason to ground an airframe.

So then why is the NTSB jumping on the Icing bandwagon for the cause of accident?

I agree with you that a Dash 8 should not fall out of the sky when other numerous aircraft on the approach during the same time experience 1/4" Rime. Why does it appear the NTSB is conditioning the public for an Icing/configuration accident?

Please see the transcript and ATC audio on this forum.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=120940

It doesnt make sense a Dash 8 would fall out of the sky when considering the NTSB "icing" overtones vs actual ATC transcripts and PIREP's.

 

[belchfire]

I have no time in any of the Dash 8 variants but a lot of turboprop time in the midwest in icing conditions. The de/anti ice systems were adequate for anything outside severe icing conditions. DHC/Bombardiare have good experience and good history with their system design.

 

[grinder]

Icing probably was a factor, but not the root cause. Unfortunately, another lesson learned the hard way.

 

[172driver]

I'm guessing failure of tail de-ice or bridging, which officially doesn't exist.

 

[flyinloki]

From what I know I believe those systems are all automatic once they are turned to the on position and modern systems do not cause bridging from anything that I have ever been told. The first thing that I thought of after the NTSB briefing today was that it had to be a tailplane stall. Since all of the troubles began after the flaps were deployed to 15 degrees. That was when the plane began to roll and pitch according to the FDR. Tailplane stalls usually occur after the extension of flaps. I had my fair share of experience flying a Chieftain around the Minneapolis area and worrying if my boots on the horiz. leading edge was doing its job and wondering whether I should or should not deploy those flaps. I know of at least two other freight dogs who have told me that they have gotten into tailplane stalls before and that proper training has gotten them out of it. So it is recoverable. However with the tail being so far away from the wing on the Q it didn't seem like this would be the situation. One of my good friends actually works at Colgan and has relayed the fact that Asymmetrical flap extension has been listed as a probable cause of the accident. Now I don't know why if it was this that the crew couldn't recover properly but then I wasn't there. This is just what I have heard. And it is the only other logical explanation that can be brought up other than the tailplane stall. With that I do hate speculation on these things. Luckily for this accident there were black boxes and the cause will most likely be discovered. With the accident that happened at my company 2 years ago....speculation is the only thing that we have.

 

[RJP]

So then why is the NTSB jumping on the Icing bandwagon for the cause of accident?

I agree with you that a Dash 8 should not fall out of the sky when other numerous aircraft on the approach during the same time experience 1/4" Rime. Why does it appear the NTSB is conditioning the public for an Icing/configuration accident?

Please see the transcript and ATC audio on this forum.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=120940

It doesnt make sense a Dash 8 would fall out of the sky when considering the NTSB "icing" overtones vs actual ATC transcripts and PIREP's.

Your guess is as good as mine. It seems a bit odd that within hours of the accident, NTSB would come out stating that "ice was a factor". How exactly did they come to that conclusion so quickly? They don't have that kind of info in the black box (how much ice accumulation on the aircraft) so what exactly led them to that statement?

This isn't like Canada geese being sucked into the engines. They're clearly speculating on the fact that there WAS ice in the area and a plane crashed.

Just my $.02. The final report will answer all the questions.

 

[BoilerUP]

You? Ahhhyeah...Purdue has the highest number of astronauts of any college.

We may not all be astronauts Belch...but some of us are rocket scientists...:laugh:

 

[LowlyPropCapt]

So then why is the NTSB jumping on the Icing bandwagon for the cause of accident?

I agree with you that a Dash 8 should not fall out of the sky when other numerous aircraft on the approach during the same time experience 1/4" Rime. Why does it appear the NTSB is conditioning the public for an Icing/configuration accident?

Please see the transcript and ATC audio on this forum.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=120940

It doesnt make sense a Dash 8 would fall out of the sky when considering the NTSB "icing" overtones vs actual ATC transcripts and PIREP's.

I think you may be assuming more than you know...

First of all, just because other aircraft were reporting only a 1/4" of rime doesn't mean that the Colgan crew didn't pick up more... Or alot more. The worst icing I have seen has been very local in nature; a change in altitude +/- 1000 feet has normally been sufficient to get me out of it. We simply do not have enough information to know what kind of contamination was on this airplane.

Secondly just because the Dash 8 has an outstanding record regarding flight in icing, it doesn't mean that the airplane is immune from upsets caused by icing. Any aircraft can have problems in ice... Every time you have any contamination whatsoever you are essentially flying an untested airfoil. Every icing encounter is different and it is possible that for this hapless crew the conditions lined up in exactly the worst possible way. It could be that the NTSB is favoring icing because the data on the FDR is indicative of a tail stall. The "what" here may be easily identified, but I suspect that the "why" may be much more difficult to assertain. Personally I am hoping for a mechanical explaination of some sort. That is far easier to fix than ice... A purely icing induced event has a "Fate is the Hunter" element that is deeply disturbing.

Finally we do not know when, how or even if the crew utilized the ice protection systems of the airplane. NOTE: I AM NOT MAKING A JUDGEMENT ON CREW PERFORMANCE OR IN ANY WAY SUGGESTING THAT THE CREW MADE A MISTAKE KNOWINGLY OR UNKNOWLINGLY. But experienced and competent crews can and do make mistakes, or make decisions for the best of reasons that don't work out as they intended for a plethora of reasons. None of us are immune. We simply don't know what happend on that flight deck yet.

To conclude, we don't have enough information to make any worthwhile airworthiness judgements regarding the Q400. The Dash 8 series outstanding record suggests at the very least that this is a very rare event... A one in a several million flight hours sort of event. We are going to have to be patient, but I agree with other posters that a review of icing procedures, especially as they relate to tailplane stalls, is in order.

 

[CopilotDoug]

If what people are saying is true, then this airplane is unsafe and needs to be grounded immediately.

WORST...POST...EVER!!!

 

[belchfire]

We may not all be astronauts Belch...but some of us are rocket scientists...:laugh:

Bottle Rockets???

hehehehehehe...there are some things I miss.

Piper's Pride Gaelic Ale from LBC is one. Though had we not all moved on there are things we would never have found...

like Karmelite (sp?-wtf, I know it when I find it) Triple!