• This site moved from forums.flightinfo.com to flightinfo.com. Please update your bookmarks.

Another Near Stall Incident Involving a CRJ at FL400

User546

The Ultimate Show Stopper
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Posts
1,959
Total Time
+1500

NTSB Identification: DCA05WA073
Scheduled 14 CFR Part 129: Foreign operation of Air Canada Jazz
Incident occurred Friday, June 10, 2005 in Canada/US border
Aircraft: , registration: Injuries: Unavailable

An Air Canada Jazz Bombardier CL-600-2D15, tail number C-FBJZ, was operating as flight JZA8501 from Houston, Texas to Calgary, Alberta Canada, experienced a stick shaker event while at flight level 400 and in the vicinity of the US/Canada border.

The airplane experienced a loss of airspeed and the flight crew pitched the nose down to maintain airspeed. The stick shaker and an aural stall warning sounded. The descent was arrested at flight level 380.

One passenger struck their head on the overhead bins during the descent maneuver. The Transportation Safety Board Canada is investigating and the Safety Board has provided a US accredited representative.​
 
Last edited:

TonyC

Frederick's Happy Face
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
3,050
Total Time
>8,000
Apparently these folks aren't reading FlightInfo.com!!!!! We're going to have to insist that all pilots read FlightInfo, and perhaps take a comprehension test, prior to flying each day.



:)




On a serious note... I alluded to this in a post a few days ago... I don't think the lessons fo PCL 3701 are being widely shared, if they're even being acknowledged, by even the training department at the airline where it happened. It's little surprise, then, that it's not shared among other operators of the same aircraft or similar aircraft.

When my wife complains about me "playing" on FlightInfo (OK, she's right most of the time :)) I point out this and other topics of discussion where I believe we gain invaluable benefit from sharing information. We're all potentially much better off for having been here.



I'm glad these guys didn't fight the stick shaker, didn't flame out the engines, and DID live to write the safety reports.

:)

.


.
 

601Pilot

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
338
Total Time
250+
TonyC said:
Apparently these folks aren't reading FlightInfo.com!!!!! We're going to have to insist that all pilots read FlightInfo, and perhaps take a comprehension test, prior to flying each day.



:)




On a serious note... I alluded to this in a post a few days ago... I don't think the lessons fo PCL 3701 are being widely shared, if they're even being acknowledged, by even the training department at the airline where it happened. It's little surprise, then, that it's not shared among other operators of the same aircraft or similar aircraft.

When my wife complains about me "playing" on FlightInfo (OK, she's right most of the time :)) I point out this and other topics of discussion where I believe we gain invaluable benefit from sharing information. We're all potentially much better off for having been here.



I'm glad these guys didn't fight the stick shaker, didn't flame out the engines, and DID live to write the safety reports.

:)

.


.

I know we have talked about this here at ASA; so hopefully every operator is
passing the info along to their pilots.
 

User546

The Ultimate Show Stopper
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Posts
1,959
Total Time
+1500
I second and third everything TonyC said!
 
4

410dude

Dudes and especially dudettes need to be careful operating the CRJ at 410. It takes a skilled hand to keep it up there and I've done it before so I know what I speak.
 

GravityHater

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Posts
1,168
Total Time
3000
What are the techniques? Besides the usual 'follow the OM', 'don't exceed the certification limits', 'fly the minimum speed for that PA/gross wt'?

Hand-fly is better?

Don't yank it around in general?

Keep the bank under 20deg?

First sign of trouble, put everyone to the roof? ;)

I have been trying to find the ntsb report on the original, fatal one (the abbreviated one, not the 15-pager) without luck. Help?
 

JohnnyCash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Posts
113
Total Time
n/a
"dudettes"??

ring the gong--this one is done!

how smurfy
oh smurfette
those dam(n) monkeys and smurfs and dudettes. (mr. heston please take your seat)

john
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
Tony,

You have mentioned before that the lessons from 3701 haven't been applied......

But the official report isn't out yet..... There was a hearing and facts were released.....

:)
 

TonyC

Frederick's Happy Face
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
3,050
Total Time
>8,000
Rez O. Lewshun said:
Tony,

You have mentioned before that the lessons from 3701 haven't been applied......

But the official report isn't out yet..... There was a hearing and facts were released.....

:)
I understand your point, and agree.


However...


Some things can clearly be gleaned from just what we know already: the little that was released, and the proceedings that were public. Clearly, some action has already been taken - - altitude restrictions, company procedures on repositioning flights (flight data recorders), etc. There may be some recommendations that the NTSB makes that aren't yet obvious, but there are SOME lessons that seem obvious already. I guess I'm a little impatient, but I would have thought that the training department might apply what has been learned already to better prepare the pilots that are on the line today. It would be tragic if this same type of thing were to happen prior to the release of the NTSB's final report.


I suppose making some changes, though, would be tantamount to admitting a portion of the fault. I'll leave it at that.





.
 

Flechas

........
Joined
Aug 2, 2003
Posts
1,964
Total Time
$$$$$$
TonyC said:
I suppose making some changes, though, would be tantamount to admitting a portion of the fault. I'll leave it at that.
Being at fault or not, some changes need to be made, and that shouldn't be the reason for not making changes so far. It would suck to lose more pilots because of this.
 

FN FAL

Freight Dawgs Rule
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Posts
8,580
Total Time
7,000+
Flechas said:
Being at fault or not, some changes need to be made, and that shouldn't be the reason for not making changes so far. It would suck to lose more pilots because of this.
It's too bad they had to make new rules.

I saw something relevent today at the "fleet farm". I was looking at buying a Fram oil filter for my wife's car and some old dude had his cart parked in front of the book hanging off the shelf that listed all the Fram oil filters, so I had to wait until this soap opera unfolded.

He was lost and some Fleet Farm employee comes over and asks..."Can I help you?"

He says, "Yea, I'm looking for an oil filter for a 2000 Ford."

She opens that book and gets to the 2000 Ford section and asks, "Is it a pickup truck, mini-van or a sedan?"

He acts surprised, as if Ford made more than one vehicle and they go back and forth...eventually the chick gets this guy a model number on the Fram oil filter.

The chick asks me if I need any help and I say, "No, I just need to look my filter up in the book."

Finally, the old man has his cart out of the way and I can use the book to look up what I need, I find it and grab it. Within minutes, the wife and I are in our car...paid for the filter, paid for the oil and we on our way.

So, the wife and I are going down the road and I say, "Honey, when the chick from Fleet Farm saw the old dude stranded in the Fram filter isle...how come she didn't ask, 'Who won the 1958 world series or who was the 24th president of the United States?'"

My wife looked at me like, "What the hell are you getting at now?"

I said, "Don't you remember the John Carpenter movie, "They Live"?

She goes, "Yea?"

And I said, "When the hell does an American male who has been on this planet for over 65 years, need somebody to hand feed him the way to a Fram oil filter in a Fleet Farm?"

They are here...
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
TonyC said:
I understand your point, and agree.


However...


Some things can clearly be gleaned from just what we know already: the little that was released, and the proceedings that were public. Clearly, some action has already been taken - - altitude restrictions, company procedures on repositioning flights (flight data recorders), etc. There may be some recommendations that the NTSB makes that aren't yet obvious, but there are SOME lessons that seem obvious already. I guess I'm a little impatient, but I would have thought that the training department might apply what has been learned already to better prepare the pilots that are on the line today. It would be tragic if this same type of thing were to happen prior to the release of the NTSB's final report.


I suppose making some changes, though, would be tantamount to admitting a portion of the fault. I'll leave it at that.
.
Tony C.,

Well changes are being made, but not the NPRM or congressional way one might like to see. The new FARS that make regional training much better may or may not arrive and certianly not as much as we'd like to see....

First, let's not look for "A one shot kill" hollywood style clean up..... Of all people Tony C you are not looking for this.... but some are....

There are two changes that are being made right now.... Personal reflection/self analysis and CYA.

Individual pilots are looking in the mirror and starting to realize what can happen if you don't police yourselves. And they are becoming better pilots....

As far as CYA..... I let the reader continue on from here.....
 

trip

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Posts
878
Total Time
11000
I thought most operators were restricted to 370 the following week after the PCL crash? I guess the Canucks still have faith!
 

TonyC

Frederick's Happy Face
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
3,050
Total Time
>8,000
Rez O. Lewshun said:
First, let's not look for "A one shot kill" hollywood style clean up..... Of all people Tony C you are not looking for this....
Not at all. I would have hoped, though, that the story of PCL 3701 might at least be shared among Pinnacle pilots. As I explained in another thread, I spoke to a PCL pilot just last week, and upon asking him what he knew about the flight, had him tell me he knew nothing about it because "they don't tell us about those things." I think we take for granted the information we get from FlightInfo.com. Apparently, the personal reflection is not as widespread as you might think. THAT's the lack that I speak of.








Gotta go fly - - y'all have fun. :)




.
 

Flechas

........
Joined
Aug 2, 2003
Posts
1,964
Total Time
$$$$$$
TonyC said:
Not at all. I would have hoped, though, that the story of PCL 3701 might at least be shared among Pinnacle pilots. As I explained in another thread, I spoke to a PCL pilot just last week, and upon asking him what he knew about the flight, had him tell me he knew nothing about it because "they don't tell us about those things." I think we take for granted the information we get from FlightInfo.com. Apparently, the personal reflection is not as widespread as you might think. THAT's the lack that I speak of.

Gotta go fly - - y'all have fun. :)
Agree with Tony, something happened at coex a few months ago and I only read about it here, and didn't even get the full story. It was safety related, you would think they want you to know this kind of stuff so it doesn't happen again.
 

Rez O. Lewshun

Save the Profession
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
13,422
Total Time
X>X
TonyC said:
Not at all. I would have hoped, though, that the story of PCL 3701 might at least be shared among Pinnacle pilots. As I explained in another thread, I spoke to a PCL pilot just last week, and upon asking him what he knew about the flight, had him tell me he knew nothing about it because "they don't tell us about those things." I think we take for granted the information we get from FlightInfo.com. Apparently, the personal reflection is not as widespread as you might think. THAT's the lack that I speak of.








Gotta go fly - - y'all have fun. :)




.
Tony,

What do you say we split the difference......

In addition, offer your solutions or suggestions as to how you think something should be done...

Again, how do you want the story of 3701 to shared umongsts the pilots? A formalized briefing from the training dept.? The report isn't final and no gov't directives have been issues. Thus, the lawyers are in CYA mode...

The person you talked to was new to MEM? Getting his drivers license I think. Well perhaps he was brand new to the company..... ( can you clairfy your encounter).

IF you are this educated on the issue then why wouldn't we be? Just becuase you ran into ONE pilot, who may have been a new hire?

The pilots I fly with are just as informed as you about 3701. We're current in the jet and we are applying what we know.........
 
Last edited:

surplus1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Posts
5,649
Total Time
25K+
Flechas said:
It was safety related, you would think they want you to know this kind of stuff so it doesn't happen again.
That's a logical and a nice thought but it's not "real world". Unfortunately, it requires a level of maturity in management that does not exist at most regional airlines and only exists at a very few major airlines.

Remember, only a few years ago major airline management used to rush the painters to the scene to cover up the company logo.

Everybody talks "safety first", but most companies run the CYA program long before they think about passing out safety tips.

If you watched the public hearing for PCL3701 you must have noticed that a large part of the testimony from the manufacturer and the airline was delivered in full CYA mode. They focused on how to protect their own interests and ensure that they were not included in the "probable cause".
 

Flechas

........
Joined
Aug 2, 2003
Posts
1,964
Total Time
$$$$$$
surplus1 said:
That's a logical and a nice thought but it's not "real world". Unfortunately, it requires a level of maturity in management that does not exist at most regional airlines and only exists at a very few major airlines.

Remember, only a few years ago major airline management used to rush the painters to the scene to cover up the company logo.

Everybody talks "safety first", but most companies run the CYA program long before they think about passing out safety tips.

If you watched the public hearing for PCL3701 you must have noticed that a large part of the testimony from the manufacturer and the airline was delivered in full CYA mode. They focused on how to protect their own interests and ensure that they were not included in the "probable cause".
You are right, and it shouldn't be that way, but I guess it's a product of the American way (Lawsuits). It's a catch 22 and like you said, the bottom line is always first.
 

EagleRJ

Are we there yet?
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
1,490
Total Time
5800
trip said:
I thought most operators were restricted to 370 the following week after the PCL crash? I guess the Canucks still have faith!
The aircraft in question was not a 200 series, but the more powerful 700 series. To my knowledge, no operators have restricted the -700 to lower than its 41,000' ceiling, but the same aerodynamic limitations still apply to it.

This incident has already been discussed at length here.
 

JohnE

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Posts
63
Total Time
350
Whats the big deal? Just lower the nose and recover. Sounds like the pilot (HPIC) threw the control wheel forward in a panic and some pax got jostled around a bit. He should learn some finesse.

Would be curious though what sort of pitch attitude they would be using up that high.
 
Top