Colgan 3407 Down in Buffalo

[Brody1]

Surplus1- excellent post. And yes, it does give a likely answer to my question. The one thing from the video (I've seen it in several training classes) that gives me cause for concern is the comment regarding how much we don't know about icing. Scary.

 

[JAKEFAC]

Re. the Surplus1 post, most likeky an accurate description of what happened. In advance, please excuse me if i sound too simplistic. We all know that the AP can "mask" what is really going on with the airplane - what trim it is imputting to maintain a desired attitude. And didn't the video mention a difference between an impending wing stall vs a tail stall as the former being evidenced by airframe buffet and the latter by control buffet and thet the dfference is hard to tell unless one is hand-flying the airplane - or words to that effect? Lessons learned -1., in dicy conditions, maybe we should do more hand flying to get a better tactile feel what what the controls are trying to tell us and 2., know what the "normal" trim settings are for your airplane, especially the elevator, for various flight configurations. I can remember the "Final Checklist" for an airplane I flew years ago included "configuration....check" which to us meant not only gear and flaps but also the stab trim setting. My agenda is to improve our awareness. May God be with our departed breatheren.

 

[Erlanger]

I guess now this is going to turn into a pissing match of what "significant" and "severe" means and is.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29194109/

 

[Singlecoil]

I guess now this is going to turn into a pissing match of what "significant" and "severe" means and is.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29194109/

Oh, man. Just when I thought the media was starting to write some sensible things on this accident; this is from the above link.
"Investigators did not offer an explanation, but the orientation raised the possibility that the pilot was fighting an icy airplane. Air safety guidelines says a pilot can try a 180-degree turn to rid a plane of ice."

WTF?

 

[SuperFLUF]

For what its worth, at both Simuflite and Flightsafety recurrent for the King Air 350, tail stalls are covered as is (of course) wind shear and TCAS collision avoidance, along with your standard ice on the wings buildup stuff

Simulflite and Flight Safety are in the business of training pilots. Thus the different attitude towards creativity and time in training. (more sim time means more money for them)

Most airlines; however, do not take that part of their business seriously enough. They train what the FAA minimally requires and that's about it. Anything additional is left to the creativity of the individual sim instructors.

I have a feeling that tail stalls and inflight icing procedures will appear in the training scenarios of turboprop operators in the next year or so.
Just as will max crosswind takeoffs, low atitude dual engine failure on climbout, and unplanned ditchings appear in most airline training cycles soon.

Creativity does not often prosper in airline training departments so its almost always a reaction to recent events or regulations.

 

[Salukipilot4590]

Oh, man. Just when I thought the media was starting to write some sensible things on this accident; this is from the above link.
"Investigators did not offer an explanation, but the orientation raised the possibility that the pilot was fighting an icy airplane. Air safety guidelines says a pilot can try a 180-degree turn to rid a plane of ice."

WTF?

Well they were kinda close...sort of...I'll award them a 1/2 point.

 

[trainer8]

I've never heard anything about it in my 3.5 years at PDT. I fly almost exclusively in the Northeast and go into BUF a few times every week. After watching that NASA video and seeing what happened to Colgan, my confidence flying in icing conditions had been shaken somewhat.

Can't speak for the Keenites at PDT, but prior to the merger, ALG covered tail plane icing in Winter Ops, complete with NASA videos and recovery techniques.

The overview of the pneumatic deice system by Chealander of the NTSB on Friday's 4pm meeting was better than some oral review answers I've heard DHC-8 Type candidates stumble through. I was impressed.

I'll reiterate again, the DHC-8 is a solid airframe and designed well. It was designed originally to be able to operate on utility airstrips in Canada, in the weather. It has an excellent history.

T8

 

[trainer8]

Simulflite and Flight Safety are in the business of training pilots. Thus the different attitude towards creativity and time in training. (more sim time means more money for them)

Most airlines; however, do not take that part of their business seriously enough. They train what the FAA minimally requires and that's about it. Anything additional is left to the creativity of the individual sim instructors.

I have a feeling that tail stalls and inflight icing procedures will appear in the training scenarios of turboprop operators in the next year or so.
Just as will max crosswind takeoffs, low altitude dual engine failure on climbout, and unplanned ditchings appear in most airline training cycles soon.

Creativity does not often prosper in airline training departments so its almost always a reaction to recent events or regulations.

Do you work for my boss?

 

[satpak77]

Simulflite and Flight Safety are in the business of training pilots. Thus the different attitude towards creativity and time in training. (more sim time means more money for them)

Most airlines; however, do not take that part of their business seriously enough. They train what the FAA minimally requires and that's about it. Anything additional is left to the creativity of the individual sim instructors.

I have a feeling that tail stalls and inflight icing procedures will appear in the training scenarios of turboprop operators in the next year or so.
Just as will max crosswind takeoffs, low atitude dual engine failure on climbout, and unplanned ditchings appear in most airline training cycles soon.

Creativity does not often prosper in airline training departments so its almost always a reaction to recent events or regulations.

Well I never worked for a 121 carrier, and you have, but I guess I am a little taken back that the airline training would not at least cover equally what Flightsafety and Simuflight cover for their "corporate pilot" audience.

My thinking (admittedly could be wrong) is that the airlines (AA, SWA, etc) own the sims and "run" the training departments and thus they could cover darn whatever they wanted to.

If this is not the case, I am indeed a bit surprised.

 

[fatazz]

Is it me or is the media witch hunt beginning. They are saying the autopilot was on and that is against company regulations. Is that in all icing or just severe icing.