Colgan 3407 Update

[Aerosurfer]

If you are at in a true stall (as in you pulled through the pusher, not just a shaker recovery) you ARE going to have to lower the nose in a swept wing jet to recover, especially at high altitude. (And you may have to give up a hell of a lot of altitude to get it flying again)

Obviously if you are just in the shaker you probably don't need to pitch at the ground full tilt.

And thats exactly why you dont push down on a larger aircraft. It is certified to be able to power through the stall with minimum loss. Even so, at 1500 feet, you really dont have any altitude to lose, regardless of what plane you are in. The situation should not have made it as far as it did, by then is seems as though it has proven to be too late

 

[wmuflyguy]

And thats exactly why you dont push down on a larger aircraft. It is certified to be able to power through the stall with minimum loss. Even so, at 1500 feet, you really dont have any altitude to lose, regardless of what plane you are in. The situation should not have made it as far as it did, by then is seems as though it has proven to be too late

When the shaker goes off, it is only approaching the critical AOA. Your not stalled and and thus you are not really powering out of a stall. You could concievably get the shaker to go off with full power already in (high altitude and/or slow flight), then your not pwoering through anything and you must lower the nose to make the shaker stop.

 

[SpauldingSmails]

When the shaker goes off, it is only approaching the critical AOA. Your not stalled and and thus you are not really powering out of a stall. You could concievably get the shaker to go off with full power already in (high altitude and/or slow flight), then your not pwoering through anything and you must lower the nose to make the shaker stop.

Ding! Ding! Ding!... and so the stick pusher was born.

 

[Big Beer Belly]

I've followed this tragedy with interest like most other aviators and am NOT here to start a fight. With today's preliminary findings I am left scratching my head though. As I understand it, the two pilots were engaged in extraneous conversation below 10k (18k per my employer) and were distracted. Understood... not correct, but we've probably all been there.

They allow the aircraft to slow well below bug speed and faced with a stick shaker he/she abruptly pulls back and changes pitch +30 degrees?

If I have the basics correct (and I may be mistaken?)... I'm left scratching my head with the big, "What were they thinking?" Stalls and approach to stalls AND THEIR RECOVERIES!... (trying to be polite here)... are two of the MOST BASIC of all aviation concepts and maneuvers to fly.

49 people lost their lives because two pilots were incapable of recognizing and recovering from one of the most basic of all aviation scenarios? Someone please tell me BBB has this all wrong. I have NOT paid close attention to all the facts/findings of this accident and may be out to lunch. If so, I'd SINCERELY appreciate a kind response to my lack of knowledge. As of now, when friends ask what happened in this accident, I'm left with the above explanation and I would very much regret maligning the crew (in a generic "pilot error" sense) if another explanation exists. I truly just want to know what happened and figured this forum would probably have the most up to date information.

As with the other recent unfortunate accidents, my sincere condolences to all the families and colleagues of those involved. In the end, we all share the same love for this profession or we wouldn't be here.

Thanks for any info...


BBB

 

[Oakum_Boy]

rarely do pilots or airplanes invent new ways to crash. same stuff different day.

 

[DrewBlows]

If I have the basics correct (and I may be mistaken?)... I'm left scratching my head with the big, "What were they thinking?" Stalls and approach to stalls AND THEIR RECOVERIES!... (trying to be polite here)... are two of the MOST BASIC of all aviation concepts and maneuvers to fly.

The concepts are basic but perhaps the techniques taught and practiced are not the safest options.

The altitude standards for recovering from a stall for an ATP certificate are +/- 100'. The only reason I see to not lose more than 100' if you were to stall an aircraft by mistake in an operational setting (not training) is if you were 100' from the ground, a situation that is possible, though only happens typically twice per flight very briefly. Conversely, there will never be terrain above you so why does it matter if you recover within 100' above you stalled altitude.

What if we trained to lose 500' in a stall and climb to 1000' above the initial altitude? Seems like this is a more likely scenario outside of the training environment. We could still practice the old way (flying right at Critical AoA when we know the stall is coming), but we would be taught that it is acceptable to lose altitude when lowering the AoA. This maneuver requires much less precision and, frankly, much less skill, but a safe outcome would still be assured, maybe more so.

Thoughts...

 

[q100]

I think you are onto something Drew. I think that by the time pilots are training/checking at PT 121 operators, stall recoveries are being treated as a proficiency maneuver, rather than as a potentially lifesaving semi-emergency. Nothing wrong with being proficient in recovering from an APPROACH to stall with minimal altitude loss, but it should not be at the expense of forgetting that a stall is a function of AofA and the last thing you want to be doing with stall indications is increasing AofA!

I'd say that the most dangerous stall from an altitude loss standpoint is the landing stall, with low energy and high drag needing immediate & full power application as well as minimal altitude loss. But, at 1500' AGL, losing a couple of hundred feet may cause loss of face, but probably not loss of life. So, yeah, for most situations minimizing the altitude loss should be a secondary concern.

My concern is that the way most of us train (glad to hear there are exceptions) seems likely to develop the habit of using backpressure on the controls in a stall recovery - see my earlier posts as to why I think this is.

 

[Hamburger]

rarely do pilots or airplanes invent new ways to crash. same stuff different day.

Starting to sound like this one.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=DCA94MA027&rpt=fi

Autopilot leveled off from descent while throttles stayed untouched at idle.

 

[DrewBlows]

Starting to sound like this one.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=DCA94MA027&rpt=fi

Autopilot leveled off from descent while throttles stayed untouched at idle.

That's easy to do if distracted, usually someone catches well before it becomes a problem though. The airplane I fly now has autothrottles; it drive me nuts when guys click them off in the descent to "save fuel" or because "they don't do what I want".

I asked one guy why he purposely gave away stall protection. He told me it wasn't stall protection...I proceeded to baby-sit.

 

[EatinRamen]

What concerns me the most is that we have had two accidents since the start of this year where the crew allowed the airplane to get too slow and stall. Turkish Air, and now it seems the Colgan crash.

We wouldn't be discussing stall recovery if the crews on these flights were monitoring their aircraft's airspeed. As airplanes have gotten more technologically advance, this is what we are supposed to be doing... being systems manager. Seems to me like we need to do a better job of monitoring the airplane.

 

[maxblast72]

The article said something about a 25lb pull force applied to the yoke. Have they released anything on the where the power was during this event?

 

[Smarta$$]

I find it humorous how some of you demonize reducing pitch at 1500 feet as some how dangerous. Swept wing, straight wing, T-prop, jet, big plane or training airplane, lower the pitch slightly gets the wing flying again. Trying to make the airplane maintain altitude like you were taught in the sim, or like you are on a type ride is not the most important thing unless you have VERY little terrain clearance.

As far as turning off the auto throttles, I have no problem with that. You are required to maintain proficiency in all levels of automation. There is only one way to do that. Whats next? Can't disengage the auto pilot because it increases the work load?

But yeah, you have to watch it more carefully. I guess my CRJ is completely unsafe because it has no auto throttles.

 

[Moustache]

When we do our stall training at the first sign of a stall we push the nose down. This Captain pulled nose up in a low speed, low power, low altitude situation. Does not look like ice is going to be the cause of this accident.

What Airplane?

 

[Amish RakeFight]

We wouldn't be discussing stall recovery if the crews on these flights were monitoring their aircraft's airspeed. As airplanes have gotten more technologically advance, this is what we are supposed to be doing... being systems manager. Seems to me like we need to do a better job of monitoring the airplane.

You mean like this:

http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1292/1292871fwls2yt8o1.jpg

 

[LJ45]

You guys keep talking about pushing or pulling... How about what ever it take to hold the desired attitude for recovery!