Pinnacle NTSB Update

[FLB717]

Untill the final word is released a lot of this speculation is nothing but what you (everyone) ASS_U_ME.

 

[73belair]

Do they teach you buffet margins in the CRJ. It is a big deal in a boeing. THE -737-700-800-900 are all certified to FL410, but, only at certain weights and certain speeds and whether it is turbulent or not. I flew at a regional airline (E145) while furloughed and these things were never even disgussed in ground school as they were at the major airline I was furloughed from. When we brought this up in ground schhol at the regional airline, the instructor had never even heard of buffet speeds, he thought that you could go straight to FL370 no matter what.....I am not at all trying to assume what happened. I was only concerned with the way the E145 was flown where I worked at.

I can't say at Pinnacle, but at ASA, yes the teach us. Not that it takes a brain surgeon to figure it out. The airplane basically tells you its limits. But for us a basic fact is if you drop below 250 in the climb then you are asking for trouble.

As far as the "hire people who flew props" thing... give me a break! If you think a "jet" is in any way hard to fly then you've never flown a real prop!

 

[Oakum_Boy]

No its not "hard" to fly a jet, thanks for the tip. But, from the lack of knowledge I see from the Right Hand Seat, it IS an issue. I guess a DC-3 is a real prop. Sorry, didn't see the Duchess. My bad.

 

[efiscompmon]

Do they teach you buffet margins in the CRJ. It is a big deal in a boeing.

No. In fact the role of the low speed cue ant 1.27 Vs indicator are frquently misunderstood and not adressed operationally in training.

It makes me wonder if their (in my estimations) lack of time in the CRJ might come into play in the NTSB final report

Indeed. Or the role of PFT/no P during T as an HR and recruitment policy attracting candidates whose aviation acumen may not be on par with their financial.

I am not at all trying to assume what happened. I was only concerned with the way the E145 was flown where I worked at

And that's the problem--ground school taught by a ramper and a former KC-135 boom operator. Sim taught by professional sim instructors. IOE check airman--some outstanding pros, some Express Airlines cowboys with anti-authority streaks and "a better way" of doing things. Maybe the mantra of "you'll get it on the line" doesn't cut it anymore.

Jets don't stall without disregard for perfomance considerations. I've heard how good the captain was supposed to be, but I wonder if he had ANY formal jet aerodynamics/performance training whatsoever.

At PCL? Well--there is the jet upset training they bought from AMR--you know, the one discredited by the NTSB.

According to the emergency checklist for a dual engine failure,
there are two ways to restart or relight the engines. One option is
to use a windmill restart, which requires at least 300 knots
indicated airspeed and the core of the engine to be either 12
percent rpm above 15,000 feet or 9 percent rpm below 15,000 feet.
The FDR data show that the computed airspeed did not get above 300
knots and that there was no measured rotation of the engine
core.

Never trained for a double engine flame out at altitude as part of the syllabus. Got "ahead" on LOFT and did it "extra". Had to REALLY push that nose over to get speed to 300 KIAS. Hard to do--especially when you're used to a "Best Glide: 76 knots" mentality.

The bigger question is why were they unable to start the engines on the APU?

Double Engine Failure in Flight procedure calls for thrust levers to remain at SHUTOFF until 12% N2 and restart is not to be attempted above FL210 due to insufficient mass airflow. The FL210 note is kind of hard to read the way the checklist is written (hello--human factors anyone?). If airflow, core rotation, and speed are not acheived and maintained prior to moving thrust levers to IDLE, DC electric boost pumps will supply fuel as scheduled by the FCU as a result of low main ejector pressure sensed by the fuel computer. This can have the result of fouling the ignition, making subsequent restart attempts in effective without cessation of fuel flow and mass airflow to clear the burner cans. And there is the problem.

Street Capt,6700tt been at 9E less than 2 yrs most likely his first Jet job been sitting Reserve for a year and a half might have 700-1000hr in the CRJ

Incorrect. He spent nearly a year on line as an FO prior to upgrade. He had just recently completed upgrade OE and at the time of the accident, the type rating was not yet recorded in the FAA registry.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

I kind of figured that they stalled it, It made the most sense for the double flameout and heat damage in the engine. I got roasted in another thread for suggesting this, and that the training at some of the regionals on sweptwing and highspeed aerodynamics may be lacking.

I have talked to more than a few RJ pilots that never got the training at flight school and it was not mentioned in training at their airlines. A couple of the pilots couldn't even tell you what part of a swept wing stalled first. They just gave the standard straight wing answer of "the root stalls first and works its way out".

 

[JetCapt69]

Curious?

Does anyone monitor the airspeed indicator & AOA? A friend of mine flew the CRJ at Pinnacle. He took it up to FL410 and got the shaker, but not the pusher.

Sounds like several issues will be revealed by the NTSB and many recommendations well arise.

God bless all.

 

[dondk]

Some of the comments/observations are the same things being brought by our own people.

The items I have heard are ISA +10, and some procedural issue's on the flight. Those issue's were commented on other threads and don't need to be brought up. If you followed those threads you know what I mean.

As for time and experience, that is an age old issue with any incident/accident. Let the NTSB come to their conclusions... You can see they are already leaning in one direction...

God Bless the families and their loved one's

 

[flying4food]

I wonder why did the Captain not recognize the peril they were flying into. Jets don't stall without disregard for perfomance considerations. I've heard how good the captain was supposed to be, but I wonder if he had ANY formal jet aerodynamics/performance training whatsoever.

So,,, By that rational, shouldn't Skywest, Mesa or AWAC had an RJ fall outta the sky??? They also hire people right off the street into RJ's. They also upgrade turbo-prop pilots to RJ's!! I fail to see the logic there!!

One should be careful how they hurl stones!!!

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

So,,, By that rational, shouldn't Skywest, Mesa or AWAC had an RJ fall outta the sky??? They also hire people right off the street into RJ's. They also upgrade turbo-prop pilots to RJ's!! I fail to see the logic there!!

One should be careful how they hurl stones!!!

If a perfectly functional jet aircraft(waiting on the NTSB final) is stalled at high altitude in normal flight, especially one with a glass panel that gives you graphic depictions of both the upper and lower limits via AOA info and MMO info displayed on the airspeed tape, and with shakers and pushers installed.........then you have a serious problem with the crew somewhere.

The only pilots that can be somewhat expected to have a high altitude event like that happen would be a tactical aircraft involved in ACM.

Any jet cruising at its ceiling does not have a lot of room for sloppy airspeed control. Hopefully the NTSB will find a non-pilot induced cause for the accident. If it is what it appears to be so far, I suspect that the training programs at the regional carriers will be under the microscope.

I guess the lack of information being taught by the airlines is a byproduct of the glass panel. On the old steam gauges all you had to let you know if you were in the performance envelope was a remote mounted AOA indicator, and a flip chart with alt, speed, and weight limits. So the result was a little more vigilance in keeping tabs on high altitude performance.

 

[xjavro85]

OK, gotta put my two cents in. If they stalled it and both engines flamed out. Why did they report to ATC that they had one engine problem and not report the second engine problem until much later. Thats how the prelims suggested wasn't it, no reports of dual trouble until they were at 13000 or so? You would think that with no power the first thing you would say to ATC would be I need a runway ASAP...I think the CVR transcript outta be interesting.

 

[Lear70]

Does anyone monitor the airspeed indicator & AOA? A friend of mine flew the CRJ at Pinnacle. He took it up to FL410 and got the shaker, but not the pusher.

This aircraft doesn't have an AOA indicator. It's got this P.O.S. "1.27 VSO green line" indicator that is technically only accurate in the landing configuration and the "snake", a low-speed cue tied into (I believe) 1.13 VS1 (stall speed for whatever configuration you're in, changes with flap settings, speed/pitch (AOA) changes, etc).

There is NO direct display of AOA like in a 20-series Lear or other DECENTLY DESIGNED aircraft, a huge mistake (my opinion) of manufacturers to start omitting this instrument back in the 70's.

 

[redflyer65]

Lear 70 has got it right. The green line works well at lower altitudes, but is almost completely irrelevant at higher altitudes because of the thinner air. In the sim at the standard 10,000ft altitude, the shaker comes on right at the top of the snake. At higher altitudes, say above 28,000ft, the shaker comes on just below the green line (supposed to be 1.27Vs), and your not even close to the top of the snake yet. How do I know? Because it's happened to me, and you need to know that. But guess what. Nobody tells you! It should have an AOA indicator.

 

[da90drivr]

Redflyer

It's been a little while since I have flown the plane but the green line is only accurate in the landing configuration. It is not a reference for climb or cruise.

Even a Level D sim will not accurately depict every characteristic of a real plane. Just because the sim stalls at X AOA/ Airspeed in a certain config. the plane you are flying that day may not due to many minor differences in installed components (ADC / probe errors).

Do any of the operators have Max alt. temp charts as part of their QRH or speed cards?

 

[enigma]

A question for you all. Does the CRJ autopilot include a "climb" feature? The only glass panel airplane I've flown (six years ago) is the LJ60 and if memory serves, the 60's a/p included the following pitch modes: high speed climb, low speed climb, vertical speed, ias hold, and mach hold. Other aircraft include a pitch hold feature(The FC200 autopiloted LJ35 for example)
If the CRJ doesn't feature a climb mode, how are the CRJ pilots (especially Pinnacle) taught to climb, especially to climb after transitioning over to Mach? Do you normally climb in Mach? If so, how do you choose the speed at which you climb? Are you allowed to climb in vertical speed? If so, what precautions are taken, especially in terms of crew coordination?

I meant to ask this last month, but the first discussion deteriorated into a blame game.

Now, If I may, a little advice for those of you who have yet to fly a swept wing, turbo-jet/turbo-fan powered aircraft. Never climb more than two thousand feet in any mode other than IAS(Mach), or an FMS controlled "climb" mode. Never climb, while above the mid twenties, in any mode other than IAS(Mach) or FMS "climb" mode. Never, EVER, slow below the AFM climb speed in an attempt to make the last thousand feet or hurry the climb just a little bit. If the aircraft isn't climbing at an acceptable rate, hold your altitude, or descend; there's a reason it won't climb at the recommended climb speed so give up on the climb. If the controllers don't like it, tough.

If you think you must get that last thousand of so feet, just don't jack with anything. Leave the autopilot in IAS(Mach) and sit back. You may have lost the climb because you climbed into a layer of slightly warmer air or into a tail wind. If so, you'll get your climb back once your airplane gets caught up to the new airmass conditions. I've seen the rate of climb vary by a thousand feet over a short period of time while climbing on Mach hold.

Again, When climbing a jet aircraft, maintain your speed. NEVER sacrific speed.

Next, If you somehow lose speed (at altitude). Descend. Once you get slow, it takes mucho power and TIME to accelerate. Acceleration may NOT be possible, so just descend. I've run test flight proceedures in which speed loss at altitude was unavoidable and I can testify to this: An MD80 with no pax and very little fuel, at FL350 needs max climb power and about two minutes to accelerate from M.70 back to M.78. I've seen it take three minutes. In some situations, regaining speed is not possible using power alone, you have to sacrifice altitude.

One more thing. I love Pratt and Whitney. I've experienced a compressor stall when asking for a rapid power increase during a high altitude test, but those JT8's never quit. If the CRJ engines are prone to quit in a high altitude low speed situation, the Feds need to ground the airplane. This isn't 1948.

enigma

 

[propjockey]

Sources of info to study for transition?

That sounds like good advice, Enigma. You've mentioned issues that I just never considered in the turboprop world. I never realized that speed is such a precious commodity.

I expect to be transitioning to the CRJ within about three months. Do you (and some of our other more experienced colleagues) have some suggestions of good books and/or other resources to study for those of us who are soon to fly a swept wing jet for the first time? Is Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators still considered a classic text on the subject?