10 killed in Caravan crash

[rotornut]

10 believed dead in small plane crash: airline

CTV.ca News Staff

Updated: Sat. Jan. 17 2004 11:55 PM ET

The president of an airline whose plane crashed into Lake Erie Saturday said it appears no one has survived the accident -- one that has likely killed 10 people.

"It was not an extraordinary flight," Paul Mulrooney of Georgian Express told The Canadian Press. "The airplane was certainly equipped for those conditions. It was just a normal winter day."

Snow, freezing rain and low clouds were reportedly hampering search efforts. The U.S. Coast Guard helicopter which discovered the crash site reportedly had to hover just 15 metres above the lake in order to be below the clouds.

Two Canadian rescue helicopters dispatched from CFB Trenton, roughly 450 kilometres away from the crash scene, couldn't reach the site because of heavy snowfall.

There were eight passengers and one pilot listed for the flight, but Mulrooney said an extra passenger may have slipped on board at the last minute.

The airline, which is based in Mississauga, operates three flights per day between Pelee Island, located towards the western end of Lake Erie, and Windsor. A normal flight is about 30 minutes. Mulrooney said the Toronto-based pilot of this tragic flight was an experienced aviator who had flown the route many times.

The U.S. Coast Guard made the discovery of the Georgian Express Cessna 208 Caravan single-engine aircraft, which was found nose-down in the water, around 7 p.m. ET.

That journey would normally take about 30 minutes. The aircraft left around 4:30 p.m. ET and never arrived. Air traffic controllers say they got a frantic message from the aircraft and then heard nothing.

When the situation became known, two U.S. Coast Guard helicopters were dispatched from Detroit.

Both a Canadian coast guard ship and a U.S. Coast Guard cutter, which had been doing some ice-breaking duty, were expected to arrive at the scene sometime Saturday night.

"We really don't expect to get some really concrete news certainly until at least daybreak, until we get some daylight in there and have the vessels in there," John Leclerc of the Canadian search and rescue co-ordination centre at CFB Trenton told The Canadian Press.

The debris field from the crash appeared to be extensive, he said.

Of the eight confirmed passengers, police said four were from Chatham, two were from Windsor and two others were from Kingville. All were men. Authorities are attempting to notify the victims' families.

Transport Canada and the Transportation Safety Board were investigating.

[UNCTUOUS]

17 PT-6A engine failures up until May 03 and all with the same simple cause. They know what's causing it - but have they yet got a fix? Has it been compulsorily implemented? How many fatalities are attributable? How many accidents?

I'd be thinking twice about driving farepayers around in large singles.

[RatherBeFlying]

10am CBC radio report has a/c sliding on ice 8-12" thick then breaking through:(

Given reported weather conditions, airframe and induction icing major suspects -- perhaps more so than number of engines.

[rotornut]

The aircraft left around 4:30 p.m. ET and never arrived.

Weather observations at Windsor, Ontario (from Environment Canada website):

17 Jan. 2004 18:00 EST Light Freezing Rain -4 89 -6 SSW 9 100.9 2 *
17 Jan. 2004 17:00 EST Light Freezing Rain -5 89 -6 SSW 9 101.0 2 *
17 Jan. 2004 16:00 EST Light Snow -5 87 -7 S 11 101.1 3 -10
17 Jan. 2004 15:00 EST Light Snow -5 84 -8 S 18 101.2 2 -11
17 Jan. 2004 14:00 EST Light Snow -6 84 -8 SSE 20 101.3 1 -13
17 Jan. 2004 13:00 EST Light Snow -6 84 -9 S 14 101.6 2 -12
17 Jan. 2004 12:00 EST Light Snow -7 84 -9 SSE 14 101.8 1 -13
17 Jan. 2004 11:00 EST Snow Grains -6 73 -10 SSE 20 101.9 3 -13

Icing?

[RatherBeFlying]

Freezing Rain is as bad as it gets. Mind you Pelee Island is a considerable distance from Windsor and icing tends to be highly localised.

For the benefit of those unfamiliar with Environment Canada's "Past 24 hour conditions" column headers:

Date
Hour
Weather
Temp. (°C)
Humidity (%)
DewPoint (°C)
Wind (km/h)
Pressure (kPa)
Visibility (km)
WindChill

I'd like to see the precip radar for that time.

[Timothy]

The one time I got into severe freezing rain I managed to get out in about 30 seconds (by a very rapid 180).

The aircraft, an Aztec, was completely covered in ice in that time, and a thickness of about 1/2" had flowed back to about half the chord. The deicing I was carrying (pneumatic boots on the flying surfaces, heated boots on the props and heated windshield plate) were so inadequate for the task that they may as well not existed.

I honestly believe that another 30-60 secs and Bernouli would have given up, the controls would have frozen, the engines would have stopped from impact ice and I would have, to quote Monty Python, not so much flown as plummeted.

It's nasty, nasty stuff and must be high on the list of usual suspects.

A little early to point at this and say "SET? tsk tsk", I'd've thought.

Timothy

[tsgas]

If indeed this accident was caused by icing , then it would not be the first C-208, that this carrier has lost due to icing.

[UNCTUOUS]

It did happen very shortly after take-off. Would freezing rain have struck that fast?

January 18, 2003 - Small Plane Crashes in Lake Erie

SANDUSKY, Ohio (USA) - A single-engine plane carrying at least nine people crashed Saturday in snowy weather shortly after taking off from an island in Lake Erie, the U.S. Coast Guard said. There was no immediate word on whether anyone survived.

The pilot radioed a frantic call for help shortly after taking off about 5 p.m., but controllers then lost contact with the plane, Coast Guard Lt. j.g. Christopher Pasciuto said.

A helicopter found the wreckage about 7:30 p.m. Saturday about a mile west of Ontario's Pelee Island, Pasciuto said.

The wreckage of the Georgian Express plane was in the water with ice around it, airline president Paul Mulrooney said.

Helicopter search lights were scanning the water to look for survivors, Coast Guard Chief Petty Officer Mark Freeman said. The cutter Neah Bay was headed from the Detroit area to join the search.

The plane, a Cessna 208 Caravan, was bound for Windsor, Ontario, across the border from Detroit, and crashed about 20 miles north of Sandusky.

Mulrooney said 10 people - nine passengers and a pilot - may have been on board, but it was unclear whether one passenger made the flight.

Officials with the Canadian Coast Guard, the Ontario Provincial Police and Transport Canada - Canada's equivalent of the Federal Aviation Administration - did not immediately return calls for comment.

Mulrooney said his Mississauga, Ontario-based company has flights between the island and Windsor up to three times daily.

``It's only used in the winter months when the island is icebound and they can't use the ferry to get back and forth,'' he said.

The region has been locked in bitterly cold weather, with temperatures in the 20s Saturday in northern Ohio. The water temperature in Lake Erie, where waves were running 3 feet to 5 feet, was about 33 degrees.

[RatherBeFlying]

from Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26105-2004Jan17.html) Bob Wernecke, a pilot who flies between Ohio's resort islands just south of Pelee Island, said he made six flights during the day before deciding about 5 p.m. that the low cloud cover and freezing rain had made conditions unsafe.

"It's nasty," he said by phone from Put-In-Bay, Ohio. "It's freezing drizzle, kind of bad."

[m&v]

Tgas,didn't the Caravan 'stall'on final crash at Barrie,couple years ago,result from airframe Icing(pilot ,son of a friend)..
Evedence of Ice still on the wing after the accident??:confused:

[skidcanuck]

Check out

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1997/1997-loss.html

March 4 and November 25

[RatherBeFlying]

Just reported on CBC Radio.

Ice shifting because of wind is delaying recovery efforts and has distorted debris field which includes baggage (perhaps from lower pod). I guess divers are not going down until they are sure they can get back up. Wreckage reported in 8 metres of water.

[mstram]

Where is the "historical" weather link on the Env Canada website?

I'm looking around there now, but can't seem to find it.

thx

Mike

[Steve76]

I'm based in London on the Air Ambulance helicopter. I recieved a request to attend the scene (or go to Pelee and look....) at about 6pm last night.
I was looking at 400ft overcast in light freezing drizzle and a temp below -10 actual METAR from Windsor.

As you would imagine I declined the call because it just seemed impossible to get through.

I am very sorry about the loss of life here but I wonder what the hurry was to get to Pelee from Windsor. It is only a 20 min flight and the pilot would've been faced with the same info I was. The freezing rain was forcast to arrive all day and the wx radar showed it arriving as expected.

Additionally, I noted that either the arcal or vasis's were U/S in Pelee. Anything at night would've been difficult.

My regrets to the pilots family and friends and our acquaintences down in Pelee.

[mstram]

Steve76,

Thanks for the weather update.

Is there any "civilisation" / place to stay overnight at Pelee?

I guess even the terminal "shack" would have been better than nothing. (Hindsight mode).

Mike

[rotornut]

Mike
QUOTE]Where is the "historical" weather link on the Env Canada website?[/QUOTE]
http://weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/forecast/24_hour_conditions_e.html?yqg&unit=m

[mstram]

Rotor,

re: weather.

Thks I found that same page, but it only seems to go back 24 hrs.

Mike

[Steve76]

I think Pelee has a hotel/pub for accomodation. In those small communities there is always someone who would put you up for the night. The clinic is open as well and there are beds in there if it is an issue.

[rotornut]

Mike
You are correct. It only goes back 24 hours from the present time.
When I posted at 10:56 this morning, I was able to get the wx for the time of the accident, which was within the 24 hour period. Unfortunately, I don't know if you can go back more than 24 hours.

All that aside, it is a terrible tragedy. Having done some commercial flying I know how everyone must feel.

[mstram]

>I think Pelee has a hotel/pub for accomodation. In those small

Thx for the info.

Mike

[pigboat]

On another board, someone has reported that this is the third Caravan this company has lost. Does anyone know if this is correct?

[gooneydog]

Hey Steve 76 Thanks for the input Maybe I'll say Hi next time In in CYXU Yu've prob seen the ole USA JET ers in there on occasion

Robbie

[Dutcher]

Here's a RADAR Pix of the US North East and an IR PIX about 15 mins before T/O:

http://www.geocities.com/johnwdutcher/17Jan04.htm


METAR for the Destination Windsor, ON:

CYQG 172100Z 18006KT 1 3/4SM -SN OVC008 M05/M07 A2982 RMK SN2SC6 SLP109

CYQG 172200Z 20005KT 1 1/2SM -SN -FZRA BR OVC005 M05/M06 A2979 RMK ST8 SLP100

[8driver]

Two of those bloody things were lost due to icing in one night back in January 1990 in upstate New York and Vermont. In the years just prior to that I had flown freight for a company that operated Caravans along with other types. I was flying the Navajo at the time and heard no end of horror stories from guys on the Caravan in regard to icing.

That airplane had a terrible reputation in regard to ice 14 years ago, and I don't know as anything has changed. Why tempt fate? The Caravan will take you to the scene of the accident in regard to ice.:(

[411A]

Question for those who indeed think that single engine turbopropellor ops are 'OK' for public/exec transport.

IF you were going to invest $2million in an exec aircraft, would you purchase a (pre-owned) PC-12, or a BE200 KingAir.

Single engine fails....folks DIE, if you only have one powerplant.
Nearly always.:sad:

[chuks]

The model of PT6 used in the Caravan (C208), from what I was told by an engineer friend who works on them, has a problem with the P3 valve. When it fails the engine goes to idle power. It doesn't actually fail, but it isn't doing you much good either. This is what caused the crash at Warri, Nigeria, supposedly, when the pilot parked it in a swamp just short of the airstrip.

And from what a friend who flies Caravans told me, the aircraft ends up dragging around a lot of ice due to its construction. I guess the stuff sticks to all the sticky-outie bits that aren't de-iced, causing so much drag that the poor old thing finally cannot hold itself up. I remember reading about a few FedEx crashes in heavy icing where it certainly sounded as if the thing iced up in the cruise.

As to what happened in this crash, well, who knows, yet! All this second-guessing is rather pointless. Did it crash on take-off (engine failure or perhaps trying to fly with ice present), on approach (engine failure or flying too slow with ice accumulation) or....

About the only screw-up you wouldn't have to worry about in this aircraft is a gear-up landing. Everything else is up for grabs.

Who knows what factors went into this pilot's assessment of doing the trip? I would hazard a guess that Plan A was not to crash, screaming, into Lake Erie so that it would seem that he has, in some measure, failed. Why should we take this apparent failure as an open invitation to burst into print on this forum with all sorts of speculation about what happened? Isn't that a bit ghoulish?

I remember very well a trip when I almost hung a Cessna 441 in the high-tension wires trying to get into what turned out to be completely the wrong airstrip in very thick dust haze. After landing I had time to think how much fun the local Forum of Wise (after the fact) Elders would have had with that one! That has always acted as a brake on outing my natural feelings of being the greatest pilot since Lindbergh.

[HeloTeacher]

411A, the PC-12 for instance is not a death sentence without an operating engine.

A PC-12 flown by Kellner in Newfoundland lost its engine and despite a deck stacked against it (read the report if you can locate it), a power-off landing in a swamp resulted in no injuries, that is until a passenger got too excited trying to get out.

2 engines don't necessarily make you safer.

I'd take the PC-12 any day.

[Oluf]

Having flown the Caravan in winter, I remember the icing problems very well. The problem as I see it is that boots will help you for a short time, while you pass through the icing conditions. The Caravan is limited in it's abillity to climb out of the icing conditions, especially if it's close to max weight, and you do not want to linger in icing for a long time with this aircraft. The Ice builds up everywhere, and as it builds it slows you down, increasing your a.o.a, ultimately building ice on the wings. I remember thinking of the boots as emergency equipment. Don't get me wrong though, I think the Caravan is a great airplane for certain operations, I just don't believe that smacking a couple of boots on it qualifies it for flying into known icing. As far as the engine being the problem, I'm not so sure. The airplane is equipped with an emergency powerlever, which should be able to deal with the above mentioned problem. (Mind you it's been many years since I flew the Caravan, so I might be wrong). Let's hope the Accident investigation sheds a light on the cause of the crash.

My thoughts go out to the victims of this tragedy.

O

[rotornut]

Passenger feared icy conditions


By GLORIA GALLOWAY AND JOE FRIESEN


UPDATED AT 10:13 AM EST Monday, Jan. 19, 2004


TORONTO and KINGSVILLE, ONT. -- Larry Janik was apparently nervous as he and seven friends prepared to board the Cessna Caravan that would take them back to the mainland after two days of hunting on Pelee Island.

>>There was ice on the wings of the turbo-prop plane and he asked aloud whether they should be braving the trip under such conditions.<<

But Caravans are workhorses, and are equipped to handle ice. So Mr. Janik's reservations, which were overheard by Ford Crawford, the island resident who had taken the eight men hunting before dropping them at the small airport, were not shared by pilot Wayne Price

For the rest of the story go to:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040119/CRASVIC19/TPFront/TopStories

[pigboat]

..Caravans are equipped to handle ice. Technically that is a correct statement. In actual fact, the de-icing equipment on the airplane would probably get you out of trouble if you were to blunder into icing conditions. Launching into known ice is something else entirely.

[skidcanuck]

Crash pilot from GTA

Died with girlfriend, 8 hunters

By HIMANI EDIRIWEERA AND PATRICK MALONEY, TORONTO SUN




A Toronto-area pilot and his girlfriend were among 10 people who died when a plane crashed into the icy waters off Pelee Island. Wayne Price, 33, and his girlfriend, Jamie Levine, 28, of Los Angeles, died when a Cessna Caravan 208B, owned by a Mississauga charter airline, crashed into Lake Erie on Saturday shortly after takeoff.

A U.S.-Canadian effort begins this morning to recover the bodies and plane, which skidded along the ice and sank in eight metres of water.

The passengers were all hunters from southwestern Ontario. Among them were a top surgeon, a police sergeant and a union leader,

"This is a huge loss to the community. He is just so young," said Chris Sexsmith, a former neighbour of Price in Richmond Hill. "He was such a great guy with a great sense of humour."

He said Price moved out of his bungalow in August but he didn't know where he went. Price's phone number, however, was switched to a Toronto exchange.

'ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE'

"I feel absolutely horrible. He didn't have a nasty bone in his body," Sexsmith said.

The ill-fated trip began at 4:40 p.m. Saturday when the plane, owned by Georgian Express, left Pelee Island, headed for Windsor. Minutes later Price made a frantic radio call to Windsor; then contact was lost.

Island resident Dave Bracken was walking his dog on the shoreline.

"It sounded like the plane was having some troubles for about 10 seconds and then I heard a bang, like something going into the ice," he told CBC Newsworld.

WELL-KNOWN DOCTOR

The plane crashed half a kilometre from the island, the most southerly point in Canada and a popular spot for pheasant and rabbit hunters in the winter.

The hunters aboard were Dr. Jim Allen, 51, of Mitchell's Bay, Staff Sgt. Tom Reeve, 49, his brother Ted Reeve, 53, and Bob Brisco, 46, all of Chatham, Fred Freitas, 39, and Larry Janik, 49, both of Kingsville, and Ronald Spencler, 54, and Walter Sadowski, 49, both of Windsor.

Tom Reeve was a popular police officer in Chatham. With his brother and Allen, a well-known orthopedic surgeon, the trio ran St. Clair Sports Fishing out of Mitchell's Bay.

Linda Caldwell, an official with the Victorian Order of Nurses, said Allen was considered one of the top surgeons in his field in Canada.

Ted Reeve served as the CAW union rep at the Chatham International Truck and Engine plant.

Sadowski had a hunting dog with him on the plane.

"He died with his boots on and he died with his dog. There are a lot worse ways to go," his brother Bill told a CityTV station.

Georgian Express president Paul Mulrooney said he had no idea what brought down the plane and will leave that to the OPP and Transportation Safety Board to decide.

Price was an experienced pilot who'd flown the route many times.

A Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker was expected to arrive last night from Sault Ste. Marie. It will serve as a platform for the OPP dive unit coming from Gravenhurst.

[Timothy]

>>There was ice on the wings of the turbo-prop plane and he asked aloud whether they should be braving the trip under such conditions.<<Sounds ominous, does it not?

Whether it is certified for flight into known icing or not, it certainly ain't certified to take-off with ice on the wings.

There is an erie similarity with the story told in this month's Flyer Mag, under the "That Worst Day" series, talking of a C404 taking off carrying some ice, and claiming to be true.

Timothy

[Dream Land]

quote

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd take the PC-12 any day.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why would anyone make a choice like this, the safety record for a twin engine turbo-prop speaks for itself. :cool:

D L

[Rosbif]

I made the post on the Canada forum. It is 3 hull losses now, and the other 2 were both related to ice. Of course we don't know about this one yet.
In the first case involving the fatality in Barrie, it would appear that there was a loss of control, possibly because the transition from instruments to visual flying can be very difficult with ice on the windshield, the approach was abbreviated (a full procedure was not flown over the lake) and possible accelerated stall issues. (with ice on the wing, the behaviour can be different.) What I remember most about this accident was that a friend told me that they were getting the boxes out of the back of the plane while the pilot was still inside the inverted wreck. The show must go on. Most disrespectful in my opinion.
In the second case, at North Bay, Ontario, the plane was crewed by two people. The captain had been to the Flight Safety course and the simulator simulated a new caravan. The accident airplane was old and probably a bit 'tired', so unlikely to show similar performance. The wind was out of the West, and blows uphill after coming over the lake. (Nipissing) A stupid place for an airport and the ILS is facing East. The runway is very long though, so the best method to get in if the weather was low was to take the tailwind (within limits). The pilot on this day first shot the VOR, flew right by the tower (might have been a little below on the missed!) and then tried an abbreviated approach to the ILS. When he broke out above the runway, he chopped the power, and the thing dropped out from underneath him. The plane hit so hard that it broke in half, and a wing (left I think) snapped off downwards. Obviously not good for the spine. Luckily nobody was killed.
Now this.
This pilot must have been to Flight safety to be allowed to carry pax in the Caravan, and would have had lots of experience with ice in the machine, flying freight all over Ontario. My personal guess is that this was not a straightforward 'ice causes loss of lift' type of accident. Of course we will not know until the report, if ever.
Just some background as I see it, and my opinion. Not any kind of authoritative accident report.
It is a very sad time, and I am sure that all pilots feel for the families of the pilot and the passengers.

[chuks]

That little lever in the Caravan overrides a failure of the Fuel Control Unit (FCU) from what I remember. I don't think it can cope with a P3 valve problem.

I had a P3 valve problem in a Twin Otter (DHC6-300) once, when the membrane in the valve split. One could see a 'split' in the T5 temps between the two engines so that I just returned to base after a short flight with the engine still developing power. I guess if I had been in the air longer perhaps then I would have had to shut the engine down.

I believe they are coping with the problem in the Caravan PT6 engine by changing the valves much earlier than normal. Obviously, since the aircraft are still flying, they have come up with some sort of fix that satisfies the regulators. And from what I have read here it does not sound as though the problem that led to this crash was an engine problem.

I always used to prefer two or more engines, despite how the statistics read. But a clapped-out Aztec vs. a shiny new Caravan? Hmmm. On the other hand, no sooner were the statistics out in support of singles in IFR than there was a row of engine failure related accidents and incidents. It's a tough call.

[Rosbif]

Presumably there were at least 8 guns on the plane. Hmmm.
To enter the 'single v. twin' debate, I would say that the strength of the Caravan in which the 2 survived probably saved them. A navajoke would have been smashed to pieces in that instance. Because they are singles, they are required to be much more crashworthy. This means that if you ever get an engine failure, as long as you stay greasy side down and stay out of the water, you will probably be ok. I haven't seen anyone criticising the absolutely terrible accident record of Navajo's etc. And what about fatigue at air taxi operations.
Thes issues are always more complicated than they appear. You might find, for example only, that this latest incident was caused by assymetric flap retraction, or an elevator jam, or a tail stall on flaps retraction, or birdstrike or or or or.
Just some stuff to think about.

[skidcanuck]

The ouija board is active on this accident speculation - let's get the facts before condemning operator, pilot, or aircraft.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

The possible causes are endless.

What did he say on the radio just prior to hitting the ice?

That may solve some of the mystery.

[411A]

HT,

Yes, the PC-12 is a mighty fine looking aeroplane, and can carry a lot, but if I recall correctly has had a rather poor reputation in the engine reliability department. Many of the accidents have been fatal.
This is not to say of course that twin-turbopropeller aircraft can not have similar results, especially if mis-handled with a failed engine.

PC-12 as a freighter, good idea. To carry loads of pax around on a regular basis...approach with caution, especially IMC, IMHO.

[RatherBeFlying]

Today's Toronto Sun reports the Pelee Island mayor observing freezing rain at the time of takeoff.

I hate to think of the accumulation on the entire upper wing surface while the a/c was on the ground which would be hard to observe given the height of the wing from the ground.

[Rosbif]

Windsor weather at the time said light freezing drizzle. That is generally accepted in that operation as being acceptable for departure (as long as the wing is clean). Anything worse, like freezing drizzle or freezing rain is a no go. So technically, he would appear to be legal in that respect.

[Elliot Moose]

I've done a good bit of time on both the PC12 and the Caravan. I myself have yet to hear of a case where a simple engine failure ended in fatality. As of the time that I last flew the Van (in 2000) there had never been an engine failure that wasn't caused by the pilot either failing to gas up or failing to ensure the oil was up and the dipstick secure. The PC12 has had a few engine failures, but the fatalities have not been related to those (please correct me if I'm wrong).

The reason nobody is dying due to the engine failures is that both of those aircraft are built like tanks. The crash in Newfoundland had an impact 40-50kts faster than it needed to be and there were still no fatalities. Of course the pilot should have never left home with the oil problem, and then maintained glide speed (and altitude) and a few other things, but that's another story. The only way to end up dead in one of those singles after a simple engine failure is if you break out of the clouds at 50' straight into a rock, or right into a lake. I suppose there is always bad luck though.....:(

No, the problem with the big singles is not generally the single engine factor, but the single pilot. A huge proportion of the fatal crashes of these aircraft are CFIT or pilot decision problems, and almost always single pilot. I for one will gladly take a trained kid with 200hrs over the second engine. Given a proper S.O.P and a corporate attitude that fosters a good crew, the majority of these crashes wouldn't happen.

I won't surmise what actually caused this recent crash, but regardless of the actual cause, I think some serious questions must be asked about this accident flight

1) Why was there only one pilot with a full load of paying passengers in IFR weather?
2)Why didn't this company ground the flight in light of what was clearly some serious icing in the area? Several other pilots in the area had parked themselves already that day. I've taken Caravans off-strip and done a whole lot of things that readers of this forum might think a bit nuts with one, but tangling with ice is not something I would purposely do in a caravan. I would never knowingly accept freezing drizzle of any intensityas suitable for a caravan. The carrier in question has lost two other caravans to icing. One of them was flown by a good friend, who luckily survived with three crushed Vertebrae and a bunch of stitches. Even at the time of his crash, he stated that the company would never question a pilot's decision not to go, but they would basically never stop the flight themselves. He went-- and got caught. They of course pushed him out the door afterwards to the unemployment line.
3)Was the accident flight operating over water (or in this case thin ice) at an altitude that would allow a safe glide to shore? Were there life vests, etc. aboard? The pictures show a search happening a looonnnng ways from shore. In flight breakup/mechanical failure is certainly a good possibility at this time, which might explain why the aircraft ended up where it did, but I would seriously question how it got so far from shore unless he was at a considerable altitude.

Truly another sad day in aviation. Having been caught twice in unforecast icing in a Caravan, and having been lucky (luck and nothing else) enough to escape a few other situations whilst flying single pilot IFR, I know that there is nothing more lonely than sitting there by yourself waiting for fate to take its course. That feeling comes right back to the pit of my stomach when I read of these types of accidents. I know the sadness that the families and loved ones are feeling, but I also can't help being angered at the fact that the pilot ended up in the above circumstances (even if they turn out to be irrelavent to the crash) when there was no need. He should have never been where he was, when he was there, and by himself. The system is to blame for that.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Elliot M. :

I read that the airplane was about one km off shore.

I used to fly that run many years ago and if he took off westbound it would not take long to travel one km.

I still would like to know what his last transmission was, the news media claim that ATC picked up his transmission.

One thing for sure this is the most dreadful accident with a single engine turbine that I know about,,,

We can only hope and pray it was mechanical failure..

One cannot express the grief that these events bring.

Chuck

[Ignition Override]

Just a note to commend the other contributors to this thread. So far, no classic attacks or defensive counter-assaults seem to have been made on anyone; mighty tame for Pprune. Maybe this is premature.

Just a question about the various PT-6 engines' autofeather operation. I flew some (Emb-110) 'Bandits' and Shorts 330/360s, all of which had a very reliable PT-6 autofeather system, and we certainly don't know if there was an engine problem onboard the plane in this recent tragedy.

Someone told me several years ago that a Caravan in Alaska suffered an engine failure and the prop did NOT autofeather-the pilot supposedly had to push the nose almost straight down to keep the plane above minimum airspeed, due to the prop's huge drag. The guy was said to have ditched and survived. Is this story true? If so, what a superb recovery and ditching with little warning! Were mistakes made during maintenance on the propellor up in Alaska?

Were I to fly a turboprop again one day, it would be my wish to fly a DeHavilland with PT-6 engines.

[bcflyer]

I flew the Caravan for 2 yrs and don't seem to remember it having an autofeather. It was about 5yrs ago so maybe someone a bit more current can confirm this.
I thought it was a great plane to fly although I have to agree with the earlier comment about not flying it in any kind of freezing precip (rain, drizzle) It would handle a bit of ice but you had to know the limits of the aircraft. When I was at Flight Safety I met a grizzly old guy who's instructions on using the deice were to wait till you had lost 10 knots then blow the boots and you'll get 8 knots back. You can see that eventually you're going to be out of knots!!! Where I flew we always had a portable deicing pack that we used to get rid of any ice that was left over from the flight in or that had accumulated while on the ground. It was simply a big garden sprayer that had glycol in it. Very simple but effective. A real godsend when operating into the remote communities that we frequented.
I think one of the biggest problems with the C-208 is that its quite often a pilots first IFR captain seat and quite often single pilot at that. This usually brings a lower experience level. There is alot of pressure to get the job done and unfortunately when you are a little green and in command for the first time you don't always have the confidence to say no. Its sad but its true.

My condolences to those that lost a loved one.

[chuks]

Autofeather a la DHC-6 works by comparing the torque on two engines, doesn't it? So there's no way you could fit that to a single. There must be a specific drill for engine failure on a C-208 that has one feathering the prop after an engine failure. The risk associated with autofeather is that it might throw a wobbly and feather a perfectly good engine. That's why we only use it for takeoff. It's not a magic pill.

I try to always have my glide speed or Vx in mind, so that when that evil swine at the back of the sim slips in a total loss of power I have a snappy come-back while I figure out what to do next. But in real life there are places you could do everything right and still end up dead, either from the crash impact or else from exposure. There I just wouldn't want to be in a single if I had the choice of a twin.

There was a crash of a Piper Tomahawk down in the Carolinas a long time ago now, when they lost their magnetos at night over the piney woods. The pilot, an instructor, did everything right within the limited options available but both occupants died when they hit the trees.

Under normal conditions in much of the world if you end up in the water without a survival suit all that a life jacket will do is assist in the recovery of your corpse, unless you are extremely lucky. Check out what happened after the Air Florida crash, right in the middle of a major American city, when people ended up in the Potomac River. In winter you have a couple of minutes, max, before your body stops obeying your commands, not much time at all.

I had a job once flying what one could fairly call junk airplanes. Sad old Travel Airs (160 h.p. per engine) loaded up with four big, fat Bahamian market ladies going out of Miami on a hot afternoon with all their shopping back to Freeport. The rate of climb on two engines could have been measured with a calendar, so that if I had lost one I wouldn't have had many options. There I would have been just ever so happy to have been given a C-208 instead, I suppose. They hadn't been invented yet, plus they cost serious money relative to a clapped out Travel Air.

But then I would get these runs at night from Great Inagua back to Miami over about 400 miles of water, mostly. The so-called Bermuda Triangle, where it's quite easy to vanish without a trace. No little green men, just lots and lots of water and very few bits of dry land. Then I wanted two engines, minimum.

The thing about the Navajo is that it's often a rather tired, not all that easy-to-fly airplane flown by a low-time crew. A recipe for accidents, yes? I remember a typical accident, where the pilot lost one engine early in the takeoff roll and continued down a long runway until he lost control due to Vmc, trying to make it fly on one engine. Doh! (That was when the FAA changed the rules to require ATP licenses for air taxi pilots. After that we started having a much better class of accident, I guess.)

I guess the thing is, as a pilot, you have to take the risks as part of the cost of joining the club. The real problem is that the passengers often naively expect that boarding some little bug smasher piloted by a pimply kid on a day that the birds are all walking is just as safe as flying with a major airline. Well, thanks to the magic of 'code-sharing' sometimes they expect the major airline and get the bug smasher! Then, when the inevitable happens, flocks of lawyers descend to profess themselves shocked, just shocked by what they find about the risks their innocent clients were exposed to.

[skidcanuck]

Chuks said "Autofeather a la DHC-6 works by comparing the torque on two engines, doesn't it? So there's no way you could fit that to a single."

Actually, the autofeather for the DHC-6 works by sensing oil pressure via a pressure switch. Once the autofeather is armed, if Torque of either engine drops below 11 psi (for 2 seconds if the 2 sec delay mod is installed), the propeller feathers.

[skidcanuck]

Lake Erie crash recovery operation suspended


By DARREN YOURK
Globe and Mail Update


The Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Samuel Risley has returned to port after bad weather forced officials to temporarily suspend the recovery of the wreckage from a plane crash in Lake Erie.

Blowing show and high winds early Thursday sent the Samuel Risley back to Kingsville, Ont., to get fresh supplies and wait out the weather. Police said the ship could be back out to the site later Thursday, and the search will resume Friday morning if weather allows.

The ship has been surveying the site all week with a camera mounted on a remote-controlled sled. An OPP dive team is aboard, waiting to dive and survey the crash scene before deciding how to proceed.

Officials have warned that the preparation for a recovery operation of this size could take days or even weeks.

The bodies of the 10 victims — eight of whom were close friends from southwestern Ontario heading home from a hunting trip on Pelee Island — remain submerged 7.5 metres under the lake's surface.

The Cessna Caravan 208B carrying the 10 passengers crashed into Lake Erie's frigid waters about 4:40 p.m. Saturday afternoon, less than a kilometre after takeoff from an airstrip on the Island. The flight was bound for Windsor.

The Federal Transportation Safety Board announced Thursday afternoon it has suspended the Air Operator Certificate of Georgian Express airlines, the company that was operating the plane.

"The decision to suspend the Air Operator Certificate was based on the review of the company's documentation and the department's assessment of the preliminary information," a release said.

"The department will continue to work with the Georgian Express Ltd. The company will be required to demonstrate that they meet all applicable rules and regulations before its Air Operator Certificate will be re-issued."

[LNAV-VNAV]

"The Federal Transportation Safety Board announced Thursday afternoon it has suspended the Air Operator Certificate of Georgian Express airlines, the company that was operating the plane."

That sounds a bit strange. The Safety Board should be investigating the accident; the Department of Transport normally issues and takes away AOCs.

[604guy]

RE: TSB vs TC....I suspect it is a case of the usual muck up by journalists.

TC issues and suspends OC's. They are the regulator. TSB's mandate is to figure out what happened and make recommendations (if any) accordingly.

[rotornut]

LNAV, 604

You guys are correct. In the print edition of this morning's Globe & Mail the reporter did mention Transport Canada as the suspending authority. Unfortunately, the article is not online when I checked a few minutes ago but is at A5 in today's paper.

[c150driver]

So are the 1900s grounded too, or just the Caravans??

Elliot Moose....how ya doing? Still teaching sim?...by the way, I have a documented case of an engine failure in a Caravan before year 2000...I had an engine failure in one...thank God I was still on the ground! The mechanics said that it was due to a frozen P3 line.....As I remember, it was 200' overcast that day...lucky me!

[Cardinal Puff]

The prop on a PT6 engine is controlled by oil pressure from the engine driven gearbox oil pump. If the engine flames out and rpm decays the pump no longer supplies enough pressure to keep the prop fined off in the flight/ground range and it will run to the feather position (or almost all the way). This takes a few seconds longer than manual/auto feathering but it will happen.

[rotornut]

London Free Press

Aircraft maker 'aware of flaws'

A U.S. lawsuit raises concerns about a Cessna model similar to one that crashed off Pelee Island.
JONATHAN SHER, Free Press Reporter 2004-01-24 03:32:38

The manufacturer of the plane that crashed last weekend into Lake Erie knew for years that model had flaws that made it dangerously susceptible to ice, says a lawsuit filed against Cessna Aircraft Co. The presence of freezing rain last Saturday about the time of takeoff of the Cessna 208B Caravan is being investigated by Canadian authorities. The crash killed 10 people.

Cessna has known since the 1990s there was a defect in the design or manufacturing of its 208B Caravan that made it prone to icing, the suit claims.

The lawsuit was filed after that model crashed Oct. 10, 2001, in Alaska. That crash killed all 10 on board.

"Cessna appointed a special committee to study this precise problem and conducted additional testing," reads the legal claim, obtained by The Free Press.

Tests showed the plane was prone to stall after a "minor" amount of ice got on the wings and tail, the suit contends.

Despite discovering the flaw, Cessna marketed the Caravan for cold climates and failed to warn operators of the defect, the suit claims.

The lawsuit contains allegations that have not yet been proven in court.

Cessna spokesperson Jessica Myers wouldn't comment yesterday on pending litigation or the claim Caravans were especially vulnerable to ice.

But Myers did say the plane was durable, reliable and capable of carrying large loads in all types of weather. "It's kind of the SUV of the sky."

The Alaska crash bears striking resemblance to the one last Saturday that killed 10 people just off Pelee Island.

Both planes crashed moments after takeoff. Both were piloted by men who had flown four years for their airlines. Both led investigators to examine if ice built up on the wings, and if a buildup caused the crashes.

The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board concluded one year ago that undetected ice caused the Alaskan crash.

That ice wouldn't have been easily visible from the ground because the wings are placed high on the plane, investigators said in their final report.

Cessna is also defending a second lawsuit filed after four perished in a Caravan that crashed mid-flight in Nov. 8, 2002, in Arizona. The claim was filed in October 2003 by the family of the pilot, who was killed.

While the U.S. safety board hasn't finished its investigation, its early findings suggest icing played a critical role.

On Thursday, Transport Canada suspended the licence of the airline that operated the Caravan in the Pelee crash -- Georgian Express, based in Mississauga.

Efforts to recover the bodies of the victims of the Pelee crash as well as the plane were hampered yesterday by poor weather. High winds and blowing snow made conditions too dangerous to use a helicopter, needed to ensure the safety of the divers.

[broadreach]

Rotornut's posting of the LFP article has "nanny state" bells ringing in my ears.

Cessna's being sued because it builds a high-wing, single-engine aircraft that's commercially succesful because, like a Mercedes Sprinter van, it's the right size for the market, a flexible, tough and reliable workhorse. Those very same qualities are what put the aircraft in the line of danger, in that workhorses are always more likely to be pushed slightly beyond their limits.

Its shortcomings, if you can call the tendency of a slow-flying box to accumulate whatever ice is around during its normal flight profile, are known throughout the industry.

What, really, is the difference between taking a Cherokee or a Caravan into marginal icing conditions? The fact that there are eight pax vs three pressing to get home and saying "hell, let's at least give it a try"? The greater likelihood that the aircraft's being operated by a company a step up from air-taxi and aspiring to higher things?

It's down to the operator, and the pilot on Pellis Island, isn't it? I realise the suit Rotornut posted has nothing to do with this particular case and that it's early days to speculate about what the families of this acccident could be contemplating. But I'm sure anyone who reads the LFP article will have made the connection.

Sueing the aircraft manufacturer for its product not being up to flying perfectly in all conditions is simply ridiculous.

[Timothy]

Sueing the aircraft manufacturer for its product not being up to flying perfectly in all conditions is simply ridiculousWasn't there a case twenty years ago because someone had died as a result of an engine failure, it transpired that he hadn't done any of the recommended servicing, even changing the oil, for many hours and years and his widow still won substantial damages?

I've always heard that one quoted as why the US light aviation industry effectively died.

Timothy

[Few Cloudy]

Some of the posts above show some confusion about freezing rain.

To be sure, it is a killer. Why?

True freezing rain, as opposed to normal rain freezing on cold ground/surfaces forms when a winter warm front drops rain through the cold - below zero wedge of air below. Then super cooled droplets form - still water although below zero degrees. The environment is then filled with these highly unstable droplets - waiting only for the slightest vibration (your aircraft is more than is needed) to turn them into solid ice.

When a wing hits freezing rain, the drops start to run back across the surface, freezing as they go. The next drops follow and pretty soon you have a tenacious thick layer of ice.

This is why most airlines forbid take-off in freezing rain and why any HOT (hold over table) quoting a time for freezing rain is highly unreliable.

Anti icing systems vary - thermal ones often cannot cope in the take-off phase. Boots have the following effect:
If the boots are running when entering freezing rain, the droplets still freeze and run back along the surface. As the ice becomes thicker, a tube of ice develops around the maximum radius of the boots. You can run them all day after that but they are powerless to remove the tube.

If, despite the warnings to AVOID freezing rain, you find yourself flying in it, then you have to allow ice to begin to build BEFORE operating the boots. Then the boots can crack the layer away. the boots have to be deactivated and the process repeated. Obviously not a recommended scenario.

The ice doesn't only form on the wings - it will attack your prop, any intakes and sensors and cover your windshield pronto. All the aircraft's defences are at or beyond their limits in the severest cases.

So to those of you who are already familiar with this phenomenon, excuse the post and move on. Those who are not - be very respectful of freezing rain, freezing drizzle or heavy wet snow falls. All these scenarios have super cooled water in the game.

Lastly, this is a general note and in no way intended to be speculation on the cause of this sad crash.

[Timothy]

Few Cloudy

Yup, that's a fair summary of my experience. Ironically, although it is the least threatening part of the experience, it is the instantaneous covering of the windshield that raises the pulse rate first!

Timothy

[RatherBeFlying]

[list=1]
In discovery, demand plaintiff lawyer find like configuration a/c and videotape flight in same icing conditions
Wait looong time while plaintiff lawyer goes through test pilots until one survives -- while a deep pocket plaintiff lawyer can consider airframes expendable, insurance for test pilots may be a problem. May need to find test pilots with painful terminal illness who'd rather go quickly than slowly.
Show all videos in court.
[/list=1] In my book taking off in any a/c in freezing rain is the aerodynamic equivalent of driving a car into a bridge abutment at 80 mph. Leaving it on the ramp for fifteen minutes or more while ice acculumates is just icing on the cake:uhoh:

[rotornut]

For what it's worth, in Canada it would be harder to prove liability on the part of Cessna than in the US. Years ago American courts adopted a standard of strict liability in products liability cases, which makes it much easier for plaintiffs to recover in the event of an accident like this one. In Canada in the event of a lawsuit the plaintiffs would have a much more difficult time of it, given the current state of the law which requires a plaintiff to prove negligence on the part of the manufacturer.

[skidcanuck]

This is from the NTSB website

___________________________________________________

NTSB Identification: DCA02MA003. The docket is stored on NTSB microfiche number DMS.
Scheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Wednesday, October 10, 2001 in Dillingham, AK
Probable Cause Approval Date: 1/23/03
Aircraft: Cessna 208, registration: N9530F
Injuries: 10 Fatal.
The airplane was parked outside on the ramp the night before the accident and was subjected to rain, snow, and temperatures that dropped below 32 degrees F. Other pilots whose airplanes were also parked outside overnight stated that about 1/4 to 1/2 inch of snow/frost covered a layer of ice on their airplanes the morning of the accident. Because of these conditions, ramp personnel deiced the accident airplane with a heated mixture of glycol and water. The PenAir ramp supervisor who conducted the deicing stated that he believed the upper surface of the wing was clear of ice but that he did not physically touch the wing to check for the presence of ice. Investigators were unable to determine whether the accident pilot visually or physically checked the wing and tail surfaces for contamination after the accident airplane was deiced. However, the airplane's high-wing configuration would have hindered the pilot's ability to see residual clear ice on the surface of the wing after the deicing procedures. Company records indicate that the certificated commercial pilot completed his initial CE-208 flight training 2 months before the accident and had accumulated a total of 74 hours in this make and model of airplane. The airplane, with the pilot and nine passengers onboard, crashed shortly after takeoff from runway 01. A witness observed that the airplane's flight appeared to be normal until the airplane suddenly pitched up, rolled 90 degrees to the left, and yawed to the left. The airplane then descended nose-down until it disappeared from view. Data from the engine monitoring system revealed that the maximum altitude obtained during the accident flight was about 651 feet mean sea level. The airplane crashed in a level attitude. Investigators found no evidence of pre-impact failures in the structure, flight control systems, or instruments. Further, examination of the engine and propeller revealed no pre-impact failures and that the engine was running when the airplane hit the ground.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

an in-flight loss of control resulting from upper surface ice contamination that the pilot-in-command failed to detect during his preflight inspection of the airplane. Contributing to the accident was the lack of a preflight inspection requirement for CE-208 pilots to examine at close range the upper surface of the wing for ice contamination when ground icing conditions exist

[skidcanuck]

Searchers find plane with bodies onboard in Lake Erie
Last Updated Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:31:42


POINT PELEE, ONT. - The bodies of 10 people killed in a plane crash off Pelee Island, Ont., in Lake Eire more than a week ago have been found.

The Ontario Provincial Police say underwater video footage of the fuselage show the victims are still on board. The plane was found Monday, mostly intact and upright on the lakebed.

It's unclear how and when the plane and its victims will be recovered. Provincial police divers must first assess the condition of the plane.

Severe weather is still putting a damper on the recovery efforts.

Canadian Coast Guard Capt. Darryl Clow says there are gale force winds on Lake Erie and drifting ice is becoming a problem.



Written by CBC News Online staff

[Rosbif]

I heard that Georgian's OC has been restored. Is this true?
Just for some background.-- Air Georgian flies scheduled freight and is a subcontractor mainly for the company that distributes bank documents to every bank branch in Ontario, and then flies them all back every evening. Other freight is then 'piggy backed' on these runs.
This is a 12 month a year operation, and the company and its pilots are very experienced with the icing issues. If they did not fly every time 'light freezing drizzle' was forcast , they would be cancelling a lot of flights.They would lose their contract and be replaced by Navjo operators (single pilot to save weight).
This condition is forcast 'just in case' any time a winter warm front comes through Ontario, and the times that Georgian fly in the morning frequently makes them the weather observer for everyone else in Ontario in the morning.
By definition, freezing precip implies a temperature above zero somewhere above you, so it normally makes sense to climb into the unfrozen rain to deice if you get stuck. I have flown into Toronto in a caravan with a completely clean plane while airliners were arrivng complaining about 'severe icing'.
You have to watch the outside air temp and take action as soon as you see an inversion. The caravan is certified for known icing and is safe, in my opinion, as long as you are very careful to keep the speed up, the flaps still (preferably up) and a careful eye on outside air temp. I have seen 4 inches of ice on the thing, (I got caught out) and found that it flew OK, but I didn't experiment with speed under 120 or move extend the flaps. Needless to say that once on the ground, I didn't take off again.
Incidentally, the windshield deicing plate on the caravan is terrible. I personally would not fly any kind of circling approach with ice on this plane.
There is a step on the side of the plane and one uses it to get a look (and feel) at the top of the wing. It's easy to do, and Van drivers do it a lot if they suspect ice.
I also used to use the bugspray bottle with glycol in it. In the old freighter version there was a hot air vent just behind the pilot's seat. If you stand your bottle on it, the glycol stays warm and works much better.
Just some background and my opinion only (for the lawyers out there)
Rosbif

[rotornut]

No. ON 02/04
For release January 27, 2004

TRANSPORT CANADA LIFTS
RESTRICTIONS ON GEORGIAN EXPRESS LTD.
TORONTO - Transport Canada today announced the reinstatement of Georgian Express Ltd.'s Air Operator Certificate, effective immediately.

Transport Canada suspended Georgian Express' operating certificate on Thursday, January 22, 2004, following the fatal accident at Pelee Island, subject to demonstration by the company that it meets all regulations and standards. The special purpose audit conducted by Transport Canada over the past few days has confirmed that the company has systems in place enabling it to meet all requirements.

Transport Canada has increased the frequency of inspection of the air operator and will continue to monitor Georgian Express' operations closely.

Georgian Express continues to cooperate fully with the department. Today's decision does not preclude further action at a later date.

Transport Canada will continue to support the investigation underway by the Transportation Safety Board.

[skidcanuck]

Good post, Rosbif. However, as you may have read, with no recovery of the aircraft or victims yet, to speculate on cause is akin to throwing darts blindfolded.

Once the engine is analysed and the pilot's autopsy is complete, then we'll have narrowed the probable cause a bit for the lawyers.

P.S. The difference between a dead lawyer in the middle of the road and a dead snake in the middle of the road? ---Skid marks in front of the snake!

[Rosbif]

Quite right Skid.
I'm not trying to speculate as to the cause of this one, only trying to put some background as I see it re. the sort of things that you think/worry about in this type of operation.
It would be very disappointing if the TSB ends up citing the direct cause of this accident, rather than calling for a complete overhaul of the air taxi/703 system in Canada, which I feel is long overdue.
Whether relevant to this accident or not, we all know that the duty time regs are an anenforceable joke, for example.
It's all very sad, and I hope that at least some good comes of it.
I also think that giving Georgian their OC back after their 3rd hull loss is a bit silly, however nice their paperwork looks. I think that Three 'strikes and you're out' should apply here, and might at least adjust the attitude of all air taxi operators in Canada.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Quote:

Transport Canada has increased the frequency of inspection of the air operator and will continue to monitor Georgian Express's operations closely.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmmmmm..

Chuck E.

[pigboat]

Gives ya a warm fuzzy feeling, dunnit?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Yes, Pigboat it truly does.

I am especially comforteted by their reassurances that after a two working day in depth investigation they decided to lift the suspension. My question is why not wait two more days and save all the damage this has caused the employees of that company?

I am in no way insinuating that this company are not in compliance as I have no direct knowledge of their operation.

What gives me cause for doubt is when they (TC ) do any investigation of their own operaton it takes many months to come up with a determination that at best is so fuzzy even they are unable to interpet what the end result was.

Yeh, I am skeptical and wonder if there is any CYA in their " investigation "?

Chuck

[Rosbif]

One way or another, TC is sleeping.

Asleep at the wheel or sleeping with the enemy ?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Well lets look at one of their own internal reports on how they operate. ( I have a copy in my posession that somehow made to my mail box. )

Here is an exact quote from a TC internal document.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" Management dictates how inspectors are to act " has laid the foundation for mistrust and paranoia. Examples given include:

Behind closed doors meetings between managers and companies. "

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is lots more but that one item gives me some food for thought.

Chuck Ellsworth

[rotornut]

Plane wreckage, bodies lifted from Lake Erie
Last Updated Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:30:15

WINDSOR, ONT. - The fuselage of a plane that crashed into Lake Erie almost two weeks ago was raised from the frigid waters Thursday night, still containing the bodies of 10 people who died in the crash.

Ontario Provincial Police dive crews had attached straps to the fuselage earlier in the week.

On Thursday afternoon they began to lift it and by nightfall the plane was on the deck of the coast guard ship Samuel Risley.

Capt. Darryl Clow told a media briefing Friday that it's been a long difficult search and recovery mission. Now the investigation of the crash will begin, he said.

"The recovery of the aircraft will bring information vital to a determination of cause for this tragedy, with the goal of preventing further accidents," he said.

The investigation will now shift to the regional coroner in Windsor, Ont., and the Transportation Safety Board. The accident happened in bad weather shortly after the plane took off from Pelee Island on Jan. 17.

Eight passengers aboard the Georgian Express Flight 126 were returning from a hunting trip when the plane went down. The other two victims were the pilot and a friend from Los Angeles who came along for the ride.

On Friday, a memorial service for the 10 victims was held at the crash site. An iron cross made by searchers and a wreath were dropped into the water.

Search and recovery crews have also created an iron cross to be placed at the bottom of the lake near the crash site.



Written by CBC News Online staff

[lead zeppelin]

Has anyone heard about any findings for the cause of this accident?

Any other info............

[cringe]

Investigation is still ongoing, with the last TSB update from June 1st.

The investigation has so far determined that the structure of the aircraft was sound at the time of the flight; the aircraft engine was operational and producing power; and the aircraft was overweight at the time of departure from Pelee Island. http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/media/communiques/air/2004/a04h0001.asp

[rotornut]

I recall reading in the Globe and Mail a while ago, that the a/c was some 1000 lbs. overweight at the time of the crash. I'll see if I can find the article and post it.

[RatherBeFlying]

Recent studies have shown that the current values for standard passenger weights are no longer representative of the general population and that actual passenger weights may be routinely underestimated. In the case of Georgian Express Flight 126, the calculated weight for the people on board using standard weight was 1833 pounds; the actual weight of the persons on board with their clothes was 2400 pounds – a difference of 567 pounds. TSB Communique (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/media/recommendations/a04h0001/rec%5Fa04h0001%5F7oct2004.asp) TSB Recommendation (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/media/recommendations/a04h0001/rec%5Fa04h0001%5F21oct2004.asp)