Take off with snow on wing

[Pub User]

Just because you were taught to deice when there is snow on the wings, does not make you correct.

This crew wants to live as much as you do. You really think they came up with this method out of thin air?

The crew had probably done it hundreds of times, and got away with it. However, one in several hundred chance of a disaster is not nearly short enough odds for for commercial air transport operations (in the West), where odds in one in a million are deemed more acceptable.

[RobertS975]

Remember the Brouhaha IB A340 in BOS 12/2007?

A long thread with lots of different opinions!

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...c-cowboys.html

[tbaylx]

To all those who say the snow was blown off...don't know what video you are looking at but snow was adhering to sections of the wing and aileron long after they were airborne.

There is no captain's discretion with regards to contamination..if there is any you deice. period.

Lots of people have died to learn that lesson, no need to learn it again the hard way.

[Brian Abraham]

MD-11 Captain told me the story of landing in some European port and wanted to deice prior to departure. "What for" was the question put. No one else was, but his reason was he had tankered fuel in. Prudence.

[sabenaboy]

NEVER? take off with snow on the wings?

By all respect, in airline biz there is no room for speculations, no dry-snow-will-blow-off-during-TO procedures and no room for morons who think so.

I am certainly not defending these Aeroflot cowboys. On the contrary. (Just read my contributions in the parallel topic on the tech log)

But... let me tell you the story of an ex-colleague. He was DFO of our airline at that time. He was operating an A320 winter charter flight to Finnish Lapland with pax who were going to visit Santa Claus. I believe it was to Enontekio. It was EXTREMELY cold that day. Can't remember the exact temperature he said, but it must have been below -30°C for sure. They arrived early in the morning.

The same evening when they wanted to depart, the wings were covered by aprox. 1,5 cm of dry snow which had fallen during the afternoon. So, the captain requested de-icing. The Finair de-icing team that had been dispatched to Enontekio from Rovaniemi told him that de-icing was not an option because the de-icing fluid would be ineffective and would freeze! They brought a ladder and showed him that the snow was extremely dry and light and absolutely not sticking to the wings. The snow had fallen on a very cold and dry wing surface. The de-icing team said that Finair has procedures authorizing take-off in such conditions.

The captain decided to depart (engine intakes were cleaned with a brush) and even made a PA to the pax explaining his decision. Some pax later confirmed that the snow had completely been blown of the wing early during the take-off roll.

Was this particular captain a moron or a cowboy? In my opinion certainly not. Rules are there to be followed, but sometimes common sense has to prevail! Follow rules? Of course, but there should always be room for intelligently used common sense!

[de facto]

Couldnt they brush it off at the gate then if the snow was so 'dry' ?

Some pax later confirmed that the snow had completely been blown of the wing early during the take-off roll.

So someone wasnt so sure after all?

[sabenaboy]

Originally Posted by de facto

Couldnt they brush it off at the gate then if the snow was so 'dry'

The captain also suggested that to the de-icing team. Apparently first they laughed at him and told him he would have to do that himself at that temperature and then more seriously explained him that brooming the snow off the wings is a less good idea because you would inevitably compact the snow on some spots on the wing and that the snow might get brushed into flight control hinges. Sounds acceptable to me as well!

[up_down_n_out]

Read this:-

supercooled water

The little article from Leeds university should serve as a sharp reminder to the know it all,- "it will blow off" brigade.

Drop down to the noisy video in the page.

Surface contamination serves as a perfect seed (ice nucleation) environment for the formation of new crystals.

(This was implicated in the BA038 LHR near disaster caused by in the end by fuel cavitation).

The phenomenon might be the EXACT cause of the Tiumen crash.

[de facto]

you would inevitably compact the snow on some spots on the wing and that the snow might get brushed into flight control hinges. Sounds acceptable to me as well!

Yes and that is the problem in the first place,snow into the flight control hinges.
If FINNAIR had a special procedures in case of weather colder than lets say -30c, why wasnt the captain made aware of it via fcom,safety bulletin or else.
Why did he have to rely on the maintenance supposely knowledge of deicing procedures?
I also flew from airports where snow accumulated.It was initially brushed off then 2 steps deicing was done within close distance of the holding point.(temp was below -20c),snow had accumulated mostly on the root area of the wing(easily 20cm).Two deicing trucks used to reduce deicing time.

I wouldnt have personally accepted the maintenaNce word unless clearly stated in a written form and under what circumstances.

I guess they would have had also a concern on their fuel temperature...

[hetfield]

Found this comment below the youtube vid:

How dangerous for someone to be using an electronic device during takeoff... In the US you'd be escorted from the plane at the arrival end of your journey by air marshals...

Couldn't agree more.....

[sabenaboy]

@de facto

De Facto, this isn't the first time we start discussing. From what I've read in this and other posts, you appear to be someone who sticks to rules and SOP in what I consider to be an extreme way.

Although I wouldn't mind being a pax on your Boeing, I'd still prefer the cockpit crew of a slightly more flexible kind. I'm pretty sure that if you really ALWAYS blindly stick to the procedures and written rules, you would too often ground a plane and cause unnecessary inconvenience to your pax and financial losses for your airline.

If you are an experienced airline captain, which I can believe you are, surely you must have come in situations before where you could have said: "I'm grounding this plane" and have something on paper that would back you up, but where you didn't after using some intelligence. If that never happened in your career, but instead you used a written rule as an excuse EVERY time you saw something allowing you to ground the A/C, that might explain why you (have to?) fly in China.

I despise cowboys in the cockpit. I do not like nitpickers without any flexibility either. Following rules blindly without thinking and any flexibility can sometimes be disastrous as well!

Do I follow rules and SOP's. YES, I DO... but not like a robot. Isn't that what we call airmanship? Have I made (minor) mistakes in my career? Yes, and I'm sure I will make some more in the days, weeks and years to come. I even dare to say that I haven't made a single PERFECT flight in my whole life, even if I try it every single time! I think the difference between you and me is that I will more easily admit that I'm not infallible.

Happy flights!

Originally Posted by John R

other captains in the situation you describe would have opted not to operate the flight.

Absolutely, and I wouldn't criticize a captain for doing so. Of course that's also a safe option. But the question is: Is that the best option? Me thinks not. (trying to look at what a mess it would be trying to put up 180 pax and 6 crew in hotel beds...that weren't available.)

[The Bartender]

Originally Posted by sabenaboy

The captain also suggested that to the de-icing team. Apparently first they laughed at him and told him he would have to do that himself at that temperature and then more seriously explained him that brooming the snow off the wings is a less good idea because you would inevitably compact the snow on some spots on the wing and that the snow might get brushed into flight control hinges. Sounds acceptable to me as well!

Not a pilot myself (microlights and models don't count in here, right?), but as a former sprayer, de-icing coordinator, instructor, and head of training on the subject, i agree with them.

Attacking the snow with a broom is good for three things:
1. It may save you time in the de-icingbay, as brooming can be done at gate, during boarding, etc.
2. It will save the airline a lot of money (de-icing fluids and fuel).
3. Very enviromentaly friendly because of 1 and 2.

Brooming is however, not a replacement for proper de-icing treatment, it is a supplement, to be able to perform a more efficient de-icing treatment later on.

But rather than reccommend leaving the wing contaminated, i would take a closer look at the fluid limitations vs actual conditions, alternate de-icing positions for minimum exposure, tactile-check before line-up, and so on.
I'd rather tell you to leave the aircraft until spring, than tell you that departing with a contaminated wing is ok...

As for the video, i would probably pleed self-defence for trying out the aircrafts emergency exits in an attempt to stop the pilots from trying to kill me..

[Basil]

Can't remember the exact temperature he said, but it must have been below -30°C for sure.
The Finair de-icing team that had been dispatched to Enontekio from Rovaniemi told him that de-icing was not an option because the de-icing fluid would be ineffective and would freeze!

Perhaps they hadn't heard of this de-icing fluid.

Freezing point: -45C

[sabenaboy]

Originally Posted by The Bartender

As for the video, i would probably pleed self-defence for trying out the aircrafts emergency exits in an attempt to stop the pilots from trying to kill me

I already agreed with that. Link 1, 2 and 3.

@Basil: That would of course have been the best solution and I'm sure it would have been used if they had had that option.

[de facto]

Sabenaboy,
This is a discussion,lets not get personal,shall we?

you would too often ground a plane and cause unnecessary inconvenience to your pax and financial losses for your airline

Only time i refused an aircraft was a night flight in europe with anti ice valve dispatched in the closed position and obvious icing enroute.
I dont write the MEL nor the DDG.

If that never happened in your career, but instead you used a written rule as an excuse EVERY time you saw something allowing you to ground the A/C, that might explain why you (have to?) fly in China.

Quite a childish note.
I use the rules i am given by my airline and my licencing department to judge wether a flight can be operated or not.
If my airline leaves the final decision on me in case of a grey area,i will use my knowledge,experience to decide wether the potential risks are manageable.
I am flying in China because my previous airline went bust and the other airlines pay in europe are crap,i save 110 000 +eur/year here.

I follow rules and SOP's

Sops are what they are,mostly guidlines, Rules are regulations,rigid.
If you bend the rules and anything wrong happens,the airline you tried to save money or be so flexible for will be at the day of the hearing,not on your side but on the other side of the bench.

I think the difference between you and me is that I will more easily admit that I'm not infallible.

We are all fallible,we are humans,however i put all the chances on my side to provide my crew and passengers the safest flight i can provide.
Sometimes safety comes before profit.
You may read that i am all for fuel saving...some consider not uplifting extra fuel each flight is dangerous,i think this philosophy costs the airline money not some rare occasions when i deem as the final authority that the aircraft should be operated in the higher scale of safety net.

I despise cowboys in the cockpit. I do not like nitpickers without any flexibility either

I despise cowboys too,i dont enjoy nitpickers either,however,i always respected prudent and knowledgeable,less influenceable captains.

Sabena,are you a first officer?if so, i believe the day you will change seat,yoour perspective may change...there are times company financial benefit do not and should not cross the boundery of safety/potential hazardous odds.

It may not seem so but Im quite fun to fly with and i often helped the CC cleaning the aircraft in short turn arounds to make the turn around slot,so you see im not the DEVIL white gloved captain you may think,i take account of my airline and my passengers confort /ontime performance,but my final goal is the flight safety.

I wish you safe flight too

[andrasz]

Many moons ago I was involved with an airline as a low level life form usually referred to as bean counter. I had the privilege of having worked alongside a COO who could actually think in 256 shades of grey as opposed to the usual #000000 and #FFFFFF. In this outfit flight crews were actively encouraged to use sound judgement within the bounds of regulations, and also to consider the financial impact of their action when making decisions.

There were two scenarios (among some others), where crews were explicitly instructed to ignore any financial consequences - when deciding to go-around or when considering to de-ice. In both cases SOP called for "if in doubt, do it - no questions will be asked later".

Over the years the most serious incident we had was someone getting the nosewheel muddy after the 'caution, slippery when wet' sign was removed from the piano keys.

[Teddy Robinson]

Astonishing to see some posters defending the right of this crew to have an accident, along with countless fare paying passengers.
Quite sincerely, I hope the airline is properly identified, that the video goes viral, and said airline ceases trading.

What makes this video remarkable is that it did not include pitch & roll oscillations, and the moment of impact with the loss of all souls.

OUTRAGEOUS

[2EggOmelette]

To be fair, I don't think anyone here has actually defended the actions of the pilots involved, they have just given varying points of view as to why it may have occurred.
What gets me is the amount of supposition on this thread.
Lomapaso was very helpful at pointing out the parallel thread on the Tec log. Worth a look, some very enlightening discussion.

[aerobat77]

not pretty but also not such a brainer you discuss here. its just snow which gets blown off , the very few of us here which earn their money with sitting in the cockpit more than once made a take off with some snow on the wing or the tail .

the vast majority of the others may not understand that its today a tough market and a small margin between doing something dangerous and satisfying your company. definitvly you will not get the job done by just reading the SOP,s .

cheers !

[Bearcat]

And this aircraft departed from a large airport where numerous people would have been in attendance with aircraft at dispatch and would have seen the wings caked in snow?

I'm glad I work in an outfit that my f/o would have got the restraining kit if I attempted to do what this clot Did re dispatch together with redcaps, engineers and our ccm's are trained to report to the cockpit if they see ice / snow of wings before dispatch.

This video is vile and I said said in a previous they got out of jail with a monstrous runway length, using high icp speeds and when v1 came it was ignored with another 15 kts thrown in the bag before rotation says me.

So Capt a big clap on the back for winning the bell end award of stupidity for putting your pax lives in danger, your crews lives and those people in the surrounding area where you could have crashed.