PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Cessna Caravan icing problems
View Single Post
Old 9th March 2008 | 08:37
  #13 (permalink)  
185driverAlaska
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: Alaska
Dillingham Accident

A jury in Anchorage, Alaska, reached a verdict in favor of Cessna in a lawsuit arising from the Oct. 10, 2001 crash of a PenAir Caravan near Dillingham, Alaska. The plaintiffs, relatives of the 10 people killed in the crash, claimed the Caravan had design defects that made it dangerous to fly in icing conditions. The jury found that “no defects” of the Caravan contributed to the accident. Cessna said, “Again, we wish to extend our heartfelt sympathy to those who lost family or friends in this accident. As to the verdict, after weighing the evidence, the jury has reached a conclusion that, in fact, coincides with what we have known about the Cessna 208 since the first one entered service in 1985. It is well designed and safe when flown within the parameters of the pilots operating handbook.” The NTSB concluded in January 2003 that the probable cause of the accident was “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.”

There is too much flight time and Flight tests by several agencies to have a tail that stalls for no reason.

So one would think that the tail only has an upload during the winter in visible moisture and cold. Do you think the tail upload stall has been masked by these accidents in cold weather, so by circular logic, the tail only has an upload during the winter in visible moisture.

Where in the heck is the tail plane upload stalls in normal weather?You have to show that the critical angle of attack on the tail is exceeded for it to stall.
185driverAlaska is offline  
Reply