click, the ATR involved in the Roselawn accident was holding in severe icing conditions with flaps extended and the A/P engaged.
I have looked on the internet for a full copy of the CVR transcript, but most versions start just before the accident. I have, in the past, seen a full transcript and it makes horrifying reading.
Put simply, the crew operating in a totally unprofessional manner.
During the hold, the captain spent something like 35 minutes down the back chatting up the cabin crew. Even when on the flight deck, he was still chatting them up, appartently paying little attention to the aircraft. There have been allegations that he was having an affair with one of them, but I have no information on that.
During the hold, there were (from memory) five incidents of the pitch trim whooler going off. This should have alerted even the most inexperienced pilot to the fact that the A/P was having severe trouble maintaining the aircraft in the manner commanded. Yet not a peep out of the crew.
The ATR was quite unjustifiably slammed by the NTSB and various authorities after that incident. Even though it was demonstrated quite categorically that the crew acted in a manner opposed to the instructions of the FCOM, the ATR was victimised, even though ATR themselves ordered modifications to the boots, and paid for some very extensive tests.
I have flown both 42 and 72 versions and find it a very nice aircraft indeed. I had no problem whatsoever with icing, through two European winters, and flying in Alpine conditions.
Like any aircraft, if you don't follow the FCOM, it will bite you in the bum.
PS NoSpeed - that's a very bad habit.