Continental Airlines Newark Chief Pilot in De-Icing Controversy

[Halfnut]

And you thought your operation is screwed up.....

*CAL** Safety Update*

February 23, 2007

On Feb. 9, 2007, the EWR Chief Pilot’s Office distributed the following
B-737 Update:

I woke up Wednesday morning and departed for work. I found my car under
an unexpected covering of loose powdery snow. I brushed it off the
windshield, and departed. As I accelerated up the street, the snow
readily blew off my car as I expected it would. When I arrived in EWR
that morning, it was apparent to me that we were in the midst of a
full-blown de-icing operation with our morning bank of planes, for
exactly the same conditions as I found with my car that morning: Loose
powdery snow covering the surfaces of the aircraft. Outside temperature
was well below freezing. Was de-icing warranted that morning? It’s my
opinion it was NOT. Flight Manual Sec 3, page 349 states, “The check to
determine the need for de-icing is an examination of critical aircraft
surfaces to ensure they are free of any ADHERING ice, snow, slush, or
frost. It was more than my opinion that morning that the loose powdery
snow would have departed almost immediately during the takeoff roll; I
actually did an inspection of an aircraft parked at the gate, to
determine actual conditions. Flight Ops Manual Sec 9, cites FAR 121.629,
which says the same about adhering contamination. Yet there was a
line-up of at least 25-30 aircraft waiting to be de-iced, and more to
follow. It was my opinion (and it appears that I am full of opinions
today) that this was a herd mentality. One aircraft asks to be de-iced,
and everyone else follows suit. In light of my continued message
regarding safety, this may seem contradictory. Believe me, I am in no
way suggesting that you compromise safety. Instead, I am suggesting that
we understand the conditions, and exercise common sense. This was an
opportunity to not only be safe, but to be efficient as well. Remember
that Professional statement I mentioned above. It was suggested by
someone that he would not take the chance that a lawyer may be seated in
row 13, as he was approaching the runway for takeoff with snow on his
wings. My answer to that is to make an announcement to the passengers
stating your intentions. Again, Safety and Common Sense prevails, but
knowledge is power.

**The CAL ALPA Central Air Safety Committee whole heartedly disagrees
with this bulletin. To compare an automobile with a transport category
aircraft is ludicrous at best. The problems with this bulletin are too
numerous to mention but we’ll cite just a few. **

** **

**How would the pilot know what conditions were encountered during the
arriving flight? Did the aircraft fly through icing conditions during
the arrival which are now masked by the snow covering? **

** **

**Exactly HOW does one determine that all the critical surfaces are free
from adhering contamination when the aircraft is covered with snow? How
does the pilot know that ice is not adhering to the tail surfaces? The
wings? The top of the fuselage? What kind of inspection would need to be
accomplished to make this determination?**

** **

**We realize that this bulletin has raised many concerns among the pilot
group. We are working to get this corrected as soon as possible. You are
the professionals and your decision to de-ice should not be subject to
this type of shortsighted second guessing. Safety considerations should
always trump concerns of pure airline economics. In the end, taking
safety seriously will best serve our passengers, crewmembers and the
future viability of the airline.**

** **

**Capt. John M. Buchan**

**CAL**** ALPA Central Air Safety**

[bomarc]

Caution: chief pilots may be hazardous to your health and your career.

if you look at a plane and think more than 1 second about the deice question, you have over thought the situation. If you think it might need deicing, then get deiced/anti iced.

the old, "snow will blow off once we get going" has fallen out of favor at my airline about 19 years ago.

of course, if you want to get all the mechanics to get brooms and sweep off the snow, you can try that first, then place your hand on ever part of the critical surface to make sure that there is no ice...but of course it is easier to just get deiced.

I have a feeling the chief pilot in question used to work at one place I worked ...on a metroliner...he climbed up on the tail and swept off the snow/frost...gotta save money, gottta stay on time.

of course, in this sunny california case, pulling the plane into the bright sunlight would melt the stuff in 20 minutes, and NO risk of falling off the tail (many things wrong with this guy).

[Daysleeper]

Free online training course, useful for chief pilots offices.

NASA (http://aircrafticing.grc.nasa.gov/courses_ground.html#)

[RAT 5]

I do not know anything about the individual, nor about the exact conditions on the day, nor the type of a/c. However, if as ALPA say, there are many who disagree with this operational 'wisdom', I would have thought the FAA, D.Op's. CEO of the airline might have interesting opinions about the fitness of this person to be C.P. and offer such guidance to crews.

There may be mitigating circumstances; it may be the C.P has an exemplary record of good leadership and sound advice: then again it might not.

[captjns]

Can the chief pilot look into his crystal ball to determine how much ice is adhering to the wing beneath the powder? When in doubt... well... you don't need a crystal ball to finish the sentence.

[Captain Numpty]

Air Florida 90???????

[captjns]

BTW... if this is a letter from the CAL CP is infact ligit, I'm sure the Friends of All Aviators would have a field day with this intrepid airman who must be a direct descendant of Orville and Wilber.

[Angryfool]

When I initially read this post I thought it was a wind-up! I'm hoping this is, but then again my experience of chief pilot's is that after a while they forget what flying is all about, and become more like accountant's.

Loose
powdery snow covering the surfaces of the aircraft. Outside temperature
was well below freezing. Was de-icing warranted that morning? It’s my
opinion it was NOT. Flight Manual Sec 3, page 349 states, “The check to
determine the need for de-icing is an examination of critical aircraft
surfaces to ensure they are free of any ADHERING ice, snow, slush, or
frost.

I mean what is this muppet on!!
As Capt Numpty pointed to the Air Florida crash in Washington, there are many other's as well.

It was more than my opinion that morning that the loose powdery
snow would have departed almost immediately during the takeoff roll

How about the aircraft that is ahead of you at the r/way hold melting the snow with the heat from it's engine's exhaust. Of course this would then turn the snowy wing into an icy one. I'm sure that the chief pilot thinks that this acceptable as well, because the probability is so tiny, it'll only happen to a few aircraft a year, and even then they should all be ok.


Flight Manual Sec 3, page 349 states, “The check to
determine the need for de-icing is an examination of critical aircraft
surfaces to ensure they are free of any ADHERING ice, snow, slush

Any pilots who work for CAL, could you confirm the 'ADHERING' bit for me. Is this correct? I find it very difficult to comprehend in the context it is being taken; unless it is implying that if the snow is falling and melting (ie not adhering) then it is permissable to depart.

[wileydog3]

We had something similar at 'my house' a few years before I retired. The ATIS was calling for freezing rain in a special but the wx had moved on. The local tower had just not changed the special and so when guys were taxiing out and NOT deicing, the FAA got involved. This lead to the old axiom, "For every action there is an unequal and opposite over-reaction." EVERYONE began getting deiced if there was so much as a hint of snow/ice.

Finally reason prevailed (albeit taking a bit of time) and we had the de-ice pad set up to check the surfaces. With their booms, they could actually check the surfaces and see if it was coated, adhering or just dry powder on the wings.

Unfortunately, this seems like one of those events where one guy is saying "NEVER" and the other is 'ALWAYS' and both are probably just dancing to the pipes of a higher piper's tune.

[Huck]

Sometimes the chief pilot (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18961&key=1) may need to fly more.

[Arctaurus]

".....If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."


Seems as if the majority of pilots on that Wednesday morning thought the same way and erred on the side of safety. :ok:

The assumptions that this CP made are nothing short of breathtaking and indeed the FAA should have a closer look at his office.:=

[Basil]

Another (very surprising) airline to add to my 'Never fly with' list.

Perhaps a management representative could comment?

[merlinxx]

BOMARC in DC, hope you add Capt Numpty's post re Air Florida 90. This has to be a wind up.

[Ignition Override]

That Chief Pilot is letting the ignorant beancounters influence his thinking.

It is risky enough when outsourced ramp "staff" only de-ice one of your jet's wings (or check a DC-9 'T-tail'/horizontal stabilizer and think they are checking the upper wing for clear ice!). True situations this winter.:ouch:
Don't ever assume that these new personnel (lots of turnover/constant training) de-ice the required areas on your aircraft.

As stated above, no Chief Pilot should have pilots think about the cost or delays required when they see more than a few scattered dry snowflakes sitting on the wings. The cost of the de-icing fluid and resultant delays roughly equals out from airline to airline, and what if it does not?

Take the higher cost difference out of Upper Mgmts' bonuses, as the price for having a safer airline.:ok:

[Few Cloudy]

Hardly have we got everyone trained up to take de-icing seriously (see uncountable accidents due to improper or not performed de-icing) then out comes a chief with the attitude of a raw beginner and calls it all into question.

Show him the records someone - show him the pictures of the thick (inches thick) sheet of ice which was taken off the Finnair MD-80 wing after the snow had been removed - show him - ah! well maybe just fire him!

It seems to be a chief pilot thing. Swissair once had its chief of operations taxying a DC-10 to the runway in ZRH, when a following aircraft informed him "You have snow on your wings!" his reply could have come from our friend here, "It will blow off during Take Off!" Worse still, he then took off anyway.

After that he became known as Snowy. Well it's better than Smoky I suppose, which it well could have been (as in black smoking hole).

Yes, that name in the title seems about right.

FC.

[ornithopter]

Lets just say for arguments sake that this chap is correct just for a moment.

As you start the take off roll, you do not have the designed aerofoil shape due to the snow. As the roll continues the shape gradually changes such that during the roll the aerofoil becomes the correct shape. At what point? How does the takeoff speed/weight calculation take this into account? What about the added drag? What about the change in the surface shape and therefore a change in the boundary layer (this can make a huge difference, in fact if some aircraft wings are painted with the wrong paint it impedes their performance greatly)? What if you get bits stuck in the flaps or slats? What about the temperature of the wings with below zero fuel in them (ie not like a car at all!)?

It looks like even if the "it'll blow off" bit is right (its not!), then there are plenty of other reasons to ignore this misguided fool.

Still accepting it might be a wind up.

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

While the regulation does (somewhat misleadingly) talk about adhering contaminants, to use the same motoring analogy used by the chief pilot in question:

I wonder if he cleared the snow from his windshield and such, or did he start off driving with a blocked windshield and wait for it to blow off?

[airvanman]

:ugh:
Subject touched on this thread recently:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=265335

[Tjosan]

Or show him what happened to SAS when the MD-80 landed on a field
with a dual engine flame-out due to clear ice on the wings.

[Bigmouth]

All true.
However, there has been - at times - a bit of hysteria regarding the necessity of deicing. In order to remove just a hint of rime, hundreds of gallons of fluid are routinely applied, often leaving the aircraft covered in a yellow layer of type II that far exceeds the amount of the icy substance removed.
Three legs and 10 flight hours later the gooey stuff is still dripping off the aircraft.
And once in a while we are all surprised by unexpected side effects, such as the congealing glycol residue found in tail surface control areas a few years ago. Nobody noticed, until a few drivers had trouble rotating.
If the wing surface is cold and the air is dry, then the snow will not adhere, and it can easily be blown off, as is evidenced under windy conditions when during an average 30-45 minute turn your wings will be just as bare when you leave as they were when you arrived, despite heavy snowfall.
Which of course is not to say that you should commence any t.o. roll with the stuff piled high.
But why someone hasn't come up with a portable semi-high-pressure air-hose-thingy that a couple of guys could do their rounds with and dust off planes at the gate before departure (and then you could check for clear ice) is beyond me.

[Few Cloudy]

Yeah well the point is - no-one knows what is under that snow until it is off! There have been some very nasty surprises for folk who thought they knew...

There are many differences to the conditions on some guy´s car (even if he is a chief) and an aircraft parked not too far away - like the aircraft may have been damp after landing, been in a different wind, had fuel of a certain temperature in the wings and so on.

There is only one solution gents - get the ship clean and then check. If you are unsure, do it again but for God´s sake don´t skimp!

The hands on check is the best last resort action that has been come up with yet. It is inconvenient but always reveals the true picture.

You normally notice the operators gaining in skills, by the way as the winter goes on. Great overdoses of unthinned fluid are symptomatic of lack of practice or training. That is a separate subject and not a reason for not de-icing.


FC.

[old,not bold]

Sitting in the back departing Warsaw about 4 weeks a go on a day with flurries of snow, some heavy, and outside temperature around 0C, I felt very relieved that our Captain elected to take the full de-ice on offer near the holding point, while some others did not and taxied past while we joined the queue. It seemed to be about 50% taking it, 50% not, but that's only a guess.

I understand that those who did not probably had no need for a de-ice for one reason or another, quite legitimately. But I did find myself wondering if cost and/or slot times might have been a small factor in the decision, among others, for one or two. Perhaps those who took it had an insurance de-icing contract.

And then I thought that no-one is suicidal, regardless of the pressures, and they all know what they're doing.

But is it easier to persuade yourself, when it's marginal anyway, that it's OK not to take de-icing if you are under pressure to keep the schedule and minimise cost?

[crew the screw]

:mad: Would love to have read this :mad: ers snotty 'I know better than you' Memo had one of his Captains not elected to de'ice and crashed. Keep spraying that warm comforting sticky Goo Dudes!!

:ok:

Must be a wind up!!

[Smudger]

My heart is truly warmed by what I read here - it would seem at last that everybody (except the initiator of this thread) has the same attitude to icing/anti-icing/de-icing that I have - if there is any doubt there is no doubt -drench the damn thing with fluid and get airborne with confidence. Sod the expense.....

[stilton]

I work for CAL and can assure you, this individual assistant chief pilot is an anomally and has been the subject of much criticism from the line pilots and fellow management over his memo.

He is not representative of our safety culture in any respect

My peers and I cannot recall a similar instance or ever being pressured to not take the full de-ice when required.

[bomarc]

stilton:

every airline has its special few. sadly, sometimes they actually get into positions of authority.

while any pilot is in a position of authority, certain types who make procedure, suggestions, interview new hires, can change the shape of an airline...not always for the best.

Why upper management has not asked this asst chief pilot to depart the pattern is the real problem.

CAL has come along way and is normally doing a very good job in the safety arena. Many of us remember the days of the 80's.

I've had to deice for small bits of ice adhearing to wings. I honestly wish that there was a better way to take care of things. There are better ways, just no one wants to spend the money, or use their imagination...or build runways long enough to overcome any possible icing problem ;-)

[Pugilistic Animus]

The problem, as far as I see it, seems to stem from the fact that guidance on deice fluids as far as protection times/temps
also deice procedures seems to be in an awful state of affairs as far as the logistics of it.

While I do agree with de-icing when one has the slightest doubt [never doubt in aviation] as to the cleanliness of the airframe, but current procedures seem to be haphazard and may lead some of the more maverick souls to disregard them "for just a little ice or snow" [not a defense] also I agree that there's a possible contamination problem in terms of flight controls there needs to be a systematic study of deiceing fluids and perhaps an AC published on the topic.

remember it's always OUR fault though- unless the wings fall off or something.

[saffron]

A friend of mine was Capt of a BAC 1-11 for Ford Air out of STN many years ago,did walkround saw snow on wings,but he could blow it off with his own breath,so he thought;if I can do that it will blow off during T/O no problem.He commenced T/O,@ VR tried to rotate,no rotation,accelerated another 30 knots and staggered into the air.It was 2 minutes before wing & engines were performing properly! A hard lesson,he was lucky to get away with it.I hope that idiot chief pilot reads this!

[Few Cloudy]

He was sure lucky Saffron - especially as the BAC-111 also had the engines in line with any departing hidden cold soaked ice (so called fuel icing) cracking off as the wings flex on T/O (as in the Stockholm MD-80 case).
The guys in Washington who figured they would cuddle up nice and close to the previous in Taxy sequence and have the snow blown off by his jet efflux weren´t so lucky. They made a few more mistakes too...
But as you say we learn from these things - trouble is then, after notices and procedural improvements we then forget the lessons learned - until the next prang.
FC.

[FLCH]

The letter is real, it made the Calforums (Continental pilot forums) rounds a couple of weeks ago and generated lots of comments (mostly negative). I agree with Stilton, the safety culture here at CO is very good and no-one is put under any pressure to do anything they believe is detrimental to flight safety.

[Stearperson]

If the Chief in question would like to relieve me of my duties for a trip (with pay of course) he would be free to conduct the flight in any manner he chooses.

[jarats]

Ever heard of laminar flow?

[lomapaseo]

Ever heard of laminar flow?

yes, but what is the relavance to this discussion?

[WhatsaLizad?]

It's now warming up in Newark.

I wonder if he'll be posting his thoughts about aircraft following the herd because the lead plane is afraid of a little rainshower on the departure track :E

P.S. His type is bred and sought out for that position, we have more than a few at my US major

[Ignition Override]

Saffron: The BAC-111 you described has a "T"-tail just like the DC-9. Did the Captain reach up and feel it also? :hmm:

The effects of ice on the tail could have been deadly. On turboprops such as King-Airs, ice on the tail has caused fatal pitch-overs during selection of full landing flaps for which pilots had no training and about 100 pounds of pull on the yoke might be required.

Would not the icy tail of a jet also have potentially disastrous results for a jet on takeoff or landing? Let's not think about what could happen if the horizontal stabilizer (known as elevator or pitch trim) were not set correctly.

[llondel]

Let's not think about what could happen if the horizontal stabilizer (known as elevator or pitch trim) were not set correctly.

While it wasn't caused by ice, Alaska 261 showed what happens if the stabilizer control mechanism goes wrong

[Dualbleed]

Theese airplanes on the morning in question would most likely have been refuelled with fuel from underground storage tanks, which most likely will be abv freezing temp. And thus melting the snow from underneath and causing it to freeze and "glue" the snow to the wing. :ugh:

[Fokker28]

Just another bit of free advice from management that causes me to shake my head for a moment, chuckle, and then deice my airplane when I say it needs deicing. I also carry the fuel I think we need! No reason to get too bent out of shape over the boneheads. I just ignore 'em and do my job.