Utair ATR 72 Crash in Siberia

[camel]

News coming out (Bbc) saying likely most on board didnt survive.

[Sqwak7700]

Al Jazeera saying a UTAir crash in Siberia, they operate ATRs. 41 people on board 9 have been rescued.

[IBMN]

A Russian passenger plane with 43 people on board crashed in Siberia on Monday, killing at least 16 people while 12 survivors were rescued, an emergency official said.
The ATR 72, a twin-engine, turbo-prop plane, crashed some 30-35 km (18-22 miles) from the western Siberian city of Tyumen, Emergency Situations Ministry spokeswoman Irina Andrianova said.
She told Reuters 12 people were rescued and 16 bodies had been found at the crash site. According to preliminary information, there were 39 passengers and four crew on board

[JammedStab]

And so ends the longest period without a fatal airline crash...almost 6 months.

[Caygill]

One more died, 11 survivors, according to Russia's English language RT: Siberian plane crash kills dozens (http://rt.com/news/plane-siberia-onboard-reports-994/)

[aditya104]

oNvUMor2ooE&feature=player_embedded
LgTD6PnzOH4

[5 APUs captain]

Crashed after take-off about 3 km beyond RW end:
Wikimapia - Let's describe the whole world! (http://wikimapia.org/#lat=57.1543993&lon=65.2478027&z=13&l=0&m=b)



METAR USTR 020200Z 24007MPS 9999 SCT013CB M01/M01 Q1003
TEMPO 26015MPS 1500 SHSN BLSN BKN005 RMK QFE742/0990 21290060 30750029

TAF USTR 020135Z 0203/0303 25008G13MPS 4000 -SHSN BLSN BKN007 BKN020CB
TEMPO 0203/0209 25015MPS1500 SHSN BKN005 BKN015CB
Airplane is 20 y.o., 50000 landings
PIC 27 y.o., F.O. 23y.o.

[Super VC-10]

UTair Flight 120 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTair_Flight_120)

[5 APUs captain]

Latest rumour:
Only this airplane has not been de-iced this morning at USTR...

[kuzukuzu]

I had the misfortune of using this airline (also was an ATR-72) from VKO-VNO just over a year ago. Everything down from ticket issuance to inflight conditions was some kind of ludicrous circus show. As I understood they were also banned from entering EU airspace at one stage. You could have a more pleasant flying experience in the cargo hold of a Congolese military jet...

[Dave Gittins]

aditya104; Whilst the top video you've posted shows what looks like an ATR, the bottom one shows a variety of aeroplanes of various types and colours and seems unrelated. Where did that come from ?


OK PM noted ... video now removed and replaced....

[birmingham]

That's a little unfair - I have used UT and its pre-decessor for many years. In fact I flew in one of their brand new atr 72-500s only last week. They are a very large organisation with more than 100 aircraft and also a very large helicopter operation

[sevenstrokeroll]

according to USA Fox News, smoke was observed trailing from an engine, and then
the plane attempted a return to the airport...landed/crashed 1 mile short of runway

[Less Hair]

Supporting Birmingham's point. Flew domestic on their ATRs and everything looked nice (from a pax cabin perspective). No reason to come up with unfair clichés. Let's just wait for the facts.

[Sqwak7700]

Flew domestic on their ATRs and everything looked nice (from a pax cabin perspective)

Sorry, but what does that have to do with safety? Many "nice" looking planes have crashed.

They are a very large organisation with more than 100 aircraft and also a very large helicopter operation

Again, what does being large have to do with safety?

Both of you run in UTair's defense by claiming other's comments to be harsh, but they are merely detailing the experience he had. What is so harsh about that?

ATRs and ice, that is where I would be looking first. :hmm:

[up_down_n_out]

Sorry can't have arbitrary slanging.
I regularly fly 2-3 airlines over here.
My favourite is S7.

2nd,- UTAIR has a good safety record.

Can't stand AeroFlop especially since flight SU821.

Now, it's not the usual excuse of it being a russian made plane or stepping on the brakes taking off, or flying sideways because they got trained on a TU instead of a 737.

:ugh:

[jcjeant]

Hi,

ATRs and ice, that is where I would be looking first


according to USA Fox News, smoke was observed trailing from an engine

ATRs and smoke , that is where I would looking first :hmm:

[aditya104]

http://rt.com/files/news/plane-siberia-onboard-reports-994/ria-yushenko-80.jpg
http://rt.com/files/news/plane-siberia-onboard-reports-994/ria-zubarev-942.jpg
Courtesy RT
http://pics.rbcdaily.ru/rbcdaily_pics/uniora/46/97/014959865622a5d02b8250384c9f5731.jpg
http://pics.rbcdaily.ru/rbcdaily_pics/uniora/84/52/cf06e7f43e8101738ed4e9590513c057.jpg
Courtesy RBC Daily
http://95.167.12.226/system/images/large/26/26951/IMG_0982.JPG

[up_down_n_out]

News is now saying they DIDN'T de-ice the plane.
"quoting the airport's deputy director, Vladimir Nyesmachny"

Pilot decision.. (sounds like buck passing taking place).

I forgot this one also from last week, but couldn't find the headline.
Only TWO in one day,-

Two Planes Forced to Land With Engine Failure | News | The Moscow Times (http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/two-planes-forced-to-land-with-engine-failure/455713.html)

Probably more buck passing taking place here too
http://www.premier.gov.ru/eng/premier/press/ru/4508/print/

, in the light of the very minimal improvement in air safety since Medvedev declared last year TU, AN, JAK to be too old and unfit for service.

I wonder what excuse will be given now it's Putin officially back in the saddle, and this was no ancient french-italian aircraft kit, but run by one of the best & largest, UTAIR.

On the good side;-
Looks like the amount of soft snow around probably saved some of the PAX. :ouch:

FYI
Here it's those unique conditions you find for 2 weeks or so a year during the big thaw.
Sub zero night temps, very high humidity, followed by +6C day time temps. :suspect:

[jcjeant]

Hi,

http://i.imgur.com/GNCFI.jpg

:confused:

[mikeepbc]

...this wheel might be a cargo item - looks like there are some stickers on it.

[Fokkeriaan]

That IS a cargo item, or at least no working part of the a/c. The bearing protective blank and nut is still in place.

[Chu Chu]

If it is a cargo item, it's none too soon. . . .

[Sqwak7700]

according to USA Fox News, smoke was observed trailing from an engine


You will find that this is the typical statement from witnesses on many plane crashes, does not mean there was smoke. This happens a lot in aircraft crashes, people report the aircraft as on fire or tailing smoke when there was none. I'm not saying that was the case in this particular incident, but it is highly likely that there was no smoke.

[jcjeant]

Hi,

More photos:
Крушение Ñ�амолета ATR-72 под Тюменью | Фотоленты | Лента новоÑ�тей "Ð*ИÐ� Ð�овоÑ�ти" (http://ria.ru/photolents/20120402/614387323.html)
Video
Ð*ИÐ� Видео - КруглоÑ�уточный видеоканал Ð*ИÐ� Ð�овоÑ�ти (http://ria.ru/tv_incidents/20120402/614538984.html)

[JohnieWalker]

The Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) came up with first information from earlier retrieved data recorders:

1. Engines were working until the ground impact.
2. After T/O aircraft reached height of 210m, then banked right 35°, then left 50° before hitting the ground.

May all perished rest in peace.

[talkpedlar]

What is alleged so far... probable icing conditions..aircraft not de-iced... aircraft rolls one way and then the other...

IMHO probability that rolling was uncommanded and started at about t/o flap retraction... maybe a Ppruner with ATR experience could clarify t/o and flap-retraction procedures? Hoping this isn't another lax discipline/poor airmanship tragedy. TP

[Clandestino]

Plenty is known about the ATR's icing behaviour.

Even more is assumed to be known and is as such presented in PPRuNe discussions, yet is remote from way things work in real world. E.g. whole bunch of people are still of opinion that American Eagle ATR at Roselawn stalled.

Wait for CVR/FDR readouts. Sensible and useful discussion can start once they're published. MAK has lately been noted for some quick and accurate investigations.

[Flying Beancounter]

Take off flap is 15 degrees.

At "Acceleration Altitude" the "Climb Sequence" is initiated. The nose is lowered with a climb airspeed of 170 Knots set in the ATR 72 (some companies use 180 Knots) and the power management system set to climb (from take off). With the lower nose attitude the aircraft should accelerate ready for flap retraction.

The airspeed for flap retraction depends on whether the aircraft is in "Normal" or "Icing" conditions. In "Normal" conditions on reaching "White Bug" speed the flaps are retracted, but in "Icing" conditions this is delayed until reaching the higher "Red Bug" speed.

"High Bank" is selected at White or Red Bug plus 10 knots depending on whether operating in Normal or Icing conditions respectively.

Per ATR "Icing conditions" are expected when air temperature is less than 7 degrees Celsius and there is visible moisture in the air, etc, etc.

"White" and "Red" bug speeds are determined from the charts dependent on take off weight.
Typically for the ATR 72 at, say, 20 tonnes the speeds are:
White Bug = 134 Knots
Red Bug = 161 Knots

If all the speeds, anti-icing and de-icing procedures are followed then the ATR 42/72 is perfectly safe in cold weather operations.

[Hotel Tango]

Just a question:

210m when the uncommanded roll began. Could the timing coincide with accidental flap retraction iso of the u/c?

[Flying Beancounter]

We will have to wait to see the full report before we can speculate as to what actually happened to those poor guys.
ATR gear retraction usually comes as soon as you have positive climb which is much lower than the quoted 210 m (=approx 680 feet).
Many ATR operators set "Acceleration Altitude" at 1,000 feet above aerodrome level, but this will vary according to operator, obstacles, noise abatement, etc, etc.
As mentioned in my earlier post, it is at "Acceleration Altitude" that you lower the nose, speed up and then retract flaps.

[wilfredotour2]

The first officer survived. I want to see what he has to say. I don't know the background of the pilots of this accident, but it's usually pilots of old Russian airplanes that just upgraded to these newly acquired ATRs. I'm speculating by saying this about Russian pilots, however that's how it works in Cuba. In 2010 an ATR-72-212 operated by Aerocaribbean (CRN883), a Cuban airline, had an accident caused by a series of factors that took place. Icing condition was a factor, and pilot error was another factor. The captain, had a lot of experience in An-24 airplanes, which are old Russian turboprops that still operate in the island. The crew followed ATC instructions by banking to the right while he had an existing icing condition. By banking to the right he would be able to descend without the risk of colliding with a climbing airplane at 12 'O clock. When he banked, he stalled and got into a spin. He should have known better. He had already lost enough lift because of the ice buildup in the leading edge of the wings. Banking made the airplane loose more lift and stall. Complacency or poor training could have been a factor in his error.

[wilfredotour2]

Certain types of air crashes usually repeat themselves. If it is determined that Utair flight 120 crashed with icing conditions, it should be the third case already. However it seems that the crash was controlled somehow, because there were some survivors. In the case of flight CRN883 , the airplane fell from 22,000 feet in a spin and there were no survivors. Airplane touched the ground flat as if it fell completely vertical. Flight 120 looks more like there was an attempt to control the crash and some control was gained.

[henra]

When looking at the wreckage this appears not to have been a very high energy impact.
The exact wreckage pattern is difficult to dtermine from the pictures seen so far, however what can be seen seems to point towards some kínd of rotation/cartwheeling upon impact. It does not really look like a fast straight- in crash.

Therefore, the likelyhood that some kind of aerodynamic stall was involved here appears to be high when looking at the wreckage.

Banking heavily left and right also matches a typical behaviour in stalled ATR's.
The exact reason for the stall will only be descernable from the FDR/CVR especially based on the respective speeds and loads.

Going by ATR's history however, it would not exactly be the first case of an iced over ATR biting the pilots.

[lomapaseo]

The wreckage is quite similar to the CO DC9 at Den back in the 80's.(failed to deice)

That plane did a snap roll left shortly after ground effect and continued the roll until it ended up on its back. The left wingtip remaoined in constant ground contact through the roll leaving "C" pattern in the snow.

The nose of the aircraft eventually dropped through this roll and impacted about 30 deg nose down. It was survivable depending on where you sat (little fire on top of the snow)

[vovachan]

The authorities are saying that was the only plane which departed that day without being sprayed. Whose fault it was is not known

[Sqwak7700]

Whose fault it was is not known

Uh, The flight crew. That is were the buck stops, they decided to fly that day without de-icing. If this is the cause of the crash, then it was their decision that led to it, so their fault.

[up_down_n_out]

As with everything you read in Russia take it with a BIG pinch of salt.
Vested interests are everywhere as usual.

Who isn't to say something was not functioning at TJM that morning PREVENTING a normal de-ice op.

Remember the TU RA-85744 that (hard) landed at DME with just about 1 functional engine,-

..Blaming the fuel, the plane, anything except the crew, who eventually it turns out inadvertently turned off the fuel supply while taking off.

The blame lies at the door of a whole safety culture, or lack of it, and that goes all the way to the top through the same systemic corruption that allows people to fry in a night club for lack of fire safety.
Lame Horse fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame_Horse_fire)

So:-
You get on a freezing aircraft at 5am in a Russian regional airport.
Who are you to know the atmospheric conditions are ideal for icing, or your plane (RA-85588) is just about to catch fire?
.. or your pilot (RA-42434) is on meds that mean he gets confused at to what plane he is flying..

..or SU821 (has had a quick shot of vodka then starts swearing instead of proper CRM then turning to left when ATC ask to turn right, or missing the glide path altogether).
:eek:

[isitcheerie]

Many TP companies use an acceleration altitude above what was achieved in this accident but my ATR buddy tells me that the ATR manufacturer's procedure is to retract flaps at 400' agl. Given the time to call it, make the selection and for the flaps to travel, the maximum of achieved 680' could tie in with the result of no flaps on an iced-up wing.

If everybody else was de-icing that morning then so should have the ATR but reports do indicate it was not. The captain is 100% responsible for the de-ice/no de-ice decision as as for the suggestion de-icing may not have been available, that's no excuse you just don't take-off - simples!

From what has been said so far it does sound like a loss of control with a low speed/high descent rate impact. Lots of conjecture and no surviving crew so we'll have to wait for the FDR/CVR to tell us what really happened.

[up_down_n_out]

"de-icing may not have been available, that's no excuse you just don't take-off - simples!"

Not so simple in Russia.
Lot's of pressure often brought to bear/connecting flights/return slots, plane has to fly on time, or maybe won't fill the quota for the day where distances can be large.

What I don't understand is any pressure to be "on time at all costs" on this flight.

There are NO connecting flights in the SGC arrivals time slot.
(in fact nothing at all from 10-16h)
:hmm:
& the same plane UT119 flies back at 22h in the evening to TJM, or so it would seem, so sits on the tarmac from 23.45-6.30 every night.

Maybe PF says/thinks he's done this loads of times before and got away with it, esp on AN type AC, so cutting corners.
Would be curious to know how many times this winter the plane DIDN'T get deiced in the morning after sitting in anything down to -45C.
That would be very telling.

Culture of Safety taking back seat to commercial considerations?
Still the most dangerous country to fly in the world.

[lomapaseo]

Not so simple in Russia.
Lot's of pressure often brought to bear/connecting flights/return slots, plane has to fly on time, or maybe won't fill the quota for the day where distances can be large.

What I don't understand is any pressure to be "on time at all costs" on this flight.



My bold above

But we don't know that is a fact on this flight. After all it's a crew decision and their justification that is in question and that is not in evidence as yet

[The Ancient Geek]

Culture of Safety taking back seat to commercial considerations?
Still the most dangerous country to fly in the world.


Not really - that prize goes to DRC every time.

[JammedStab]

Per ATR "Icing conditions" are expected when air temperature is less than 7 degrees Celsius and there is visible moisture in the air, etc, etc.



Interesting...we used 10°C in visible moisture for icing conditions. Perhaps a company limit.

[JammedStab]

Maybe PF says/thinks he's done this loads of times before and got away with it, esp on AN type AC, so cutting corners.
Would be curious to know how many times this winter the plane DIDN'T get deiced in the morning after sitting in anything down to -45C.
That would be very telling.


Do the Russians have a de-ice fkuid -45°C or F?

[up_down_n_out]

"Per ATR "Icing conditions" are expected when air temperature is less than 7 degrees Celsius and there is visible moisture in the air, etc, etc."

Well I would say that would approximate very closely to the weather on that morning.
Living in the same region, Ural weather is known for being unpredictable, - sudden changes in temp & humidity with the different opposing airstreams from polar, european, southerly & siberian esp at equinox.

[Flying Beancounter]

You can get all the latest info on cold weather ops from the ATR website.

Cold Weather Operations 2011 - PDF ~ 2812 kB

http://www.atraircraft.com/media/downloads/coldweatheroperations_2011_20.pdf

This includes ATR guidance and definitions on Icing Conditions, etc.
Some companies may use more rigorous limits but hopefully all operators will at least achieve the ATR guidance.

[FLEXPWR]

isitcheerie,

You can tell your ATR buddy retracting the flaps at 400' agl is utter rubbish. Do not confuse the minimum acceleration altitude with flap retraction.

400' may be used as the lowest acceleration altitude, and in case of engine failure (no obstacles indeed) you would maintain until flap retraction speed.

In daily ops,most operators choose an acceleration between 800' to 1500' based on a number of factors, which is the altitude at which the airplane starts to accelerate, while keeping a positive climb. Only after reaching the White/Red Bug can (should) the flap retraction start.

However I do not know the UT specific SOP's. But if the aircraft was not de-iced, retracting flaps that early with a contaminated wing (and seemingly a high AOA on 2nd segment climb) can have only one outcome: the one that happened.

Sad story, thoughts for the families.

[dvv]

Take a look at the SID chart:

http://busybee.dvv.org:8000/flying/AD_2.1_USTR-70.png

They were departing via either RO 1A towards ROPOT or GR 1A towards GRADA, and both of the routes prescribe a right turn immediately after the take off. Trying to make the turn at a lower speed than the aircraft could?

[up_down_n_out]

Makes perfect sense then.
WHOOPS!

"After T/O aircraft reached height of 210m, then banked right 35°

....then left 50°"

[Stuck_in_an_ATR]

At this height after t/o the ATR should fly at speed of at least V2+5 and at that speed is perfectly capable of making turns (though with a bank angle limit of 15 deg), at least when it has been correctly de-iced...

[Hi-Alt]

Technical Failure Most Likely Cause of Siberia Crash - Experts | Russia | RIA Novosti (http://en.ria.ru/russia/20120402/172553561.html)

[sierra5913]

So the face saving and buck-passing has already started.:ugh:

[up_down_n_out]

Actually that's rather old news.

The russian rumour mill favours the pilot no de-icing to save cash. "De-icing an ATR 72-200 would cost about 30,000 roubles ($1,000)".
That sounds like rather an exaggeration especially in a region which has cash coming out of its ears.
Sure thing, 30 dead people & total a/c loss costs a lot more than 6, 5000 rouble notes.

What were these people thinking?

I guess, 2 pilots in their mid 20s, an aircraft with no technical inspection since 2010, has done this trip probably every day for months in worse conditions, routine (complacency) as usual takes over.

Evaluation of risk where are you?

[dvv]

Stuck_in_an_ATR, I'm not sure we know the height at which they started the turn — see the note at the bottom of the chart that allows to start the turn at pretty much any height below 200 meters.

[RA-65970]

I worked in russian aviation some time ago and what I saw there was just shocking. I can't give you many details as I don't want to get trouble in my job, but in russian aviation a lot of thinks going badly wrong, so the crash of the ATR is sadly only a logical consequence of what I saw there.

Technicans and Pilots working on western a/c don't speak english where flight manuals and technical documentations only available in english, no spare parts available so a/c have to be ripped that other a/c can fly. Very often one a/c stays in the hangar for months to provide spares for the rest of the fleet, until another a/c gets AOG, then they change the a/c in the hangar, making the a/c that lost more than 100 parts during it's time on ground airworty again, of course with 90% parts from other not flying a/c. Of course techical documentation is improper and aircrafts are flying with known technical defect that would lead to an immidiate AOG in Europe, I saw a/c flying with defect anti-ice-systems in the russian winter.

And the recent grounding of most soviet build planes does not really improves the situation, more and more western build a/c flying with bad trained flight and technical crews.

It's just a matter of time when the next plane is down in Russia...

[birmingham]

For the record I have never encountered a UTair ATR pilot or cabin attendant that did not speak good English - possibly why they tend to be rather young

[dvv]

A video clip making rounds on Russian websites:

925MgqyU2NA

This take-off allegedly happened on Jan 1 this year, approx at this time:

METAR UUEE 011300Z 26003MPS 5000 BR BKN007 OVC013 M01/M02 Q1011 NOSIG RMK 25510145 75510145
METAR UUEE 011330Z 27002MPS 5000 BR OVC016 M01/M02 Q1011 NOSIG RMK 75510145 25510145
METAR UUEE 011400Z 30003MPS 5000 BR OVC017 M01/M02 Q1011 NOSIG RMK 75510145 25510145

Any comments on the condition of the wing here?

[tbaylx]

Does it really need any comments?

I'd be jumping up to deploy a slide if I was on board and they taxi'd to the runway with a wing like that.

Amazing after all the crashes due to surface contamination there are still operators that just don't get it.

[RA-65970]

The language is a very big problem, at least in the company I worked with for over 1,5 years, and it is not so long ago. About the pilots there are of course many who speak good enough english, but there are quite some pilots who did not speak well enough english. Just last week I flew with a russian carrier (a/c was an Airbus) and none of the cabin crew spoke good english.

But for the technical staff, the mechanics working on the aircraft, here the language situation is really bad, in the company I worked for maybe 10-15% of the mechanics speak english well enough to understand the manuals.

I don't want to say that everything in the russian aviation is bad (I only worked with one airline), but what I saw there was so bad that I would never fly with this company again.

[Shiny side down]

From personal experience, when requesting de-icing in a similar part of the world, the response from the ground services often being-

"Russian aircraft not de-ice"

They would happily run a hand over the contamination, brush the loose stuff off, and try to suggest that we are being stupid asking for it.
Often, there were hints and suggestions that it would take a long time to find deicing kit, which would make us late. Only dogged insistence would result in their reluctant compliance.
Pointing at the dent in the ground where someone previously didn't de-ice had no appreciable effect on their thinking.

[up_down_n_out]

"This take-off allegedly happened on Jan 1 this year, approx at this time:"

That's SU flight SVO to LED that time of the day.

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/6/1/4/2089416.jpg

Correction here:-

A/c ID
http://www.avia.ru/photo/aeroflotA320rostropovich/pano1.jpg

and here is a view the other up the wing:-

http://www.avia.ru/photo/aeroflotA320rostropovich/IMG_2899.jpg

Here is video from Tiumen allegedly:-

Life News (http://www.lifenews.ru/news/88077)

[Sassy91]

Would have been better if we could see the leading edge of that wing. Maybe that was the only thing de-iced?

[dvv]

up_down_n_out, the author's comment on the youtube page identifies the aircraft as Aeroflot's Mstislav Rostropovich (A320 VP-BKY) en route to LED (St.Petersburg Pulkovo).

[liider]

Link to the news programme video (in Russian):

Àâèàêàòàñòðîôà ïîä Òþìåíüþ: ïîñëåäíèå 42 ñåêóíäû ATR-72 (http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=410010)

At 190m Capt. turns the autopilot on, 5 sec later orders "flaps up".
Aircraft starts buffeting.

FO: O--ohh..
Capt.: What's that?
FO:Why this buffeting?
Capt.: Autopilot disengage

Aircraft banks 35 degrees right.

FO: Quiet, what is this?
Capt.: Report to him.
ALERT: DON'T SINK!

Aircraft banks 50 degrees left.

FO: What should I report, f*k? What kind of failure?
Capt.: I don't understand.
ALERT: DON'T SINK!

FO: (cursing)
Capt.: UTAir 120, falling down!

Last phrase was not heard by ATC, probably because the pilot pushed the wrong button on the yoke. Aircraft collided with the ground 4 seconds later.

[vovachan]

"White" and "Red" bug speeds are determined from the charts dependent on take off weight.
Typically for the ATR 72 at, say, 20 tonnes the speeds are:
White Bug = 134 Knots
Red Bug = 161 Knots

Also from bits and pieces of CVR in the media:

Sounds like they never got to "red bug" - I figure this means they retracted flaps too soon for the icing conditions?

Decoding starts from the moment when the commander turns on autopilot and removes the flaps. After that the ship starts to shake, and the commander takes control, but the plane lurches - first right, then left, losing altitude and falls. Report to ATC, neither the commander nor the copilot have time.

Voice informer: Autopilot on. White Bug
Pilot 1: What is that shaking?
Voice informer: Autopilot disengage.
Pilot 2: Silence!
Pilot 1: What is it? Report!
Voice informer: Don't sink.
Pilot 2: What's to report? What's kind of failure?
Voice informer: Don't sink.
Pilot 1: UTair 120 we are falling

[FuntSole]

The latest info from Russian media (seems to be confirmed) that the aircraft in question was not de-iced/anti-iced after being exposed to icing conditions overnight. If it is true the outcome is unfortunately not very surprising...

[henra]

Capt.: Autopilot disengage

Aircraft banks 35 degrees right.
...
Aircraft banks 50 degrees left.



If there is one common denominator in ATR Icing accidents it is this.

In every single one you somehow find exactly this chain of events leading to a very unfortunate end.

[up_down_n_out]

So according to another thread (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/482248-take-off-snow-wing-18.html) here:-

Tailplane Icing (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2238323060735779946)

:oh:
tail icing/rear stabiliser stall was to blame?

From what little CVR info released here....

PIO?
Buffetting and heavy stick pressure?

All seems to add up.

FO doesn't understand symptoms, does exact opposite of what is required, thinks it's a wing stall, has very little time to do anything about it,

Autopilot already took away all the early clues, and by the time he works out it's going bad...

..guess what :ooh: the aircraft goes into a steep dive at too low altitude for any form of recovery.

(In these cases it's always the cockpit hits the ground first).

It's very possible the wings looked clear of ice on the ground, leading to this false sense of security.

Maybe:-
Tail icing wasn't even brought into the equation.

Eg.-
"Investigators have said the Colgan Air aircraft seemed to be flying okay to the moment that the pilots lowered the wing flaps in preparation for final approach as the airplane dropped below 2,000 feet. In short order, the autopilot disengaged, the airplane's nose pitched downward, then upward, before a final pitch downward.
The aircraft rolled left, rolled right, dove sharply and hit the ground, in short order.
The NASA Lewis video cites four warning signs of ice build-up on the horizontal stabilizer: a lightening of the controls, particularly stick lightening in forward direction; a difficulty trimming the airplane; the onset of pilot-induced oscillation; and buffeting felt in the controls, but not the airframe.

"Individual pilots may perceive these warning signs at different times depending upon the pilot's experience, the icing conditions, the workload in the cockpit and the intensity of the situation. Now, it should be noted that if you are flying on autopilot you would almost certainly miss these symptoms because you would not get any tactile feedback from the controls."

The Colgan pilots were operating on autopilot until the autopilot disengaged.
Said NASA:
"Remember, many times, these symptoms are encountered when flaps are at full extension. In extreme cases there may be a sudden pulse forward stick movement, possibly very strong. The nose of the aircraft may sudden pitch down, and it is very possible that this may not be recoverable on final approach because of the low altitude of the aircraft."
Tail-plane stall caused by icing often is first noticed when the pilot increases the flaps, the power or the speed, NASA said. In the Buffalo crash, investigators said the pilots had increased the flaps. When it began going out of control, the Colgan pilots increased the airplane engines on full throttle.

On a normal wing stall, pilots usually should increase power and relax back pressure on the yoke or push the yoke forward. On a tail-plane stall, they should pull back on the yoke, return the flaps to their former position and, depending on the aircraft type, ease off on power.
In other words, the remedy for a wing stall in some cases is the opposite of the remedy for a tail-plane stall, NASA warned."

Also:-

The Real Reason Behind Regional TurboProp Icing Crashes (http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/FAA_Inaction/Continental_Flt3407.htm)

Who maintain:-
The ATR was designed and manufactured in France by Aerospatiale. Mr. Fredrick's book, Unheeded Warning, reveals how political considerations overruled the safety mandate that is supposed to govern the FAA's design certification decisions on aircraft of foreign manufacture.

Fredrick details strong evidence that some experts in the FAA, knew the plane would be dangerous in icing conditions, but they were overruled by higher officials because the French might have been offended if certification was denied by the FAA.

He also demonstrates that numerous "close-call" incidents and one accident (10-15-87, near Lake Como, Italy with no survivors), which preceded the Roselawn crash, were known to be the result of in-flight icing, but Aerospatiale effectively covered-up and did not circulate that information, lest the reputation of its ATR aircraft be damaged.

[henra]

So according to another thread (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/482248-take-off-snow-wing-18.html) here:-

Tailplane Icing (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2238323060735779946)

:oh:
tail icing/rear stabiliser stall was to blame?


Honestly, I'm not really convinced it was the tail plane.
The Sequence of disengaging autopilot followed by significant roll excursions would rather lead me to believe it was primarily the main plane. Maybe with some contribution from the back.
But it seems it occured upon flap retraction. Flap retraction reduces the load on the tailplane, thereby it should be reducing the effect of any icing.
but the contrary appeared to be the case:
Apparently the effect increased/set on after retraction, therefore I would rather look to the main wing.

Edit: Tail plane icing would be particularly critical on the underside.
Leaving the plane outside on the ground in snowing/freezing conditions would rather lead to build up on the upper side. This is where the main plane is much more susceptible.

[Clandestino]

If there is one common denominator in ATR Icing accidents it is this.Or Fokker 100. Or anything with highly loaded wings. Primary design concern of transport aeroplane wings is cruise efficiency. When it comes to stall, they are not supposed to display the benign characteristics of C-150 and ice accretion generally does not tend to improve them. ATRs have both shakers and pushers, clearly showing their natural stall is somewhat vicious, which doesn't imply we should be deeply worried about it and start another "ATRs are dangerous!" frenzy.

tail icing/rear stabiliser stall was to blame?Absolutely not. Tailplane stall results in very rapid pitchdown, not roll. During NASA tail stall tests with Twotter, intention was never to achieve stall, just to get to brink of it and record the aeroplane behaviour. Plan worked every time but once. Nose went from horizontal to 80° AND in about two seconds, despite the two test pilots initiating recovery action as soon as the control was lost.

Tail plane icing would be particularly critical on the underside. Errr... yes, but that's not the way it works in real life. To have tailplane stall, first you have to have severe ice accretion on leading tailplane edge (failed boot in heavy icing), then flaps have to be very powerful and tail has to be in their wake. Failing on any of that, you'll pick up ice, lose some performance, increase stalling speed somewhat but you won't make vertical dive when the flaps are lowered on final.

FO doesn't understand symptoms, does exact opposite of what is required, thinks it's a wing stall Provided official reports confirm the leaked info, it was the correct thing to assume.

Investigators have said the Colgan Air aircraft seemed to be flying okay to the moment that the pilots lowered the wing flaps in preparation for final approach as the airplane dropped below 2,000 feet.
They have got it correct. Surprise, surprise

In short order, the autopilot disengagedBecause stall warning fired.

the airplane's nose pitched downwardLosing speed in approach config with engines on idle, it tried to regain the trimmed one. Perfectly natural.

then upwardBecause the panicked pilot pulled so hard that he overrode the stick-pusher!

before a final pitch downward. As the aeroplane stalled. Q400 is very simple: you stall it, you die.

Regarding The real reason behind regional turboprop icing crashes (http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/FAA_Inaction/Continental_Flt3407.htm), it is very refreshing to read misinformed drivel about the aeroplane which is not Euro-made FBW airliner. Sad, but refreshing nevertheless.

[henra]

Or Fokker 100. Or anything with highly loaded wings. Primary design concern of transport aeroplane wings is cruise efficiency.
What I wanted to point out was the involvement of the disconnection of the AP immediatly followed by violent roll.
That is something which happened in all ATR icing accidents. The AP covered the unfolding drama relatively long up to a point where the aileron forces could not be handled by the AP and then the Pilot himself anymore.This could be to some extent due to the unpowered ailerons in connection with icing on the horns.
Therefore manual flying when encountering icing conditions might be one of the better life assurances in an ATR (and the other TP's for that matter).


doesn't imply we should be deeply worried about it and start another "ATRs are dangerous!" frenzy.

Was not my intention, please see above


Errr... yes, but that's not the way it works in real life. To have tailplane stall, first you have to have severe ice accretion on leading tailplane edge (failed boot in heavy icing), then flaps have to be very powerful and tail has to be in their wake.
Exactly my point. I wanted to figuratively show how unlikely tail plane icing would have been in the given case.
Anything short of massive ice accretin on the tail with flaps fully extended should have no appreciable effect on the flyability of the aircraft.

[Clandestino]

Relax, Henra, it's nothing personal.

What I wanted to point out was the involvement of the disconnection of the AP immediatly followed by violent roll.Correct. Violent roll comes from stalling (or aileron hinge moment reversal at Roselawn). ATR picking up a ****load of ice feels very mushy - recommendation to fly manually in heavy icing is quite sensible.

This could be to some extent due to the unpowered ailerons in connection with icing on the horns.Heaters do their work just fine. I don't recall any incident or accident because of failed flight controls horns heaters. In my 6 years on ATR, I lost them only once, which prompted mightily rapid descent to MSA, below freezing level.

[liider]

According to preliminary results of the investigation, the accident with the UTair aircraft ATR-72 was the result of the deterioration of aerodynamic characteristics of the wing and stabilizer as a result of the ice not being removed while preparing the aircraft for the flight after a long (8h) overnight stay in icing conditions (freezing rain, and the transition of temperature below 0°C, the wind 7, gusts of 10 m/s).

The investigation of the crash of the ATR-72 VP-BYZ identified deficiencies that lead to the conclusion that the preparation of the aircraft for flight was made in violation of the rules by ground staff of "UTair-Technik", which was to conduct de-icing of the aircraft, and by the crew, which did not assess the state of the aircraft surfaces and meteorological conditions during the overnight stay of the plane at the airport Tyumen.

In the process of making the decision, that de-icing is not necessary, also participated an aircraft mechanic, who had no aviation education and had been working in "UTair-Technik" for little more than one and a half year. Aircraft mechanic was admitted to ground handling services after 16 hour training courses, of which to the theory of ice control and the de-icing of the aircraft were dedicated only 30 minutes. The supervisor of the shift, who should have controlled the aircraft mechanic's work, was on a nearby parking lot, located next to the plane. Having received the information, that the de-icing of the aircraft was not carried out, the supervisor didn't intervene.

The violations in the ground staff's work also point out that, despite the introduction of airline standards similar to accepted overseas, the necessary quality control system is practically inactive.

[tu144]

You have source where you got this info from

[JammedStab]

http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2012/vp-z120402/pdf/vp-z120402.pdf

[cappt]

Very detailed report.
Conclusion starts on pg192.

[Typhoon650]

I've always wondered, if turbine aircraft typically run some sort of fuel heating to warm up fuel for the engines when cruising at altitude, why not design a system that allows recirculation and heating of fuel in tanks when on the ground?
The fuel wouldn't need to be heated too much, 10c should do it and the excellent heat transfer abilities of aluminium should help to keep ice from forming from at least the majority of the wing?
It seems the systems are already in place to heat fuel and a gas turbine has plenty of excess heat available when running to turn it to this job.
I'm also sure smaller operators would pay for an aircraft that could possibly deice (or even prevent ice buildup) itself on turnaround, or within 30min/1 hour on a cold start with just the APU or a ground cart. Both APU or cart would probably be running anyway, producing large quantities of waste heat.

[Clandestino]

Engines do not produce enough waste heat to warm up all of the fuel. Fuel tanks are almost never full so upper wing skin would not be in contact with heated fuel even if there was a way to keep it warm. Leading edges, control surfaces, high lift devices and empennage have no fuel tanks inside them so can't be internally heated by the hypothetical warm fuel.

Glycol based ground de-icing/anti-icing works when applied properly.

[JammedStab]

Very detailed report.
Conclusion starts on pg192.

And a very difficult report to read as are many of the Russian reports. All kinds of unnecessary detail about unimportant subjects.

And.....for a report with very poor English, a large amount of it is spent criticizing the pilots poor English comprehension(and therefore their ability to read about the effects of contaminated wings).

I was very happy to finally finish reading it.

It appears that these pilots were the only ones who did not de-ice that morning. They were told by the ground engineer that it was not needed. Based on the weather conditions that had occurred while they were at this location, a reasonably sharp and safety minded pilot may very well have disagreed with this report from the engineer.

Apparently, there is a culture of bending or breaking rules in Russia. It cannot be ascertained from the report or CVR whether or not these pilots fell into this category. However, for some reason, the de-ice boots were used while on the ground during taxi out not just a short time in case it was desired to check for proper operation but for quite a long period. However, there was no recording of the reasoning for this action.

It appears from the weather reports that wet snow had fallen and temperatures had decreased likely leading to rough contamination on the wing(not just some frost). However, the aircraft did get airborne and reach several hundred feet of altitude.

If one were to decide to knowingly try this, it would seem to be a prudent idea to wait until a reasonably high speed had been reached prior to retracting the flaps. However, the flaps were retracted at white bug which is the minimum allowable speed to do so and the aircraft lost control.

So in the end, perhaps they were just truly unaware of the contamination and had little situational awareness from a weather point of view and were just testing the de-ice boots on the taxi out, or they intentionally took off with contamination(perhaps assuming it was less significant than what it really was) and lost control.

A couple of things to think about. If the maintenance guy says the wings don't require de-icing, it may be prudent to confirm for yourself. If you somehow do get airborne with contaminated wings, waiting for a higher speed to retract flaps could very well be beneficial.

[Clandestino]

Nice advice on takeoff with contaminated wings you have there. In order to clear-up the applicability of it, pray tell us how does one:

1. fail to notice wings need de-icing during walkaround?
2. fail to notice icing conditions during ground ops that necessitate use of anti-icing?
3. suddenly realize that wings are contaminated between Vr and acceleration altitude so postpones flap retraction, or in more extreme case; between V1 and Vlof so gathers speed on runway or in ground effect?

Apparently, there is a culture of bending or breaking rules in Russia.

You don't say!

[JammedStab]

Nice advice on takeoff with contaminated wings you have there. In order to clear-up the applicability of it, pray tell us how does one:

1. fail to notice wings need de-icing during walkaround?
2. fail to notice icing conditions during ground ops that necessitate use of anti-icing?
3. suddenly realize that wings are contaminated between Vr and acceleration altitude so postpones flap retraction, or in more extreme case; between V1 and Vlof so gathers speed on runway or in ground effect?




1. According to the report, video evidence showed that there was a very minimal walkaround done by the captain. Some mention was made of briefly hanging around one of the engines and not much else. Therefore, a proper walkaround was not performed.

2. The report doesn't give much evidence about your question except to go on endlessly about poor English comprehension. This meant that information about the hazards of wing contamination that were published in English could not be understood. Of course, it seems highly unlikely that they were not aware of the warnings that all pilots have received on subject. So more likely is that the advice from the engineer that they would not need de-icing gave them enough of an excuse to be able to justify their decision if ever questioned about it in the future.

3. I suppose only in the unlikely case that one meant to get a de-ice and somehow forgot to do so. In the tens of millions of flights that have occurred(or is it hundreds), I am sure it has happened at least once. After years of reading accident reports, I have come to the conclusion that if it is possible to happen in aviation, it has happened.

Anyways, if someone did forget to stop at the de-ice bay and then suddenly remembered at a critical time during takeoff(however unlikely) or was a bit worried about how well their fluid was holding up or perhaps a plane felt sluggish after takeoff despite being within a holdover time, it might be prudent to not fly a normal profile. Perhaps a delay in retracting flaps.

[henra]

3. I suppose only in the unlikely case that one meant to get a de-ice and somehow forgot to do so. In the tens of millions of flights that have occurred(or is it hundreds),

Exactly. If they didn't deem de-icing necessary in the first place using normal speeds seems only consequential...
These guys didn't seem to have worried much about the possible existance (not a single word about it - OK they activated the boots but that might have been Routine for them) of ice and its effect on the aircraft.
Given the history of ice sensitivity of TPs in general and especially ATRs one has to wonder a bit why it didn't dawn on them that something bad could happen.

[Johno8]

Yeah they did think something bad could happen...but only after they lost control.

[5 APUs captain]

Just few facts:

1. Airplane has arrived well before the snowfall (actually wet snow).
2. They've got up after the snowfall.
3. According their company SOPs - before departure from company base the technician is responsible for the contaminant check and de-icing.
4. That was a captain's birthday ...... Rush...

[JammedStab]

On page 50 of the report....wet snow and rain upon arrival with temperature of zero.

[Naali]

To understand these procedures,one must know where they came from. Ground engineer decides if the aircraft is fit to fly,Radio operator handles the comms,Navigator does the maths. Pilot flies. Somewhere else,it is estimated that it takes three generations to change a way of common thinking. At best.

[Sunamer]

"Somewhere else,it is estimated that it takes three generations to change a way of common thinking."

Common thinking arises from the way new people are raised/taught.
So, it might take less, given that there is a need for new safety culture.
The need that is felt by instructors as well as airlines personnel(responsible for safety) including top level managers.

It is saddening that so much has been learnt in aviation about safety, yet, while reading what some russian pilots on various forums have to say about that "damn western airmanship culture that no one needs", I am left to wonder, what century they are flying in ...
:sad:

[rostal]

Guys, probably I'm getting something wrong but how could they have Total Flight Time only about 50hrs more than experience on ATR. Is the TT counted after obtaining CPL or what?
Cheers

[Sunamer]

From the final MAK report

Cpt:
Total time: 2602
ATR42/72 type hrs: 2522
ATR42/72(as CPT) hrs: 288 (ATR42 - 53 hrs, ATR72 - 235 hrs )

School time - 80 hrs. such a nice and round number...

how could they have Total Flight Time only about 50hrs more than experience on ATR

Schools struggle to get planes in the air due to the lack of funds. So, most of the time, by the time students get their CPLs, they are only in 50-70 hrs logged range. Depending on a school, some students can get slightly higher numbers, but not by much.

In fact, the real number might be even less - no money in the school - they fly 30-40 hrs, the rest is just ....ehh..."added" to make at least 50-70 hr number in the logbook).