You just thought you where the PIC
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Eat My Shorts
You say "You were not there, so you cannot judge the weather conditions" which is true but, in the previous post you said " it was snowing really, really slightly we had a few tiny frozen droplets on our outer wings". I based my remarks on your statement!
You also say "you don't know the type of aircraft that I fly" however I see from previous posts that you mention Excell, EMB145 and Falcon 2000. I don't know which of those you were flying on the day of course but I do know that aircraft of this class typically mandate "clean wings" before departure!
My question was simply to ask how you can consider falling snow and frozen droplets on the wing as meeting a "clean wing" policy. Based on the information you have given us and assuming that you are flying an aeroplane which requires a "clean wing" on departure, my judgement is that your decision was flawed. If you don''t want others to judge your decision then don't include it in a public discussion!
Pace,
I agree that there is a cost motivation but, I guess it's just the cost of doing business in Vnukovo!
3 Point
You say "You were not there, so you cannot judge the weather conditions" which is true but, in the previous post you said " it was snowing really, really slightly we had a few tiny frozen droplets on our outer wings". I based my remarks on your statement!
You also say "you don't know the type of aircraft that I fly" however I see from previous posts that you mention Excell, EMB145 and Falcon 2000. I don't know which of those you were flying on the day of course but I do know that aircraft of this class typically mandate "clean wings" before departure!
My question was simply to ask how you can consider falling snow and frozen droplets on the wing as meeting a "clean wing" policy. Based on the information you have given us and assuming that you are flying an aeroplane which requires a "clean wing" on departure, my judgement is that your decision was flawed. If you don''t want others to judge your decision then don't include it in a public discussion!
Pace,
I agree that there is a cost motivation but, I guess it's just the cost of doing business in Vnukovo!
3 Point
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace,
I agree that there is a cost motivation but, I guess it's just the cost of doing business in Vnukovo!
I agree that there is a cost motivation but, I guess it's just the cost of doing business in Vnukovo!
Never been to Vnukovo
my three times what I need was elsewhere with the excuse that they were geared up to Airlines and had a minimum dispense quantity which would do half an A320 not a tiny little Citation.looking at the A320 they deiced before me I was tempted to park under the wing and catch the deicing fluid free
As it was I was dripping so much deice fluid that on the takeoff roll I am sure i deiced half the runway
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 19th Jan 2014 at 11:42.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: MCO (occasionally)
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aside from the "clean wing" issue, which I believe is mandated on all aircraft, the other issue I see that disturbs me is a few pilots here advancing the cost containment argument.
Now sure, I can hear pilots screeching like an old turbojet, but the truth is gentlemen, that we need to always stand up and say "this is what it costs".
Cutting corners on training, operations, salaries, and maintenance is a losing game. After a few rounds, you'll be staying in a Accor hotel, eating crackers, getting minimal training, and then someone will call and ask "can't you guys buy a broom and get that frozen snow off".
Our catering bills most often exceed the daily rate of our flight attendant. While we most often toss 80% of the salmon pate, we are always asked to shave off the pay rates, but no one ever says cut back on caviar.
Accountants hate you already, you'll never change that, so do your job and sleep well.
FR
Now sure, I can hear pilots screeching like an old turbojet, but the truth is gentlemen, that we need to always stand up and say "this is what it costs".
Cutting corners on training, operations, salaries, and maintenance is a losing game. After a few rounds, you'll be staying in a Accor hotel, eating crackers, getting minimal training, and then someone will call and ask "can't you guys buy a broom and get that frozen snow off".
Our catering bills most often exceed the daily rate of our flight attendant. While we most often toss 80% of the salmon pate, we are always asked to shave off the pay rates, but no one ever says cut back on caviar.
Accountants hate you already, you'll never change that, so do your job and sleep well.
FR
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
decision making
I don't think the real issue is about the budget. I think most pilots that are in the position to fly $50 million+ biz jets are more worried about self preservation than they are about saving a few thousand dollars. The real issue here is taking away our decision making authority. Let me ask you, do you want the ground handler looking over the weather and second guessing your fuel load, your alternate, or the route you filed? The most important person on the airplane to me is me. If I need to deice, I will make the decision to deice and what type to use. I don't want someone that may be getting a commission the amount of deice fluid they sell, trying to tell me that I need to deice. That is what my principal pays me for. Yes there may be a few inept pilots out there that are too scared of getting an a$$ chewing for spending a few bucks, but don't punish the rest of us for their mistakes. To the pilots that think this a good policy, let me know how you feel when the government tells you where to live, what to do for a living, whom to marry, how many babies to have because you are not intelligent enough to make those decisions on your own. Let the bombardment begin.
g450cpt
g450cpt
Last edited by g450cpt; 19th Jan 2014 at 14:08.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: FL450
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ooooo the irony! Russian authorities forcing western crews to de-ice? 
In the meantime I have lost count of the number of times I have witnessed Aeroflot fly with ice contaminated surfaces when everyone else is being de-iced!
Get your own house in order Russia before you try to fix ours.
In the meantime I have lost count of the number of times I have witnessed Aeroflot fly with ice contaminated surfaces when everyone else is being de-iced!
Get your own house in order Russia before you try to fix ours.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Ooooo the irony! Russian authorities forcing western crews to de-ice? "
Well, maybe they are forcing everybody to de-ice as a mechanism to catch all the non-professional crews; everybody tarred with the same brush!?!
I thought the old fashioned "I'm the captain and I'm right, don't want to listen to you" attitude had gone from 21st century professional aviation; looks like it has survived in the dark reaches of our community somewhere!
If a de-icing crew in a cold and frost country recommends to me that I should de-ice I'm going to think long and hard before I override that recommendation. Even if I think I don't need it, I have to allow the possibility that I might be wrong.
If he's wrong and I'm right then I de-ice when it wasn't necessary; if I'm wrong and he's right then we just avoided an accident. I prefer to err on the safe side.
3 Point
Well, maybe they are forcing everybody to de-ice as a mechanism to catch all the non-professional crews; everybody tarred with the same brush!?!
I thought the old fashioned "I'm the captain and I'm right, don't want to listen to you" attitude had gone from 21st century professional aviation; looks like it has survived in the dark reaches of our community somewhere!
If a de-icing crew in a cold and frost country recommends to me that I should de-ice I'm going to think long and hard before I override that recommendation. Even if I think I don't need it, I have to allow the possibility that I might be wrong.
If he's wrong and I'm right then I de-ice when it wasn't necessary; if I'm wrong and he's right then we just avoided an accident. I prefer to err on the safe side.
3 Point
PPRuNe Handmaiden
Transaero in summer? No issues and until that flight two winters ago I had no issue with them in winter either. However, they took off with ice on the wings. I did alert the FA and well... the flight crew just told her to tell me that the controls are ok and roared off... 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have to guard against incremental erosion of standards; if it's not right it's not right, end of story!
I´m all for deicing a frozen airplane, even though 'my' Cessna contraption just cost 17m$ I want to come home unhurt, but I still use some brain cells. And that has NOTHING to do whatsoever with:
the old fashioned "I'm the captain and I'm right, don't want to listen to you" attitude
ECON cruise, LR cruise...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MIRSI hold - give or take...
Age: 52
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guard against eroding standards as follows: What does the book say?
1) Is there a 'few frozen drops' on the wings? What does your book say? De-ice, no??
2) Is it 'snowing very, very lightly'? What does your book say? Anti-ice, no??
This issue far, far far outweighs being ripped off. We're professionals, that means abiding by a certain ethic, upholding standards and doing things not only in a safe, but also approved and legal manner.
How do you guard against being ripped off? Simple - when you have applied your safe, approved and legal decision making - i.e. no contamination on the wings, and no precipitation falling - then you tell them that a de-ice is not necessary. If they persist, you call your supervisor over, ask for the resident safety inspector to attend as well and inform your handling agent that you will accept the de-ice under duress and that an official complaint will follow. Record names, times, what was said when and by whom, the lot.
However, have never been asked to de-ice / anti-ice when it was not required, neither in VKO or elsewhere. Have, however, on several occasions had to struggle to get the aircraft de-iced when the crews in their wisdom couldn't be bovverd to heat the rig up for a single departure at oh-christ-hundred in the morning.
As long as the minimum standard of being able to understanding and following the rules to the letter hasn't been met, I cannot take seriously complaints about wiser (or at least more compliant) people overriding your decision-making. Yes, I am absolutely 99.9% sure that departing in the conditions described without de- and anti-icing would have been safe - and thank eff we'll now never find out if that 0.1% chance would have left you with any change.
When you have done it all by the book and they still charge you - then start complaining!
1) Is there a 'few frozen drops' on the wings? What does your book say? De-ice, no??
2) Is it 'snowing very, very lightly'? What does your book say? Anti-ice, no??
This issue far, far far outweighs being ripped off. We're professionals, that means abiding by a certain ethic, upholding standards and doing things not only in a safe, but also approved and legal manner.
How do you guard against being ripped off? Simple - when you have applied your safe, approved and legal decision making - i.e. no contamination on the wings, and no precipitation falling - then you tell them that a de-ice is not necessary. If they persist, you call your supervisor over, ask for the resident safety inspector to attend as well and inform your handling agent that you will accept the de-ice under duress and that an official complaint will follow. Record names, times, what was said when and by whom, the lot.
However, have never been asked to de-ice / anti-ice when it was not required, neither in VKO or elsewhere. Have, however, on several occasions had to struggle to get the aircraft de-iced when the crews in their wisdom couldn't be bovverd to heat the rig up for a single departure at oh-christ-hundred in the morning.
As long as the minimum standard of being able to understanding and following the rules to the letter hasn't been met, I cannot take seriously complaints about wiser (or at least more compliant) people overriding your decision-making. Yes, I am absolutely 99.9% sure that departing in the conditions described without de- and anti-icing would have been safe - and thank eff we'll now never find out if that 0.1% chance would have left you with any change.
When you have done it all by the book and they still charge you - then start complaining!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now sure, I can hear pilots screeching like an old turbojet, but the truth is gentlemen, that we need to always stand up and say "this is what it costs"
Frank R
I take the point you are making but with a concern. Its all very well if you fly some very expensive hardware with a budget to suit but some of us fly bottom of the pile business jets where the owners are cost aware and loading too many costs could get to the point that the jet is considered too expensive to keep.
i feel that yes it costs what it costs but you have to deal with things as if they are your own and your own money.
do you catch peak time trains or try and schedule for off peak or do you think your going first class because in the scale of things first class is a drop in the ocean? I am sure you get what I am saying.
Yes safety is paramount but it bugs me when three times the deicing fluid needed is poured over the aircraft and charged for because they claim to have a minimum dispense volume or if you feel as an experienced pilot that the jet does not need deicing but someone sees £££s and tells you it does.
Should that determination be judged by a non pilot or by a qualified Captain?
Its a bit like hospital administration staff telling a consultant surgeon how to operate ?
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 20th Jan 2014 at 11:38.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do not underestimate the effects of contamination on flying surfaces on aircraft.
"Attempting to get airborne with any contamination on the flying surfaces of the aircraft, you immediately become a test pilot"
As no two cases of contamination are the same, then watch out.
Someone has mentioned cost of deicing. Well I call that commercial pressure creeping in, right there. The old story, if you have to think about costs in this business you shouldn't be in it as an owner. You as Captain must be certain one way or another, all surfaces have been deiced. That is your job.
So if the authorities of the country you are a guest in, decides to hit your aircraft with deicing fluid, then it cant be all bad can it?
At least if you do prang on t/o you can't be blamed for attempting to get airborne with a contaminated a/c.
"Aerodynamics is a highly developed science, so don't pioneer"
"Attempting to get airborne with any contamination on the flying surfaces of the aircraft, you immediately become a test pilot"
As no two cases of contamination are the same, then watch out.
Someone has mentioned cost of deicing. Well I call that commercial pressure creeping in, right there. The old story, if you have to think about costs in this business you shouldn't be in it as an owner. You as Captain must be certain one way or another, all surfaces have been deiced. That is your job.
So if the authorities of the country you are a guest in, decides to hit your aircraft with deicing fluid, then it cant be all bad can it?
At least if you do prang on t/o you can't be blamed for attempting to get airborne with a contaminated a/c.
"Aerodynamics is a highly developed science, so don't pioneer"
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about if the "snow" is actually somewhere in between rain and snow, and turns into aqua as soon as it hits the wing because OAT is +2 and the wing might be even warmer from having been in the hangar all night. Don't fall for the commercial pressure, but surely captain's discretion would be appropriate in such a scenario rather than blindly listen to what some ass-covering de-icing crew is trying to tell you?
Same discretion that's being used when HOT table says 20-40 min and after 23 min you have to decide whether to accept take-off clearance or not.
Same discretion that's being used when HOT table says 20-40 min and after 23 min you have to decide whether to accept take-off clearance or not.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: MCO (occasionally)
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The short answer is that I blindly de-ice (your term) if there is anything slush like, slurpee like, or frosty like on the wing, or if I think something may develop. Some of my considerations are temp, trends, wind, moisture on runway, fuel tank temp, and time from closing the door to takeoff. I especially deice if I have done a quick turn and it is below 10c, as the fuel will almost always be colder than -10.
The law for the G550 is as follows:
01-30-10: General
Icing conditions exist when the Static Air Temperature (SAT) on the ground
and for takeoff, or SAT in flight is 10°C (50°F) or below, and visible
moisture in any form is present (such as clouds, fog with visibility of one
mile or less, rain, snow, sleet and ice crystals).
Icing conditions also exist when the SAT on the ground and for takeoff is
10°C (50°F) or below when operating on ramps, taxiways or runways
where surface snow, ice, standing water or slush may be ingested by the
engines or freeze on the engines, nacelles or engine sensor probes.
Takeoff is prohibited with frost, ice, snow, or slush adhering to the wings,
control surfaces, engine inlets, or other critical surfaces.
A visual and tactile (hand on surface) check of the wing leading edge and
the wing upper surface must be performed to ensure the wing is free from
frost, ice, snow, or slush when the outside air temperature is less than
42°F (6°C), or if it cannot be ascertained that the wing fuel temperature is
above 32°F (0°C); and
· There is visible moisture (rain, drizzle, sleet, snow, fog, etc.) present;
or
· Water is present on the wing; or
· The difference between the dew point and the outside air
temperature is 5°F (3°C) or less; or
· The atmospheric conditions have been conducive to frost formation.
The law for the G550 is as follows:
01-30-10: General
Icing conditions exist when the Static Air Temperature (SAT) on the ground
and for takeoff, or SAT in flight is 10°C (50°F) or below, and visible
moisture in any form is present (such as clouds, fog with visibility of one
mile or less, rain, snow, sleet and ice crystals).
Icing conditions also exist when the SAT on the ground and for takeoff is
10°C (50°F) or below when operating on ramps, taxiways or runways
where surface snow, ice, standing water or slush may be ingested by the
engines or freeze on the engines, nacelles or engine sensor probes.
Takeoff is prohibited with frost, ice, snow, or slush adhering to the wings,
control surfaces, engine inlets, or other critical surfaces.
A visual and tactile (hand on surface) check of the wing leading edge and
the wing upper surface must be performed to ensure the wing is free from
frost, ice, snow, or slush when the outside air temperature is less than
42°F (6°C), or if it cannot be ascertained that the wing fuel temperature is
above 32°F (0°C); and
· There is visible moisture (rain, drizzle, sleet, snow, fog, etc.) present;
or
· Water is present on the wing; or
· The difference between the dew point and the outside air
temperature is 5°F (3°C) or less; or
· The atmospheric conditions have been conducive to frost formation.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FrankR,
Yes, I agree with all you say and the conditions are the same for my type. But even considering temp, trends, wind, moisture on runway, fuel tank temp, time till T/O, the assessment can vary considerably from pilot to pilot based on previous experience.
A friend of mine (first officer) and his captain was failed on a line check for not de-icing when in the opinion of the checker they should've de-iced. Interestingly they were told they'd failed first after landing at destination, meaning the checker did not intervene and ordered de-icing himself. Apparently not fearing for the safety of the ship. This for a well known European carrier, no dodgy Russian carrier in darkest Siberia.
Edit: wording, story
Yes, I agree with all you say and the conditions are the same for my type. But even considering temp, trends, wind, moisture on runway, fuel tank temp, time till T/O, the assessment can vary considerably from pilot to pilot based on previous experience.
A friend of mine (first officer) and his captain was failed on a line check for not de-icing when in the opinion of the checker they should've de-iced. Interestingly they were told they'd failed first after landing at destination, meaning the checker did not intervene and ordered de-icing himself. Apparently not fearing for the safety of the ship. This for a well known European carrier, no dodgy Russian carrier in darkest Siberia.
Edit: wording, story
Last edited by 172_driver; 22nd Jan 2014 at 19:31.