Continental Airlines Newark Chief Pilot in De-Icing Controversy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Somewhere Over America
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Continental Airlines Newark Chief Pilot in De-Icing Controversy
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**
*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**
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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).
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).
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: England
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
snow would have departed almost immediately during the takeoff roll
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
determine the need for de-icing is an examination of critical aircraft
surfaces to ensure they are free of any ADHERING ice, snow, slush
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sometimes the chief pilot may need to fly more.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
".....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.
The assumptions that this CP made are nothing short of breathtaking and indeed the FAA should have a closer look at his office.
Seems as if the majority of pilots on that Wednesday morning thought the same way and erred on the side of safety.
The assumptions that this CP made are nothing short of breathtaking and indeed the FAA should have a closer look at his office.
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.
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.
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.
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.
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The word Dick Head comes to mind
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.
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.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: down 'ere my lovely
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.