Dash 8 gear problems ( Merged)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Butcher's
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flap 40,
Nope. You land; you get the spoilers. End of.
You have a choice as to whether they stick up or not ('taxi' or 'flight') on the ground - usually to avoid comments of the "did you know your spoilers are out?" kind at the holding point but not in flight.
Fred.
Nope. You land; you get the spoilers. End of.
You have a choice as to whether they stick up or not ('taxi' or 'flight') on the ground - usually to avoid comments of the "did you know your spoilers are out?" kind at the holding point but not in flight.
Fred.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: at the edge of the alps
Posts: 447
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been a while since I have flown in a Q400 but couldn't you disable the spoilers via one of the flight control push-off buttons on the glareshield?
(Not that that would be a recommended procedure, just a technical possibility.)
(Not that that would be a recommended procedure, just a technical possibility.)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8000 feet of cabin altitude
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys have to be kidding!!! Shut down a perfectly healthy engine?!?! As was mentioned earlier we do what it says in the checks and that's all. Leave the second guessing to other people. The aircraft is a bit of handful on two engines...but we're used to flying it with two engines. Now apart from introducing another problem to your already f
d up day you want to fly an assymetric approach, which means a reduced flap setting, different landing attitudes, lost some of your hydraulics.......the list goes on. You've got one problem....let's not complicate it. Personally, thought the crew did bloody well. Would hate to have been in their place.
d up day you want to fly an assymetric approach, which means a reduced flap setting, different landing attitudes, lost some of your hydraulics.......the list goes on. You've got one problem....let's not complicate it. Personally, thought the crew did bloody well. Would hate to have been in their place.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by speed freek
You guys have to be kidding!!! Shut down a perfectly healthy engine?!?!
Currently being reported in the Danish press, the pilot in the Vilnius incident, had shut down the right engine, mindful that the prop had penetrated the aircraft in the Aalborg incident.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Aalborg thread:
"Currently being reported in the Danish press, the pilot in the Vilnius incident, had shut down the right engine, mindful that the prop had penetrated the aircraft in the Aalborg incident. "
Some people learn from experience.... some never learn.
"Currently being reported in the Danish press, the pilot in the Vilnius incident, had shut down the right engine, mindful that the prop had penetrated the aircraft in the Aalborg incident. "
Some people learn from experience.... some never learn.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horizon Air Press Release
Horizon Air Initiates Q400 Inspections Based on Transport Canada Airworthiness Directive 9/12/2007 5:20 pm (PT)
SEATTLE — Today, in response to a Transport Canada airworthiness directive (AD), Horizon Air initiated the inspection of the landing gear of its Bombardier Aerospace Q400 turboprops. To allow sufficient time for the inspection process and the reaccommodation of customers whose travels are being affected, Horizon announced it will be making additional flight cancellations through Friday.
The AD was produced in the wake of two landing gear failure incidents involving SAS-affiliated airlines in Europe. Horizon, which has operated the Canadian-manufactured Q400 since 2001 and now has 33 in its fleet, has never experienced any issues like those SAS recently encountered.
Horizon today canceled 120 flights out of its daily average of 500. Horizon is canceling 156 flights on Thursday, and those will appear in central reservations systems by 5:30 p.m. today. Additional cancellations are also expected on Friday as Horizon works through the inspection requirements. Horizon is asking its customers flying on those days to check on the status of their flights via horizonair.com or by calling the reservations center at 800-547-9308.
Through Friday, customers on affected Horizon flights are being offered refunds, being allowed to cancel at no charge, or are being reaccommodated without any change fee.
Aircraft will be returned to service and Horizon flights will be reinstated as the inspections are completed successfully.
Horizon currently operates the Q400 in 74- and 76-seat configurations. Horizon operates two other aircraft types in its all-Bombardier fleet, neither of which is subject to these inspections: 70-seat CRJ-700 regional jets and 37-seat Q200 turboprops.
Horizon serves 48 cities throughout California, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, and British Columbia and Alberta. Together, Horizon Air and Alaska Airlines serve 92 cities and are subsidiaries of Alaska Air Group, Inc. (NYSE:ALK).
SEATTLE — Today, in response to a Transport Canada airworthiness directive (AD), Horizon Air initiated the inspection of the landing gear of its Bombardier Aerospace Q400 turboprops. To allow sufficient time for the inspection process and the reaccommodation of customers whose travels are being affected, Horizon announced it will be making additional flight cancellations through Friday.
The AD was produced in the wake of two landing gear failure incidents involving SAS-affiliated airlines in Europe. Horizon, which has operated the Canadian-manufactured Q400 since 2001 and now has 33 in its fleet, has never experienced any issues like those SAS recently encountered.
Horizon today canceled 120 flights out of its daily average of 500. Horizon is canceling 156 flights on Thursday, and those will appear in central reservations systems by 5:30 p.m. today. Additional cancellations are also expected on Friday as Horizon works through the inspection requirements. Horizon is asking its customers flying on those days to check on the status of their flights via horizonair.com or by calling the reservations center at 800-547-9308.
Through Friday, customers on affected Horizon flights are being offered refunds, being allowed to cancel at no charge, or are being reaccommodated without any change fee.
Aircraft will be returned to service and Horizon flights will be reinstated as the inspections are completed successfully.
Horizon currently operates the Q400 in 74- and 76-seat configurations. Horizon operates two other aircraft types in its all-Bombardier fleet, neither of which is subject to these inspections: 70-seat CRJ-700 regional jets and 37-seat Q200 turboprops.
Horizon serves 48 cities throughout California, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, and British Columbia and Alberta. Together, Horizon Air and Alaska Airlines serve 92 cities and are subsidiaries of Alaska Air Group, Inc. (NYSE:ALK).
Founder:
That is true, in most situations. But "to follow your checklists and procedures as they are written and nothing more" resulted in a dual-flameout on that A-330 years ago over the Atlantic Ocean, as we all know. A mis-installed engine part allowed a problem to develop which had no simple list of procedures in a book.
As we went through years of accumulated experience, we noticed that sometimes no one list of procedures exactly fits the indications which we have. And fairly often, flying 3-5 legs per day. This happened to us with a hydraulic system along with other systems over the years. Out of about 15 hydraulic choices, no title (with assumed conditions) matched the indications.
When the right pack shows no pressure with a normal APU source, only years with the systems teach us whether to call Maint. or not (we wait until the right engine is started: resetting the pack and press. reg. + flow control circuit breakers often does nothing) . We have many pneumatic, anti-icing and some electrical anomolies.
A few weeks ago I lost my altimeter, EGPWS and TCAS, all at the same time. There is no magic procedure for this, and no circuit breaker pulling/resetting helped.
25 years of this present interesting surprises.
That is true, in most situations. But "to follow your checklists and procedures as they are written and nothing more" resulted in a dual-flameout on that A-330 years ago over the Atlantic Ocean, as we all know. A mis-installed engine part allowed a problem to develop which had no simple list of procedures in a book.
As we went through years of accumulated experience, we noticed that sometimes no one list of procedures exactly fits the indications which we have. And fairly often, flying 3-5 legs per day. This happened to us with a hydraulic system along with other systems over the years. Out of about 15 hydraulic choices, no title (with assumed conditions) matched the indications.
When the right pack shows no pressure with a normal APU source, only years with the systems teach us whether to call Maint. or not (we wait until the right engine is started: resetting the pack and press. reg. + flow control circuit breakers often does nothing) . We have many pneumatic, anti-icing and some electrical anomolies.
A few weeks ago I lost my altimeter, EGPWS and TCAS, all at the same time. There is no magic procedure for this, and no circuit breaker pulling/resetting helped.
25 years of this present interesting surprises.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SWE
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it really that difficult to fly with one of the engines shut down? Is not that what every pilot has to be able to do? We practice it in the sim.
Another incident involving a Q 400 revealed that the emergency checklist could be interpreted in different ways.
It was a prop overspeed during approach. The crew followed the checklist and pulled back the throttle. This stabilized the rpm at a higher than normal value but still below the red line.
The checklist stated that if the rpm was uncontrollable, the engine should be shut down. The captain elected not to shut down the engine since the rpm was under control and he did not want to increase the workload by shutting down the engine.
That decision made the aircraft almost impossible to fly and offcourse the autopilot disengaged. According to the investigation report, they came close to crashing.
In his effort not to increase the workload, the captain actually increased the workload to the point that all his capacity had to be used just to fly the aircraft.
The reason was that the windmilling prop caused so much extra drag that they had to overboost the other engine just to remain flying.
Had they feathered the prop, there would never have been an incident.
It seems strange if the captain did not know that a windmilling prop would cause a lot more drag. Maybe he did not consider it to be windmilling. After all the engine was still running and the rpm was under control, is that the same as a windmilling prop?
Now it seems that Bombardier will rewrite the checklist on this point.
Another incident involving a Q 400 revealed that the emergency checklist could be interpreted in different ways.
It was a prop overspeed during approach. The crew followed the checklist and pulled back the throttle. This stabilized the rpm at a higher than normal value but still below the red line.
The checklist stated that if the rpm was uncontrollable, the engine should be shut down. The captain elected not to shut down the engine since the rpm was under control and he did not want to increase the workload by shutting down the engine.
That decision made the aircraft almost impossible to fly and offcourse the autopilot disengaged. According to the investigation report, they came close to crashing.
In his effort not to increase the workload, the captain actually increased the workload to the point that all his capacity had to be used just to fly the aircraft.
The reason was that the windmilling prop caused so much extra drag that they had to overboost the other engine just to remain flying.
Had they feathered the prop, there would never have been an incident.
It seems strange if the captain did not know that a windmilling prop would cause a lot more drag. Maybe he did not consider it to be windmilling. After all the engine was still running and the rpm was under control, is that the same as a windmilling prop?
Now it seems that Bombardier will rewrite the checklist on this point.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: @ some hotel far away from everything
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not completely correct... The checklist was never completed after the power lever was retarded,and the prop rpm was inside limits (controllable). 
The next step is to feather the prop, but keep it running - in case you for some reason need the engine later on... Don`t know the SAS procedures regarding this though, so I could be mistaken
The next step is to feather the prop, but keep it running - in case you for some reason need the engine later on... Don`t know the SAS procedures regarding this though, so I could be mistaken
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SWE
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, anyway the report stated that the checklist could be misinterpreted at that point. I believe the training had focused on a prop overspeed during takeoff not during approach.
Strangely it had been another incident just like it in the same situation and with the crew leaving the prop unfeathered. That time it did not cause any similar problems handling the aircraft.
That is the reason the first officer did not insist on feathering the prop.
However, all pilots should be perfectly able to fly an aircraft with engine failure (shut down).
Strangely it had been another incident just like it in the same situation and with the crew leaving the prop unfeathered. That time it did not cause any similar problems handling the aircraft.
That is the reason the first officer did not insist on feathering the prop.
However, all pilots should be perfectly able to fly an aircraft with engine failure (shut down).
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horizon must be thanking their lucky stars they don't fly the CRJ200 also. A major AD for those came out this past week in the US due to constant and regular flap failures. I read through the AD last night and it puts some very complicated requirements on the flight crews with respect to planning for a flap failure.
The video of that Q400 gear collapsing is quite amazing, it looked like the gear held up for a few seconds before it decided to just completely give way. I can only assume that the cockpit indication was that the gear was not locked?
The video of that Q400 gear collapsing is quite amazing, it looked like the gear held up for a few seconds before it decided to just completely give way. I can only assume that the cockpit indication was that the gear was not locked?
Once the wheels have touched, it's landed. After that its taxi.
Some hairyplanes, from little narrow track taildraggers to big swept wing jets, need to be flown on the ground as well; esp in a crosswind or with control pproblems.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wideroe has found corrotion on the part in question on one of their Q400s.
A news crew from NRK was shown the offending part, which has been removed from the a/c for further inspection.
Head of the Norwegian CAA Heine Richardsen commented that he found the whole problem extraordinary, and that Bombardier has dropped the ball regarding inspection intervals on the part.
Richardsen inspected one Q400 himself today as part of a meeting with Wideroe management. Wideroe was commended for grounding their fleet early on.
NRK allso reports that Q400s on which corrotion is found, will stay grounded for some time, due to lack of spare parts. (Hydraulic piston)
A news crew from NRK was shown the offending part, which has been removed from the a/c for further inspection.
Head of the Norwegian CAA Heine Richardsen commented that he found the whole problem extraordinary, and that Bombardier has dropped the ball regarding inspection intervals on the part.
Richardsen inspected one Q400 himself today as part of a meeting with Wideroe management. Wideroe was commended for grounding their fleet early on.
NRK allso reports that Q400s on which corrotion is found, will stay grounded for some time, due to lack of spare parts. (Hydraulic piston)
I remember from the Fokker 50 to shut down the engine at the moment you're already on the ground.
Landing is assured, and with the engine shut down it at least takes some energy out..
Landing is assured, and with the engine shut down it at least takes some energy out..
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear friends,
the corrossin on the retraction actuator wich was found on both AC broken were caused by the crash, but not the root cause as the gear locks mechanially by the overcenter.Of cause all parties have interest to get planes back in the air asap- but only if the real cause is known.
Just think how inprobably it is to have the same event within two days same operator and you can imagine what happened.
Sparkies
the corrossin on the retraction actuator wich was found on both AC broken were caused by the crash, but not the root cause as the gear locks mechanially by the overcenter.Of cause all parties have interest to get planes back in the air asap- but only if the real cause is known.
Just think how inprobably it is to have the same event within two days same operator and you can imagine what happened.
Sparkies