Continental TurboProp crash inbound for Buffalo
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During this time, the vertical speed continued at a constant 1190 fpm up.
There's the smoking gun for that one...
As far as the accident in question goes, the most startling "fact" for me is the disturbingly slow CAS or IAS reported earlier. 134KIAS or something? Clean? Something going very pear-shaped right there in my opinion.
We wait for the briefings. And the arse-covering.
Last edited by WynSock; 17th Feb 2009 at 10:48. Reason: kias
It wasn´t just kerosene burning at the scene, but also a source of natural gas, which explains why the fire took some 13 hours to put out.
Fire at Continental 3407 crash scene near Buffalo stalls black box recovery - Breaking News From New Jersey - NJ.com
Attempts to recover the "black box" flight data recorder from Continental 3407 to help determine what caused the plane to crash outside of Buffalo late Thursday killing 50 people, are being hampered by a fire from a natural gas leak at the scene, officials said this morning.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cosmos2
Within a second of autopilot disengagement, the aircraft began to roll right and pitch down (see Appendix A - Flight Data Recorder Plot and Appendix B - Flight Data Recorder Plot - Engines). Immediately after the aircraft began to roll, it was noticed that there was ice on the left engine inlet. The roll angle increased to 64º, the pitch angle went from 15º nose up to 5º nose up, and the aircraft vertical acceleration dropped to approximately 0.5 g.
The aircraft pitch then increased to 30º nose up briefly before decreasing to 40º nose down.
These conditions are indications that the aircraft wing had fully stalled. However, the captain interpreted the indications as severe turbulence.
The aircraft pitch then increased to 30º nose up briefly before decreasing to 40º nose down.
These conditions are indications that the aircraft wing had fully stalled. However, the captain interpreted the indications as severe turbulence.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Thessaloniki, GRECE
Age: 41
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: anywhere but home?
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
do you have a direct link to this AAIB report please ?
Transportation Safety Board of Canada - AVIATION REPORTS - 2005 - A05A0059
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Thessaloniki, GRECE
Age: 41
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
compare
From NTSB initial findings :
The stick shaker and stick pusher activated (at which point the autopilot would be disconnect at the very latest), then the airplane pitched up to 31 degrees nose up, then pitched down to 45 degrees nose down and rolled left to a bank angle of 46 degrees, then right to a bank angle of 105 degrees (already 15 degrees upside down). The airplane experienced G-forces between 0.75 and 2G.
From Canadian Transport board report :
The roll angle increased to 64º, the pitch angle went from 15º nose up to 5º nose up, and the aircraft vertical acceleration dropped to approximately 0.5 g. The aircraft pitch then increased to 30º nose up briefly before decreasing to 40º nose down. These conditions are indications that the aircraft wing had fully stalled.
Different circumstances but very similar description of stall characteristics.
The stick shaker and stick pusher activated (at which point the autopilot would be disconnect at the very latest), then the airplane pitched up to 31 degrees nose up, then pitched down to 45 degrees nose down and rolled left to a bank angle of 46 degrees, then right to a bank angle of 105 degrees (already 15 degrees upside down). The airplane experienced G-forces between 0.75 and 2G.
From Canadian Transport board report :
The roll angle increased to 64º, the pitch angle went from 15º nose up to 5º nose up, and the aircraft vertical acceleration dropped to approximately 0.5 g. The aircraft pitch then increased to 30º nose up briefly before decreasing to 40º nose down. These conditions are indications that the aircraft wing had fully stalled.
Different circumstances but very similar description of stall characteristics.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: irl
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
deep stall common to T tailed planes looks possible?
A standard main wing stall followed by a deep stall condition
suffered by T tailed airplanes would explain the 30 degree pitch up and subsequent pitch down.
Airflow across the Horizontal stabalizer gets disrupted by the wake of turbulent air from the stalling main wing -due to the T tailed design the horizontal stabalizer is right in the line of fire.This severly limits elevator control.Recovery is only possible by trying to induce an oscillation or rocking pendulum effect, effectively having to let the nose pitch or "swing" up to the extreme of the envelope before it can swing nose down -just like a pendulum.These types of stalls are noted in the article below to be extremely difficult to recover from
deep stall:
Stall (flight) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In this hypothetical situation the question is -what caused the main wing to stall in the first place ?
1 Why the lack of speed ?
2 Was there an engine problem or maybe an inaccurate airspeed indication?
3 Was ice creating extra drag and if so how come the FDR shows
the autopilot did not trim to compensate?
4 Surely the above scenario looks more likely than a tail plane stall
as according to the NASA icing video a severe pitch down would have
occured first in that scenario?
suffered by T tailed airplanes would explain the 30 degree pitch up and subsequent pitch down.
Airflow across the Horizontal stabalizer gets disrupted by the wake of turbulent air from the stalling main wing -due to the T tailed design the horizontal stabalizer is right in the line of fire.This severly limits elevator control.Recovery is only possible by trying to induce an oscillation or rocking pendulum effect, effectively having to let the nose pitch or "swing" up to the extreme of the envelope before it can swing nose down -just like a pendulum.These types of stalls are noted in the article below to be extremely difficult to recover from
deep stall:
Stall (flight) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In this hypothetical situation the question is -what caused the main wing to stall in the first place ?
1 Why the lack of speed ?
2 Was there an engine problem or maybe an inaccurate airspeed indication?
3 Was ice creating extra drag and if so how come the FDR shows
the autopilot did not trim to compensate?
4 Surely the above scenario looks more likely than a tail plane stall
as according to the NASA icing video a severe pitch down would have
occured first in that scenario?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hate to say it but I think this ones going to come down to pilot error Airspeed Airspeed Airspeed. 130 knots with "significant Ice" too slow hanging out in the shiz. But I would love to know is if she is such a bad airplane as some on here proclaim and would have it grounded, why ain't these things falling out of the sky in bad Ice wich they fly in everyday. I hate to Sunday morning quarterback but some on here need a solid smack up side the head regarding turbo props and operating in Ice its an everyday thing where im from where you got 10 months of Winter and 2 months bad Sledding (snowmobiling)
Just because the Dash doesn't have the shiny metal appeal of a jet doesn't mean she should grounded or labeled unsafe. Aww did some of you get passed up for the jet jobs, but think you deserve a jet because your bars are the shineyeist in the terminal.
she is a hell of a performer with plenty of balls to get out of the Ice.
Bombardier Aerospace announced that its new Q400 airliner established turboprop time-to-climb records in three flights from Davis Airfield in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The records have been submitted to the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale in Paris, France, for validation. The records cover time to three altitudes in three different weight categories. The Q400 climbed to 3,000, 6,000 and 9,000 metres (9,843, 19,685 and 29,527 feet) in each weight category, including one flight in the "unlimited weight" category to 9,000 m. The records claimed for flights to 9,000 m include: C1i weight class, 16,000 to 20,000 kg (35,274 to 44,092 pounds), seven minutes, two seconds, or 59 seconds faster than the eight minutes, one second established by the Saab 2000 in 1993. C1j weight class, 20,000 to 25,000 kg (44,092 to 55,115 pounds), eight minutes, 21 seconds, or three minutes, four seconds faster than the previous record of 11 minutes, 25 seconds held by the Grumman E2C Hawkeye military aircraft. C1k weight class, 25,000 to 35,000 kg (55,115 to 77,161 pounds), 11 minutes, 41 seconds. There was no current record in this category.
Q400.COM - Performance
Just because the Dash doesn't have the shiny metal appeal of a jet doesn't mean she should grounded or labeled unsafe. Aww did some of you get passed up for the jet jobs, but think you deserve a jet because your bars are the shineyeist in the terminal.
she is a hell of a performer with plenty of balls to get out of the Ice.
Bombardier Aerospace announced that its new Q400 airliner established turboprop time-to-climb records in three flights from Davis Airfield in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The records have been submitted to the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale in Paris, France, for validation. The records cover time to three altitudes in three different weight categories. The Q400 climbed to 3,000, 6,000 and 9,000 metres (9,843, 19,685 and 29,527 feet) in each weight category, including one flight in the "unlimited weight" category to 9,000 m. The records claimed for flights to 9,000 m include: C1i weight class, 16,000 to 20,000 kg (35,274 to 44,092 pounds), seven minutes, two seconds, or 59 seconds faster than the eight minutes, one second established by the Saab 2000 in 1993. C1j weight class, 20,000 to 25,000 kg (44,092 to 55,115 pounds), eight minutes, 21 seconds, or three minutes, four seconds faster than the previous record of 11 minutes, 25 seconds held by the Grumman E2C Hawkeye military aircraft. C1k weight class, 25,000 to 35,000 kg (55,115 to 77,161 pounds), 11 minutes, 41 seconds. There was no current record in this category.
In this hypothetical situation the question is -what caused the main wing to stall in the first place ?
1 Why the lack of speed ?
2 Was there an engine problem or maybe an inaccurate airspeed indication?
3 Was ice creating extra drag and if so how come the FDR shows
the autopilot did not trim to compensate?
4 Surely the above scenario looks more likely than a tail plane stall
as according to the NASA icing video a severe pitch down would have
occured first in that scenario?
1 Why the lack of speed ?
2 Was there an engine problem or maybe an inaccurate airspeed indication?
3 Was ice creating extra drag and if so how come the FDR shows
the autopilot did not trim to compensate?
4 Surely the above scenario looks more likely than a tail plane stall
as according to the NASA icing video a severe pitch down would have
occured first in that scenario?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alps
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHAT REALLY PUZZLES ME: 
According NTSB the shakeup occured when the flaps where in transit to 15°.
I think that minimum speeds reduce faster during flap transit, than the airplane decelerates.
Ergo : if it was a normal wingstall it should have occured earlier, when flaps where at 5°.
Maybe adding full power at such a low speed was the factor that destabilized the A/C.
Flying at low speed (near idle) and then adding full Power feels quite "brutal" in the Q400. Maybe adding the power was the factor which brought the A/C into a kind of "dynamic" stall.
According NTSB the shakeup occured when the flaps where in transit to 15°.
I think that minimum speeds reduce faster during flap transit, than the airplane decelerates.
Ergo : if it was a normal wingstall it should have occured earlier, when flaps where at 5°.
Maybe adding full power at such a low speed was the factor that destabilized the A/C.
Flying at low speed (near idle) and then adding full Power feels quite "brutal" in the Q400. Maybe adding the power was the factor which brought the A/C into a kind of "dynamic" stall.
Actually, the first person who suggested Dash 8s - and, in fact, all turboprops - should be grounded with immediate effect was not anybody from this forum, but Mr. Jim Hall, who was the NTSB´s chairman for some seven years.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re: Turboprop icing on approach to Buffalo
I'm struck by Scudrunner's observation in comment 459; that a clean aircraft can acquire an inch of ice in a matter of seconds. Like having a bucket of water thrown over your car.
Implies that icing conditions can vary quite a bit, so one plane can encounter moderate or light icing, and a minute or two later one following can have a very unpleasant surprise.
Does this happen?
Implies that icing conditions can vary quite a bit, so one plane can encounter moderate or light icing, and a minute or two later one following can have a very unpleasant surprise.
Does this happen?
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
weather conditions can change in minutes
I've seen conditions change quickly...there is an old joke everywhere in the USA..if you don't like the weather, wait 15 minutes and it will change.
for a plane to come through 27 minutes later, same type, same place, means nothing. or at least, very little.
for the crew to raise the gear means they had time to try ''something'' to recover, but it didn't work.
Indeed, I think it is universal in aviation to NOT raise the gear until a positive rate of climb is observed.
for a plane to come through 27 minutes later, same type, same place, means nothing. or at least, very little.
for the crew to raise the gear means they had time to try ''something'' to recover, but it didn't work.
Indeed, I think it is universal in aviation to NOT raise the gear until a positive rate of climb is observed.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finn47: Actually, the first person who suggested Dash 8s - and, in fact, all turboprops - should be grounded with immediate effect was not anybody from this forum, but Mr. Jim Hall, who was the NTSB´s chairman for some seven years.
I'm struck by Scudrunner's observation in comment 459; that a clean aircraft can acquire an inch of ice in a matter of seconds. Like having a bucket of water thrown over your car.
New reports say the captain only had 110 hours of Q400 experience:
Training of Flight 3407 pilots being examined : Home: The Buffalo News
Training of Flight 3407 pilots being examined : Home: The Buffalo News
Psychophysiological entity
A few random points.
I think that has more to do with not subsiding back onto the runway during take-off.
The lower prop rpm just feels unnatural to me when thinking of icing conditions. It's back to trusting the software again...don't like it.
That certainly is not much time on type. I usually don't settle down on a new type for at least 300, then I need a lot of empty sectors to really play with it before feeling confident about difficult handling situations.
These days, flight crew are not allowed to do the experimenting that we did. It of course means time in an empty or freight aircraft, and even if it was allowed, there's often not the chance with today's high workload.
Indeed, I think it is universal in aviation to NOT raise the gear until a positive rate of climb is observed.
The lower prop rpm just feels unnatural to me when thinking of icing conditions. It's back to trusting the software again...don't like it.
That certainly is not much time on type. I usually don't settle down on a new type for at least 300, then I need a lot of empty sectors to really play with it before feeling confident about difficult handling situations.
These days, flight crew are not allowed to do the experimenting that we did. It of course means time in an empty or freight aircraft, and even if it was allowed, there's often not the chance with today's high workload.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Second Colgan flight
Has anyone noticed that several more aircraft continued on the approach even after the crash and reports of ice were known ? What if a second had crashed ?
My original theory said 'stall recovery in progress' and Im sticking with it, it was not a flat spin by any means. It rotated 180 degrees and began to recover straight ahead at 100 kts..
My original theory said 'stall recovery in progress' and Im sticking with it, it was not a flat spin by any means. It rotated 180 degrees and began to recover straight ahead at 100 kts..
Last edited by Uncle_Jay; 17th Feb 2009 at 16:56.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Elysion
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Following the NTSB briefing yesterday, it was clear that Chealander was somewhat evasive/deliberately vague when asked about the reported 134 kts at gear down. All other numbers given were reported as "you can take them to the bank" solid.
To me, that says that they are not very comfortable with the numbers they see.
To me, that says that they are not very comfortable with the numbers they see.