Continental TurboProp crash inbound for Buffalo
where? I'm signing up
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Zulu-8
Age: 62
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NTSB plans to hold the 'Sunshine' meeting on 2 Feb to discuss the final report on this event. It will be webcast live (0930 local/ 1430 GMT) so you can see the action and discussion amongst the board members as they debate the causes and recommendations. Details of meeting and webcast available on:
NTSB - Board Meetings
Complete docket of all factual information available on:
CD List Of Contents
Could be pretty interesting!!!
NTSB - Board Meetings
Complete docket of all factual information available on:
CD List Of Contents
Could be pretty interesting!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
I for one am opposed to live broadcasting of the Board's hearing. In my experience, it is not helpful.
I was disappointed in Colgan's submission, as I note they do not train approach to Stall in the configuration this a/c was flying at the Stall.
Airspeed and altitude in training are not in any way challenging relative to the circumstances in this accident. The shaker recovery is reported to be maintain altitude and airspeed with power. This would have involved no pushing on the yoke (per training), and propellor pitch prevented immediate acceleration with thrust. IMHO.
bear
I was disappointed in Colgan's submission, as I note they do not train approach to Stall in the configuration this a/c was flying at the Stall.
Airspeed and altitude in training are not in any way challenging relative to the circumstances in this accident. The shaker recovery is reported to be maintain altitude and airspeed with power. This would have involved no pushing on the yoke (per training), and propellor pitch prevented immediate acceleration with thrust. IMHO.
bear
A summary of the final report, including findings, probable cause and recommendations will be available online at NTSB´s website after today´s meeting is over, but the full report only after a few more weeks:
http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2010/100129.html
http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2010/100129.html
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CNN reports on crash findings
Crash: Colgan DH8D at Buffalo on Feb 12th 2009, impacted home while on approach
Aviation Herald
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Feb 2nd 2010 15:53Z, last updated Tuesday, Feb 2nd 2010 19:44Z
(developing story as the board meeting progresses)
Today the NTSB conduct their final board meeting to determine the probable cause of the crash in preparation of the final report.
The chair said, that it was the first investigation in 15 years to be completed and the final board meeting done within a year after a crash.
23 safety recommendations have been drafted to be released to the FAA.
Recommendations regarding pilot professionalism and code sharing going beyond the Colgan accident have not yet been drafted. The issues will be discussed in a symposium later the year.
The final report will be released in due time.
Aviation Herald
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Feb 2nd 2010 15:53Z, last updated Tuesday, Feb 2nd 2010 19:44Z
(developing story as the board meeting progresses)
Today the NTSB conduct their final board meeting to determine the probable cause of the crash in preparation of the final report.
The chair said, that it was the first investigation in 15 years to be completed and the final board meeting done within a year after a crash.
23 safety recommendations have been drafted to be released to the FAA.
Recommendations regarding pilot professionalism and code sharing going beyond the Colgan accident have not yet been drafted. The issues will be discussed in a symposium later the year.
The final report will be released in due time.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While waiting for the 23 item report in the next year, I suggest an interim 2 item procedure.
1. Monitor your flight instruments and power settings.
2. If you get a wing stall add power and lower the nose a bit.
It worked quite well in the 60 some different types I have flown and would have worked here. This is not rocket science.
Only if you have no experience would you not know this.
1. Monitor your flight instruments and power settings.
2. If you get a wing stall add power and lower the nose a bit.
It worked quite well in the 60 some different types I have flown and would have worked here. This is not rocket science.
Only if you have no experience would you not know this.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: new jersey, usa
Age: 78
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"pilot error" almost always wins.....
this is my first post, so bear with me folks. i hesitate to add to the discussion because i usually learn so much more than i could possibly contribute to this forum. that being said, i just want to add my two cents from my experience as a flight advisor and controller in the nyc airspace, and the unattributed author of the flight rules and regs for the "uncontrolled" exclusion area over nyc.
for some reason i was intrigued by the colgan air incident, and i listened twice to the tapes of that night, from about one hour before to a half hour after. from about forty-five minutes before the incident, various aircraft on approach reported icing between certain flight levels, and they and others were directed by approach (or the tower, i can't remember which) to get through those levels quickly. when the colgan air flight called in they were given just normal response and directions - no mention of conditions, temps, icing, etc.
i agree partially with the board findings as to pilot experience, training, work load and situation, etc. - you get what you pay for - but for a flight controller to omit pertinent and essential information in their communication with flight crew is to me a glaring omission and dereliction of responsibility.
i respect the ntsb; indeed, in the several incidents i was involved with, they were the only ones who "got it right". but, unless i missed something along the way (and that's very possible), they missed an essential part of the puzzle in this case.
i'll stop now, i hate long posts, but i just felt i had to mention this. any and all comments or criticism are appreciated.
for some reason i was intrigued by the colgan air incident, and i listened twice to the tapes of that night, from about one hour before to a half hour after. from about forty-five minutes before the incident, various aircraft on approach reported icing between certain flight levels, and they and others were directed by approach (or the tower, i can't remember which) to get through those levels quickly. when the colgan air flight called in they were given just normal response and directions - no mention of conditions, temps, icing, etc.
i agree partially with the board findings as to pilot experience, training, work load and situation, etc. - you get what you pay for - but for a flight controller to omit pertinent and essential information in their communication with flight crew is to me a glaring omission and dereliction of responsibility.
i respect the ntsb; indeed, in the several incidents i was involved with, they were the only ones who "got it right". but, unless i missed something along the way (and that's very possible), they missed an essential part of the puzzle in this case.
i'll stop now, i hate long posts, but i just felt i had to mention this. any and all comments or criticism are appreciated.
eastsidewillie;
First, thanks for contributing - good first post.
Second, All ATC communications are examined and likely if your point is valid that will be recognized and would likely be part of the report. At first blush there seems an overwhelming unprofessionalism going on here but one never knows where an intervention in a causal path may arise, even if it is a communication. In fact often, one never knows what is, and what is not, an "intervention"...
First, thanks for contributing - good first post.
Second, All ATC communications are examined and likely if your point is valid that will be recognized and would likely be part of the report. At first blush there seems an overwhelming unprofessionalism going on here but one never knows where an intervention in a causal path may arise, even if it is a communication. In fact often, one never knows what is, and what is not, an "intervention"...
EastSideVille,welcome,... to Pprune
um...just to add we forget that it is the company's responsibity to turn GA ex-mil pilots to Airline pilots,...pilots don't need to be very smart,...but I think I have it right ,....there were like 7 stall accidents [one wrong runway
] and [one NTS failure
] within a decade,....the GA 1500 hours,... it is to test the mettle and weed out the lazy who don't want to work...but most entrants don't know 'airline' not a TR but 'AIRLINE'
and stalling seems to still be the most dangerous phenomenon in aviation [it is actually]...but really, no
PA
no, I like the emoticons, so, get off me about it
Lester
um...just to add we forget that it is the company's responsibity to turn GA ex-mil pilots to Airline pilots,...pilots don't need to be very smart,...but I think I have it right ,....there were like 7 stall accidents [one wrong runway
] and [one NTS failure] within a decade,....the GA 1500 hours,... it is to test the mettle and weed out the lazy who don't want to work...but most entrants don't know 'airline' not a TR but 'AIRLINE'and stalling seems to still be the most dangerous phenomenon in aviation [it is actually]...but really, no
PA
no, I like the emoticons, so, get off me about it
Lester
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as we all know, commuter airlines were under Part 135 at one time. The big switch to Part 121 came with the promise of one level of safety.
Back in the old days, our major airline contract stated that our flight crews did not have to fly on Part 135 airlines.
Does anyone else remember this provision or a similiar one?
Back in the old days, our major airline contract stated that our flight crews did not have to fly on Part 135 airlines.
Does anyone else remember this provision or a similiar one?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jacksonville, Fl, US
Age: 84
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wait and Listen
The pilots of this flight never intended to crash and be killed when their aircraft impacted the ground. I believe they were most likely proficient aviators; and, they had good intentions.
The question in my mind then is what interceded between their proficiency and their good intentions. There are lots of questions and answers to be established.
I do not know the answer, but I await the factual data and analysis. It is not only the families of the deceased who deserve the answers, but the aviation community all over the world.
Lets wait an listen and read.
Tom
The question in my mind then is what interceded between their proficiency and their good intentions. There are lots of questions and answers to be established.
I do not know the answer, but I await the factual data and analysis. It is not only the families of the deceased who deserve the answers, but the aviation community all over the world.
Lets wait an listen and read.
Tom
PA
I read your post 3 times and I'm still at a loss to see your point. Care to clarify it? Especially this part
GF
I read your post 3 times and I'm still at a loss to see your point. Care to clarify it? Especially this part
the GA 1500 hours,... it is to test the mettle and weed out the lazy who don't want to work...but most entrants don't know 'airline' not a TR but 'AIRLINE'
and stalling seems to still be the most dangerous phenomenon in aviation [it is actually]...but really, no
and stalling seems to still be the most dangerous phenomenon in aviation [it is actually]...but really, no
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
finn47
thanks for posting the URL to the NTSB stuff.
With the concept of being startled...I wonder if the concept of MICROSLEEP was properly investigated in this situation.
I am also reminded of the scene in the originial version of "The Andromeda Strain"...the female scientist misses the vital clue because of an epileptic episode.
could there be a misunderstood medical condition???????
thanks for posting the URL to the NTSB stuff.
With the concept of being startled...I wonder if the concept of MICROSLEEP was properly investigated in this situation.
I am also reminded of the scene in the originial version of "The Andromeda Strain"...the female scientist misses the vital clue because of an epileptic episode.
could there be a misunderstood medical condition???????
p51guy thank you!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fair enough, it was worth a re-read. Two specifics remain. It isn't entirely clear that Renslow wasn't simply reacting to what he thought was tailplane stall. He had ~ 170 hours in type. Great stress can command motor memory before critical thinking. I keep in mind the flagrant violation of Sterile Cockpit. For the better part of an hour, and right up to shaker, the Captain was flirting with a pretty 24 year old FO (married). Shocked back to flying, he wasn't a competent pilot (at that specific time), he was a busted flirt, and evidently unable to shake that persona. His inner pilot was demonstrably on furlough.
On further thought, pursuant to fear, It would be interesting to find out if Spins were in the curriculum at Captain Renslow's ab initio training, and alas, lack of stall training for ATP? I believe in spins, they build character, and confidence.
bear
On further thought, pursuant to fear, It would be interesting to find out if Spins were in the curriculum at Captain Renslow's ab initio training, and alas, lack of stall training for ATP? I believe in spins, they build character, and confidence.
bear
Last edited by bearfoil; 3rd Feb 2010 at 17:36.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the concept of being startled...I wonder if the concept of MICROSLEEP was properly investigated in this situation.
Sure doesn't sound like the pilot was sleepy.