Plane crashes after takeoff in northern Saskatchewan 25 people on board
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Heart of Europe
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An ATR.
Lucky they hit the small trees.
At 25 occupants - if they did not load additional stuff into the cabin it was hardly overloaded.
Not even with max fuel load.
Lucky they hit the small trees.
At 25 occupants - if they did not load additional stuff into the cabin it was hardly overloaded.
Not even with max fuel load.
I wonder if the passengers' survival resulted partly from them being distributed to a particular area (eg aft) for weight and balance reasons.....would that be necessary in an ATR 42?
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Heart of Europe
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
42 is not very susceptible to CG. Most of the time it is enough to load part of the bags in the back.
It will be interesting to track the investigation. Shouldn't be too long before a preliminary report is available. Aircraft more or less in one piece, all recorders already recovered and probably not very badly damaged and most important, all alive to tell the story.
It will be interesting to track the investigation. Shouldn't be too long before a preliminary report is available. Aircraft more or less in one piece, all recorders already recovered and probably not very badly damaged and most important, all alive to tell the story.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't fly ATR myself...
Sounds very like the shorts crash out of Edinburgh.
The crew turned on the engine heaters and opened the separator doors both together. Which caused a huge lumps of ice to go through both engines, both at the same time causing flame out together.
Don't know what the penalty is for icing on departure on the ATR but hey could have gone for icing off then turned it on as the gear came up.
Seems there is a rather large group of pilots that think this is acceptable not realising that the icing performance is required if your going to be in it before the end of the third phase.
If there is ice formed in the bottom of the intake and forms a lump and you put the heaters on, that just melts what is attaching it to the bottom and the whole lot lifts up and blocks the compressor.
I was always taught with engine controls to operate anti-ice or de-ice individually and wait to see what the effect was and then do the other engine.
We shall see what the investigation turns out
Sounds very like the shorts crash out of Edinburgh.
The crew turned on the engine heaters and opened the separator doors both together. Which caused a huge lumps of ice to go through both engines, both at the same time causing flame out together.
Don't know what the penalty is for icing on departure on the ATR but hey could have gone for icing off then turned it on as the gear came up.
Seems there is a rather large group of pilots that think this is acceptable not realising that the icing performance is required if your going to be in it before the end of the third phase.
If there is ice formed in the bottom of the intake and forms a lump and you put the heaters on, that just melts what is attaching it to the bottom and the whole lot lifts up and blocks the compressor.
I was always taught with engine controls to operate anti-ice or de-ice individually and wait to see what the effect was and then do the other engine.
We shall see what the investigation turns out
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Timbukthree
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The isolated community of Fond-du-Lac is not served by an all-weather road nor any railroad, so air service is crucial. Passenger loads are occasionally reduced to carry more freight
Fond-du-Lac, Saskatchewan. The aerodrome is visible at the top of the photograph.
Last edited by evansb; 16th Dec 2017 at 16:05.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seoul
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CBC news reports passengers could not escape plane after crash. It took 4 uninjured men 30 minutes to force open the rear door. Implication door frame was twisted and not door blocked. Very lucky no fire.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATR has a main door rear left, a service door rear right which is also an emergency exit and two emergency exits front left and front right of the cabin. Can believe the main door (drop down, built in stairs) being hard to open if frame is bent, but all four exits? Very concerning if true.
Last edited by Jump Complete; 16th Dec 2017 at 17:11. Reason: Typos, posting from pub..
Aviation Herald is reporting, that the TSB is reporting, that "both engines were functioning normally" up until impact.
Accident: West Wind AT42 at Fond-du-Lac on Dec 13th 2017, descended into terrain shortly after takeoff
Accident: West Wind AT42 at Fond-du-Lac on Dec 13th 2017, descended into terrain shortly after takeoff
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my engineering and pilot intuition, it looks like weight and balance problems were a cause to some degree. As always, there are multiple causes to an accident that have to align for a catastrophe to occur. I don't know what all the other causes are but weight and balance is one of them.
Why is the center of gravity (CG) problem a contender? Keep reading and let me know if it makes sense. CG problems are evident as soon as an aircraft lifts off the runway. Why did the aircraft crash less than 1nm away? Flaps still down from takeoff. Consider that the aircraft is capable of carrying 40+ passengers; this flight only had 25 right? Were the passengers distributed accordingly for correct CG location, or were they all piled up at the rear where the entrance door is located? Did everyone want to sit down quickly, bundle up and keep warm? The cargo area is near the nose, up front behind the cockpit. For such a short flight, I doubt they were carrying goods from the south. A combination of a half booked plane, a light cargo area (only bags), passengers maybe sitting at the rear near the entrance door, these things would create a tail heavy bird. From experience, slightly tail heavy aircraft are great for reducing drag but unstable. Stall recovery is impossible. To prevent a tail heavy aircraft from stalling is nose down asap (if possible) and try to land as opposed to just crashing. You’re options are limited, damage control at this point.
Icing is not a problem; the ATR has extensive icing research done with it and is more than capable of flying in icing conditions. Also, -19C is not a good indicator of icing conditions. It could be snowing out and -20C, if your wings are cold to begin with and clear of cloud, you have a low chance of icing to occur. Icing can't develop in that short amount of time and any wing contamination HAS TO be removed prior to take off. Even a thin layer of frost that you can scrape off with your fingernail has to be removed.
Considering the length of flight and time of day, 18:00 local time, perhaps the last flight of the day, short flight (~80km ~10min?) a fatigued crew, dark outside, a new distraction somewhere that may have caused crew to overlook common items of importance like passenger distribution. Maybe the crew is accustomed to flying the plane full of passengers. So on and so forth.
I will also say that the aircraft are very well maintained, I have a very good reason why I know.
Engine failure would have been out of this world shocking (confirmed both engines were running at the time of the crash).
Why is the center of gravity (CG) problem a contender? Keep reading and let me know if it makes sense. CG problems are evident as soon as an aircraft lifts off the runway. Why did the aircraft crash less than 1nm away? Flaps still down from takeoff. Consider that the aircraft is capable of carrying 40+ passengers; this flight only had 25 right? Were the passengers distributed accordingly for correct CG location, or were they all piled up at the rear where the entrance door is located? Did everyone want to sit down quickly, bundle up and keep warm? The cargo area is near the nose, up front behind the cockpit. For such a short flight, I doubt they were carrying goods from the south. A combination of a half booked plane, a light cargo area (only bags), passengers maybe sitting at the rear near the entrance door, these things would create a tail heavy bird. From experience, slightly tail heavy aircraft are great for reducing drag but unstable. Stall recovery is impossible. To prevent a tail heavy aircraft from stalling is nose down asap (if possible) and try to land as opposed to just crashing. You’re options are limited, damage control at this point.
Icing is not a problem; the ATR has extensive icing research done with it and is more than capable of flying in icing conditions. Also, -19C is not a good indicator of icing conditions. It could be snowing out and -20C, if your wings are cold to begin with and clear of cloud, you have a low chance of icing to occur. Icing can't develop in that short amount of time and any wing contamination HAS TO be removed prior to take off. Even a thin layer of frost that you can scrape off with your fingernail has to be removed.
Considering the length of flight and time of day, 18:00 local time, perhaps the last flight of the day, short flight (~80km ~10min?) a fatigued crew, dark outside, a new distraction somewhere that may have caused crew to overlook common items of importance like passenger distribution. Maybe the crew is accustomed to flying the plane full of passengers. So on and so forth.
I will also say that the aircraft are very well maintained, I have a very good reason why I know.
Engine failure would have been out of this world shocking (confirmed both engines were running at the time of the crash).
Last edited by royled11; 22nd Dec 2017 at 03:03. Reason: correcting terminology
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know what takeoff profile this operator used, but generally in transport category aircraft flaps are retracted upon reaching a certain altitude. Generally this altitude is high enough that it would be really difficult to climb to that altitude, retract the flaps, then crash the airplane, all within a mile of the runway. My point being that I think you're trying to read too much into this. Flaps still extended is what I'd expect in this case. I would consider it unusual for an aircraft which crashed within a mile of the runway to have flaps retracted.
Transport Canada grounds West Wind
Unfortunately PPR will not allow me to post a link, but this is from Canadian Press, via the Toronto Star...
OTTAWA—Transport Canada says it has grounded the airline that operated the plane that crashed in northern Saskatchewan earlier this month.
A West Wind Aviation ATR42-320 with 25 people on board went down on Dec. 13 shortly after taking off from the Fond du Lac airstrip.
Everyone survived, but seven people were seriously injured.
Transport Canada said Friday that it has suspended the airline’s operator certificate, citing deficiencies in the company’s operational control system.
It said such systems ensure a company is following safety rules for dispatching staff and aircraft.
“In the interest of public safety, Transport Canada suspended West Wind Aviation’s Air Operator Certificate and will not allow the company to resume its commercial air service until it demonstrates compliance with aviation safety regulations,” the department said in a post on its website.
“Transport Canada takes its aviation safety oversight role very seriously and expects every air operator to fully comply with aviation safety regulations.”
West Wind said it has received the order but had already voluntarily suspended all flying operations.
“We are working diligently to resolve any issues, with the aim of restarting operations as soon as possible,” the Saskatoon-based company said in an email.
“Safety is our number one priority, and we look forward to improving our processes to continue to serve our communities and customers.”
On Wednesday, the Transportation Safety Board said it had eliminated engine failure as the cause of the crash.
There was no explosion or fire on impact.
A TSB investigator said it was remarkable there was no fire.
The board said the cause of the crash has not been determined and investigators are still looking at weather conditions, runway length, aircraft maintenance, pilot training and operational policies.
Transport Canada said it does not hesitate to take action when regulatory non-compliance is identified and the department will continue to monitor West Wind Aviation’s actions as it works towards compliance with aviation safety regulations.
OTTAWA—Transport Canada says it has grounded the airline that operated the plane that crashed in northern Saskatchewan earlier this month.
A West Wind Aviation ATR42-320 with 25 people on board went down on Dec. 13 shortly after taking off from the Fond du Lac airstrip.
Everyone survived, but seven people were seriously injured.
Transport Canada said Friday that it has suspended the airline’s operator certificate, citing deficiencies in the company’s operational control system.
It said such systems ensure a company is following safety rules for dispatching staff and aircraft.
“In the interest of public safety, Transport Canada suspended West Wind Aviation’s Air Operator Certificate and will not allow the company to resume its commercial air service until it demonstrates compliance with aviation safety regulations,” the department said in a post on its website.
“Transport Canada takes its aviation safety oversight role very seriously and expects every air operator to fully comply with aviation safety regulations.”
West Wind said it has received the order but had already voluntarily suspended all flying operations.
“We are working diligently to resolve any issues, with the aim of restarting operations as soon as possible,” the Saskatoon-based company said in an email.
“Safety is our number one priority, and we look forward to improving our processes to continue to serve our communities and customers.”
On Wednesday, the Transportation Safety Board said it had eliminated engine failure as the cause of the crash.
There was no explosion or fire on impact.
A TSB investigator said it was remarkable there was no fire.
The board said the cause of the crash has not been determined and investigators are still looking at weather conditions, runway length, aircraft maintenance, pilot training and operational policies.
Transport Canada said it does not hesitate to take action when regulatory non-compliance is identified and the department will continue to monitor West Wind Aviation’s actions as it works towards compliance with aviation safety regulations.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can the travelling public honestly believe that Transport Canada takes its aviation safety oversight role very seriously ? Not enough resources. They have delegated this role to the operator. Safety is our number one priority. Yeah sure. It`s all about money. Very lucky there were no fatalities. We await the report.
"The board said the cause of the crash has not been determined and investigators are still looking at weather conditions, runway length, aircraft maintenance, pilot training and operational policies.
Transport Canada said it does not hesitate to take action when regulatory non-compliance is identified and the department will continue to monitor West Wind Aviation’s actions as it works towards compliance with aviation safety regulations."
Still looking at operational policies, but have grounded the airline!
Transport Canada said it does not hesitate to take action when regulatory non-compliance is identified and the department will continue to monitor West Wind Aviation’s actions as it works towards compliance with aviation safety regulations."
Still looking at operational policies, but have grounded the airline!
