No you weren't. It got the attention of the flight crew. Another thing, Your concerns were handled in a concise and professional manner. I don't know what airline it was, but they deserve a thumbs up for the attention you were given.

45 sec is quite a long t/o roll for a minibus. I guess he held it on the runway to build up a 'safe' airspeed?

I say "he" with some confidnece ;)

It was nearly all gone by the time he rotated, can't see what all the fuss is about.

4 pages of mainly rot and speculation. Well here's my contribution of rot and speculation: that the crew new exactly what the condition of the wings were - as became apparent during the take off run when it all blew away leaving a clean wing.

MA and HT, if your comments weren't tongue-in-cheek then I'd suggest you take a look here: http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/48221...eoff-roll.html

No danger
 

Powder snow on the wing is of no importance. The dangerous thing is rime ice on the leading edge (slats) or just behind it. By the time the air flow is to the flaps, any powder snow will quickly be blown off, as you see here. If the leading edge is disrupted, then the snow on the flaps will remain and not be dispersed, because the flow is already rendered turbulent and separated farther up the wing. Then there is no lift.

Just how thick was the ice underneath the snow?

Air Ontario Flight 1363 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, when will they ever learn?

We have to assume that the pilots were aware that the snow was powder (and even in the video, it sure looks and behaves like powder to me), and there was no ice beneath. Pilots are generally loath to kill themselves with stupidity.

My concern was:

1. the aircraft had contamination, "no importance" or not, it's not allowed. It's something that's been drilled into pilots since the PPL, and the ATPL books ramble on about that there must be nothing on the wings at all many times.

2. There could have been inches of ice under that snow and nobody would have known.

I wonder if any officials have seen this. I don't think it should go on pprune and no further.

Well snow has a personality that is known to those who live in it. Ice below snow would not be confused with harmless powder on the surface. In fact a cursory de-icing might be more dangerous, because a condition with no melting and no actual contamination would be turned into one with at least partial melting and then being "on the clock", in very cold conditions.

Mary
 

lt doesn`t work like that.

Maybe you could leave the ones with professional licences to get on with

it.

The renegades do not reflect on the rest.

Do you remember the fatal stabbing in lstanbul in 2000, or maybe late

1999, when one of Britains finest, a footie supporter, took to doing what

he did regularly at home ?

The point is not everyones keys are in the hat.

As Clint Eastwood said, or to paraphrase, do you feel lucky ?

Pay the extra for a brand, otherwise toss a coin.

x FAI 232

Fishes in a barrel, I know - apologies to the pilots on the forum - move on to the next post.

You might have to assume - I assume that, the pilots on this flight had no idea what condition the snow was.

"even in the video" - it's hard to see ice on a cheap phone recording - have a look ar the second take off vid posted on this thread - the ice barely shows up, but was obvious to the filmer.

Clear ice can hardly be seen in real life - even from the cabin windows, you have to feel for it.

"No ice beneath" - what was holding on to the bits of snow we can see even after the take off?

"Pilots are loath to kill themselves" - like idiots in cars, idiots on unstable ladders, etc etc, pilots can be stupid as well. The problem isn't that they are "loath to kill themselves" - its that they can't see the guy with the hood and sickle walking up behind them while they are laughing at the view out of the front window .... :rolleyes:

OK well I defer to regulations. But there was no danger.

-drl

Of COURSE there was danger. You can only even think "there was no danger" because you have seen the outcome.

If that film was shown only up to the point of V1 and then stopped, with a "what happens next" question ...

... what would be your response?? :ugh:


P.S. Are you a Russian Public Relations spammer?? Or are you really THAT stupid??

Continue the take off .....

De Sitter wrote Apparently not aware of all the 'things than can and do go wrong'.
And yes aviation admits members who were not up to snuff, a prime example in this video.
Mistakes must be corrected,hence their licenses must be revoked.

GOOD NEWS is that you obviously aint a pilot.:ugh:

Good news indeed !

Are you a pilot ?

and laziness goes on ....
yes i am.

Brilliant !

now just remind me, my memory isn`t what it was, what are the

advantages of winglets ?

and the downside ?

Thankfully you`ve stopped that headbanging nonsense.


After you`ve finished checking the books explain a sideslip to

me please.