Challenger Crash Almaty
About three years ago we taxied our narrowbody jet to the international ramp in ATL to de-ice.
This was a two-step operation, at the busiest airport in the US. Luckily, this was about 2000, but dark, and little traffic.
The point about the location is that this should have been a first-rate de-icing procedure.
Not only was the radio at the de-icing cabin inop, but the de-icing crew walked away with no indication to us that we received a wave-off. But we saw them about 200 feet away.
She gave us the start time for the first step, not the second step, as
required, then unplugged from the intercom.
How is de-icing done for the other US airlines at "spoke" airports? 'Wino'? 'Airb'?
Does this happen with other crews?
As bad as they were at standard communications, one can only imagine how it could be with either a language problem or other problems with training, standardization and/or morale.
Last winter, a de-icing crew in the upper midwest only sprayed one of the wings on a jet. Snow was on both wings and the tail etc.
A Line Check Airman told me about this. Luckily, the passengers noticed and said something.
Outsourcing. Less pay, less results, more job turnover, reduced safety. And this is in the US, with management's blessing$ (indifference).
This was a two-step operation, at the busiest airport in the US. Luckily, this was about 2000, but dark, and little traffic.
The point about the location is that this should have been a first-rate de-icing procedure.
Not only was the radio at the de-icing cabin inop, but the de-icing crew walked away with no indication to us that we received a wave-off. But we saw them about 200 feet away.
She gave us the start time for the first step, not the second step, as
required, then unplugged from the intercom.
How is de-icing done for the other US airlines at "spoke" airports? 'Wino'? 'Airb'?
Does this happen with other crews?
As bad as they were at standard communications, one can only imagine how it could be with either a language problem or other problems with training, standardization and/or morale.
Last winter, a de-icing crew in the upper midwest only sprayed one of the wings on a jet. Snow was on both wings and the tail etc.
A Line Check Airman told me about this. Luckily, the passengers noticed and said something.
Outsourcing. Less pay, less results, more job turnover, reduced safety. And this is in the US, with management's blessing$ (indifference).
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: any town as retired.
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reduced Flaps, excellent Idea
There is a lot of good sense in say f10 not f20, as you say speed is life.
Not covered in the AFM, or SOPS, issued by Glf.
Just years of learning, and the occasional fright.
Depending on where you are there will never be warning of windsheer, just knowledge of a strong inversion layer, perhaps.
glf
Not covered in the AFM, or SOPS, issued by Glf.
Just years of learning, and the occasional fright.
Depending on where you are there will never be warning of windsheer, just knowledge of a strong inversion layer, perhaps.
glf
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Age: 56
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's no evidence to suggest that the handling pilot of this particular 604 did not in fact use increased V speeds and/or a slower rate of rotation as suggested above. For all any of us know, he did apply both techniques.
People suggesting increased V speeds need to try to give a balanced point of view and not lead less experienced pilots into believing that when a wing is contaminted, increased V speeds are somehow a magic fix. Granted speed is good but only when you know what you are doing with it.
Increased V speeds techniique is available in the AFM and these are there to increase the climb gradient for obstacle clearance NOT contaminated wings.
From memory, the severe icing checklist on a 604 suggests that the MINIMUM speed that should be flown if Severe Icing is encountered is Vref + 27 and if you experience severe icing you would want to definately fly a higher speed than the minimum and this figure is based on Wing Anti Ice ON and working and is actually to give the stabilizer enough bernoullis to do its job as it is not fitted with Anti Icing capability.
So if you EVER have any doubts about contaminated wings and Hold over times, go back and get de-iced again!!!! DON'T USE HIGHER ROTATION SPEEDS AS A DEFINATE SOLUTION as there is NO evidence to suggest that an extra 10 kts, 20 kts or even 30 kts is going to do anything for you with regards to safetly getting airbourne with wing contamination suspected.
All the best
GW
People suggesting increased V speeds need to try to give a balanced point of view and not lead less experienced pilots into believing that when a wing is contaminted, increased V speeds are somehow a magic fix. Granted speed is good but only when you know what you are doing with it.
Increased V speeds techniique is available in the AFM and these are there to increase the climb gradient for obstacle clearance NOT contaminated wings.
From memory, the severe icing checklist on a 604 suggests that the MINIMUM speed that should be flown if Severe Icing is encountered is Vref + 27 and if you experience severe icing you would want to definately fly a higher speed than the minimum and this figure is based on Wing Anti Ice ON and working and is actually to give the stabilizer enough bernoullis to do its job as it is not fitted with Anti Icing capability.
So if you EVER have any doubts about contaminated wings and Hold over times, go back and get de-iced again!!!! DON'T USE HIGHER ROTATION SPEEDS AS A DEFINATE SOLUTION as there is NO evidence to suggest that an extra 10 kts, 20 kts or even 30 kts is going to do anything for you with regards to safetly getting airbourne with wing contamination suspected.
All the best
GW
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Stansted
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is NOT... I repeat again... NOOOOOT what is being said here.
As if we would be that stupid to launch with iced up wings by adding 5kts.. jeez.. what do you take us for. Having flown Lears and Challengers in and out of wintery places, do you seriously think I would still be alive now if I had been doing what you are suggesting? I am the bane of the existance of both beancounters and grumpy passengers with a zero-tolerance attitutude towards wing contamination... this I will shove down the throats of anybody I fly with to keep them alive.
GlobalWarrior speaks sense.
As if we would be that stupid to launch with iced up wings by adding 5kts.. jeez.. what do you take us for. Having flown Lears and Challengers in and out of wintery places, do you seriously think I would still be alive now if I had been doing what you are suggesting? I am the bane of the existance of both beancounters and grumpy passengers with a zero-tolerance attitutude towards wing contamination... this I will shove down the throats of anybody I fly with to keep them alive.
GlobalWarrior speaks sense.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GW
Agree with everything you say but I don't think that your pious lecturing tone was particularly justified.
Previous posters were not, if I read correctly, advocating a technique to be used instead of or as a substitute for proper de-icing. They were suggesting a 'belt and braces' technique that may add to flight safety.
Thanks chaps - I don't fly these types but am learning a lot from this thread.
BS
Agree with everything you say but I don't think that your pious lecturing tone was particularly justified.
Previous posters were not, if I read correctly, advocating a technique to be used instead of or as a substitute for proper de-icing. They were suggesting a 'belt and braces' technique that may add to flight safety.
Thanks chaps - I don't fly these types but am learning a lot from this thread.
BS
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quote from the section "SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEDURES Cold Weather Operations" of the official Bombardier CL-604 Operating Manual:
8. PHASE OF FLIGHT PROCEDURES
...
E. Take-Off
...
Considerations:
...
...
E. Take-Off
...
Considerations:
...
- Do not exceed 3 degrees/second rate of rotation. Anticipate and be prepared to accept a higher than normal initial climb speed. This increased initial climb speed will not adversely affect the climb profile.
... - If the airplane tends to pitch-up or roll-off once airborne, immediately reduce the pitch to reduce the angle of attack and simultaneously apply maximum thrust. Be prepared to accept altitude loss to recover aircraft. Use ailerons as required to level wings.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: hungary
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question to all professionals in this topic:
You are landing on a Caribbean island (hot and dump) after a long flight at FL410 with your 604, for a short stop to refuel.
During the refueling/short walkaround you notice frost on the lower part of your wings formed by cold soaked fuel.
Can you disreagard it and takeoff?
Wait for an hour or two watching the frost to dissipate?
balaton
You are landing on a Caribbean island (hot and dump) after a long flight at FL410 with your 604, for a short stop to refuel.
During the refueling/short walkaround you notice frost on the lower part of your wings formed by cold soaked fuel.
Can you disreagard it and takeoff?
Wait for an hour or two watching the frost to dissipate?
balaton
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are landing on a Caribbean island (hot and dump) after a long flight at FL410 with your 604, for a short stop to refuel.
During the refueling/short walkaround you notice frost on the lower part of your wings formed by cold soaked fuel.
Can you disreagard it and takeoff?
Wait for an hour or two watching the frost to dissipate?
During the refueling/short walkaround you notice frost on the lower part of your wings formed by cold soaked fuel.
Can you disreagard it and takeoff?
Wait for an hour or two watching the frost to dissipate?
WARNING
Even small amounts of frost, ice, snow or slush on the wing leading edges and forward upper wing surface may adversely change the stall speeds, stall characteristics and the protection provided by the stall protection system, which may result in loss of control on take-off.
NOTE
1. Comprehensive procedures for operating in cold weather are provided in the Operating Manual, Volume 1, Chapter 6; SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEDURES – COLD WEATHER OPERATION .
2. Take-off is permitted with frost adhering to the underside of the wing that is caused by cold soaked fuel, in accordance with the instructions provided in the Operating Manual, Volume 1, Chapter 6; SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEDURES – COLD WEATHER OPERATION – PRE-FLIGHT PREPARATION – External Safety Inspection .
Even small amounts of frost, ice, snow or slush on the wing leading edges and forward upper wing surface may adversely change the stall speeds, stall characteristics and the protection provided by the stall protection system, which may result in loss of control on take-off.
NOTE
1. Comprehensive procedures for operating in cold weather are provided in the Operating Manual, Volume 1, Chapter 6; SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEDURES – COLD WEATHER OPERATION .
2. Take-off is permitted with frost adhering to the underside of the wing that is caused by cold soaked fuel, in accordance with the instructions provided in the Operating Manual, Volume 1, Chapter 6; SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEDURES – COLD WEATHER OPERATION – PRE-FLIGHT PREPARATION – External Safety Inspection .
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: hungary
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks Mad (Flt) Scientist,
You are right, I have just checked it in my manual. Even the allowable thickness is determined. I was a bit carried away with this 604 wing ice turmoil.
You are right, I have just checked it in my manual. Even the allowable thickness is determined. I was a bit carried away with this 604 wing ice turmoil.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: VIENNA
Age: 58
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But unfortunately the FAA
has opened a few years ago a door, which should have been never touched:
On the B737 New Generation the take-off is permitted with a certain amount of frost on the UPPER WING surface, in the so called cold fuel soaked zone.
Teaching winter operation & de-icing/anti-icing I often get the question, which other aircraft types are also good for this.
Saying only this one, often gets me head shaking as an answer.
THis shoudl have never happened, as it is also clear against the "Clean Aircraft Concept" as already published in the ICAO document nearly 20 years ago.
On the B737 New Generation the take-off is permitted with a certain amount of frost on the UPPER WING surface, in the so called cold fuel soaked zone.
Teaching winter operation & de-icing/anti-icing I often get the question, which other aircraft types are also good for this.
Saying only this one, often gets me head shaking as an answer.
THis shoudl have never happened, as it is also clear against the "Clean Aircraft Concept" as already published in the ICAO document nearly 20 years ago.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is that even possible? It's in direct contradiction to:
There's no legal basis for the FAA to provide any other alleviation. Unless I'm thoroughly misunderstanding that section.
§ 121.629 Operation in icing conditions.
(b) No person may take off an aircraft when frost, ice, or snow is adhering to the wings, control surfaces, propellers, engine inlets, or other critical surfaces of the aircraft or when the takeoff would not be in compliance with paragraph (c) of this section. Takeoffs with frost under the wing in the area of the fuel tanks may be authorized by the Administrator.
(b) No person may take off an aircraft when frost, ice, or snow is adhering to the wings, control surfaces, propellers, engine inlets, or other critical surfaces of the aircraft or when the takeoff would not be in compliance with paragraph (c) of this section. Takeoffs with frost under the wing in the area of the fuel tanks may be authorized by the Administrator.
Was SLFing on my then employer's A-310 in '89 on a fine Summer day and noticed frost on the upper surface over the wing tanks.
The area was quite limited, about 20 sq. ft. and towards the rear of the wing; so, choose not to bring it to the attention of the crew. Takeoff was fine.
I sent an inquiry up through channels and got a reply back from the CP that the FOM allowed takeoffs with frost in that location.
After the Dryden report, Transport Canada changed the regs to exclude all upper surface frost.
The area was quite limited, about 20 sq. ft. and towards the rear of the wing; so, choose not to bring it to the attention of the crew. Takeoff was fine.
I sent an inquiry up through channels and got a reply back from the CP that the FOM allowed takeoffs with frost in that location.
After the Dryden report, Transport Canada changed the regs to exclude all upper surface frost.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Berlin
Age: 56
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
news update
A little update from German news reports: The passenger injured in the Almaty crash, Lars Windhorst, was released from hospital on Jan 3. A day later, investment firm Vatas, for which Windhorst acts as managing director, annouced it had acquired a 15 percent share of Air Berlin.
An interesting side note: News reports said that the first officer killed in the crash was a police officer from Berlin, piloting was his second job. Further reports claim that he was on a prolonged leave from his police job due to health issues. A spokesman for the jet charter company stated that the first officer, who was relatively new to this type of aircraft, had all the necessary paperwork including health checks.
An interesting side note: News reports said that the first officer killed in the crash was a police officer from Berlin, piloting was his second job. Further reports claim that he was on a prolonged leave from his police job due to health issues. A spokesman for the jet charter company stated that the first officer, who was relatively new to this type of aircraft, had all the necessary paperwork including health checks.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: u.k.
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In an earlier post,it was stated that Russian de-icers know their work,well don't count on it.Last Nov de-iced in Novosibirsk,after inspection of deicing,noticed large areas on wing (one in front of engine ingress path) & tail missed,told them to redo ,then they sprayed type 4 all over the windscreen (after being told specifically to not de-ice fwd of main door)
Concerning increasing rotate speed,be carefull if obstacle limited,you might not meet your obstacle clearence heights,however no obtacles no problem,with sufficient runway length,
A retired colleague had an interestig experience flying a BAC 1-11 for Ford Air out of Stansted some years ago,inspected wing,found snow on wing but very dry snow he could blow off,so he thought to himself the snow will just blow off during the t/o roll,I don't need to de-ice..... On T/O at rotate speed pulled back,nothing happened,he then firewalled the throttles(you can get away with that on Speys as they have governors) accelerated another 30 kts & staggered into the air.He lived to fly another day,moral of the tale;ANY contamination on top of the wing DE-ICE!
Concerning increasing rotate speed,be carefull if obstacle limited,you might not meet your obstacle clearence heights,however no obtacles no problem,with sufficient runway length,
A retired colleague had an interestig experience flying a BAC 1-11 for Ford Air out of Stansted some years ago,inspected wing,found snow on wing but very dry snow he could blow off,so he thought to himself the snow will just blow off during the t/o roll,I don't need to de-ice..... On T/O at rotate speed pulled back,nothing happened,he then firewalled the throttles(you can get away with that on Speys as they have governors) accelerated another 30 kts & staggered into the air.He lived to fly another day,moral of the tale;ANY contamination on top of the wing DE-ICE!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: where the money is
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Policeman / Pilot
Dear TXL,
there is nothing wrong with that. Having had another 'life' before flying does not hurt nor does it imply anything about the skills of the applicable airman.
The killed fellow-pilot had enough experience, he used to fly LearJets for many years to destinations all over the world. Most people knew him as being careful and professional. So did I.
Yes, he was new to the CL604 and he was still under supervision, but: aren't we all at one point or during our career? The Commander with him had sufficient experience and this one wasn't the first long-distance trip at night for this particular crew.
All the speculations - particularly from the German yellow press - are missing important things: facts. They're full of speculation and allowing the airport chief of Almaty publish his opinion as 'preliminary report' is totally irresponsible as long as f.ex. the FDR and CVR are still under examination by the Russian Authorities, who took over when the accident occured (Kazachstan is said to not even have an AAIB of their own...). The Germans haven't even received the tapes yet.
So, hold your horses, cowboy. Nothing's determined.
there is nothing wrong with that. Having had another 'life' before flying does not hurt nor does it imply anything about the skills of the applicable airman.
The killed fellow-pilot had enough experience, he used to fly LearJets for many years to destinations all over the world. Most people knew him as being careful and professional. So did I.
Yes, he was new to the CL604 and he was still under supervision, but: aren't we all at one point or during our career? The Commander with him had sufficient experience and this one wasn't the first long-distance trip at night for this particular crew.
All the speculations - particularly from the German yellow press - are missing important things: facts. They're full of speculation and allowing the airport chief of Almaty publish his opinion as 'preliminary report' is totally irresponsible as long as f.ex. the FDR and CVR are still under examination by the Russian Authorities, who took over when the accident occured (Kazachstan is said to not even have an AAIB of their own...). The Germans haven't even received the tapes yet.
So, hold your horses, cowboy. Nothing's determined.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The German daily Bild Zeitung (the most popular newspaper in Germany) published some comments last Wednesday on the Almaty Challenger crash. For those who read German, link is http://www.bild.de/BILD/berlin/aktue...=3628176.html#
For those who don't, a certain Rishat Tustkbaev, who appears to be the airport manager and a member of the "Special Commission" was reported as saying it was pilot error.
Since Kazahkstan is a member of the Interstate Aviation Commission, the Russian MAK is the responsible investigating body, and I don't know what relation the "Special Commission" has to it.
Tustkbaev is reported as saying that the pilots did not have anti-ice on; that they didn't follow all safety requirements; that the captain gave the copilot misleading instructions; and that the copilot was not experienced enough (he had 60 hours on type).
Two seconds after "start" (I guess they mean the unstick point) the aircraft rolled 64° right and the wing touched the ground. Apparently, to recover, SOPs say pull the throttles back and the crew did not do this.
Tustkbaev is reported as putting all the blame on the pilots.
I report this here only for the record. There is a lot of obvious rubbish. If they rolled 64° right two seconds after liftoff and there is no mechanical explanation then it looks very much as though the right wing lost lift or never had any. Icing is the obvious suspect and, regardless of whether the crew had anti-ice on or not, one wants to know when and how the aircraft was de-iced. And of course the airport is responsible for the quality of de-icing and it is the airport chief who is speaking out.
Any suggestion that a 64° roll within two seconds of liftoff is something that experienced pilots can handle is nonsense. If you don't have lift on your right wing, physics dictates what happens next, not number of hours on type.
PBL
For those who don't, a certain Rishat Tustkbaev, who appears to be the airport manager and a member of the "Special Commission" was reported as saying it was pilot error.
Since Kazahkstan is a member of the Interstate Aviation Commission, the Russian MAK is the responsible investigating body, and I don't know what relation the "Special Commission" has to it.
Tustkbaev is reported as saying that the pilots did not have anti-ice on; that they didn't follow all safety requirements; that the captain gave the copilot misleading instructions; and that the copilot was not experienced enough (he had 60 hours on type).
Two seconds after "start" (I guess they mean the unstick point) the aircraft rolled 64° right and the wing touched the ground. Apparently, to recover, SOPs say pull the throttles back and the crew did not do this.
Tustkbaev is reported as putting all the blame on the pilots.
I report this here only for the record. There is a lot of obvious rubbish. If they rolled 64° right two seconds after liftoff and there is no mechanical explanation then it looks very much as though the right wing lost lift or never had any. Icing is the obvious suspect and, regardless of whether the crew had anti-ice on or not, one wants to know when and how the aircraft was de-iced. And of course the airport is responsible for the quality of de-icing and it is the airport chief who is speaking out.
Any suggestion that a 64° roll within two seconds of liftoff is something that experienced pilots can handle is nonsense. If you don't have lift on your right wing, physics dictates what happens next, not number of hours on type.
PBL
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Not Ardua enough
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Came across this some time ago and made me somewhat sceptical of the design then. Wonder if this had any part to play.
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/...04__vp_bjm.cfm
The HSTCU is susceptible to contamination. A sad loss.
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/...04__vp_bjm.cfm
The HSTCU is susceptible to contamination. A sad loss.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: where the money is
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HSTCU Contamination
You're right, but this is known and has just recently been widely published, for example in Flight International.
We still have to wait for the conclusions of the Russian and German AAIB. It appears though, that the aircraft's right wing did not produce the necessary lift after rotation. Assuming that the aircraft commander acted wisely in deciding pro de-icing, one must focus on the ambient temperature and the nature of precipitation during the quick turn-around enroute to Hongkong. We can safely assume that the airframe itself must have been cold soaked after the first leg from Hannover to Almaty. We all know how the task-sharing during such a technical stop works: CM1 does all the paperwork, payments and overlooks the refuelling (and de-icing, when necessary), while CM2 goes through new WX-information and starts punching in the numbers for the 2nd leg into the FMS (which could have taken some time, given that he still was under supervision).
What I'd be interested in finding out: what type of de-icing fluid was used and were there any samples available in the days after the accident?
Something went terribly wrong that night and my guess is, that the occupants of this CL604 were doomed once they applied takeoff thrust...
We still have to wait for the conclusions of the Russian and German AAIB. It appears though, that the aircraft's right wing did not produce the necessary lift after rotation. Assuming that the aircraft commander acted wisely in deciding pro de-icing, one must focus on the ambient temperature and the nature of precipitation during the quick turn-around enroute to Hongkong. We can safely assume that the airframe itself must have been cold soaked after the first leg from Hannover to Almaty. We all know how the task-sharing during such a technical stop works: CM1 does all the paperwork, payments and overlooks the refuelling (and de-icing, when necessary), while CM2 goes through new WX-information and starts punching in the numbers for the 2nd leg into the FMS (which could have taken some time, given that he still was under supervision).
What I'd be interested in finding out: what type of de-icing fluid was used and were there any samples available in the days after the accident?
Something went terribly wrong that night and my guess is, that the occupants of this CL604 were doomed once they applied takeoff thrust...