Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Message
Author
User avatar
Rowdy
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4897
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:26 pm
Location: On Borrowed Wings

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#26 Post by Rowdy » Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:17 pm

We were operating a 705 category turboprop the same day, at approximately the same times not that far away in +SN.. Our holdover time from a deice bay with trucks spraying type 1 and 4 in an accurate and proper manner was... 20 minutes from the start of application. It got to the point that they closed 8R and some taxiways as the snow was accumulating too quickly for the runway and taxiway teams to clear them. Even at 20 minutes on a HOT.. I can tell you when we pulled back onto the gate before the 20 mins was up that the fluids were saturated and no longer effective. I even snapped some photos when we set the park brake.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Jimmy2
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:50 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#27 Post by Jimmy2 » Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:47 pm

What method is Jazz using that says you can go 20 minutes in heavy snow?
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#28 Post by pelmet » Wed Feb 28, 2018 8:28 pm

Jimmy2 wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:47 pm
What method is Jazz using that says you can go 20 minutes in heavy snow?
Perhaps it varies from operator to operator...but we don't have a holdover time for heavy snow. It is endless, as long one uses type IV undiluted fluid and does an visual inspection of the critical surfaces to determine if there has been a fluid failure.

Not easy on a high wing aircraft, of course.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Rowdy
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4897
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:26 pm
Location: On Borrowed Wings

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#29 Post by Rowdy » Wed Feb 28, 2018 8:48 pm

HOT times are simply a guideline. We use either a system via the ACARS or an APP on the provided iPad to provide an accurate timeline. There is ALWAYS an LCI (last chance inspection) done before departing.

The 20 minute time was based on SN.. NOT +SN which is what it was when we pulled into the deice bay. We returned to the gate when it became +SN.
---------- ADS -----------
  

jakester
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:40 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#30 Post by jakester » Thu Mar 01, 2018 6:22 am

there was no co-pilot on that B100, only the owner who has a history of non compliance on record, always in a hurry or late for something due to acute disorganization.......rumour has it the Chinese just dropped a deposit for split 70\30 ownership of the company
---------- ADS -----------
  

goingnowherefast
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#31 Post by goingnowherefast » Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:58 pm

The intensity of the snow isn't based on the -sn, sn or +sn in the meter. It's based on visibility and temperature. It says this right on the HOT chart.

Learn how to use the HOT guidelines and follow them accurately. They're not that complicated. If your company has their own approved procedure, use that. Just make sure it's approved and not some homebrew crap by a sketchy operator too cheap to pay for type 4 fluid.
---------- ADS -----------
  

CpnCrunch
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2843
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#32 Post by CpnCrunch » Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:07 pm

In this case the 3/8 SM visibility was only in the METAR at 2000Z, which was 2 mins before takeoff. The previous SPECI at 1927 was showing 5/8SM.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Diadem
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: A sigma left of the top of the bell curve

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#33 Post by Diadem » Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:52 pm

CpnCrunch wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:07 pm
In this case the 3/8 SM visibility was only in the METAR at 2000Z, which was 2 mins before takeoff. The previous SPECI at 1927 was showing 5/8SM.
Okay, so that just makes it moderate snow with a HOT of 6-10 minutes from initial application. Do you think you could use a garden sprayer to clean the plane, get in, close the door, start the engines, finish all your checks, set up the avionics, taxi out, and depart in under ten minutes?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Canuck1988
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:49 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#34 Post by Canuck1988 » Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:15 am

Diadem wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:52 pm
CpnCrunch wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:07 pm
In this case the 3/8 SM visibility was only in the METAR at 2000Z, which was 2 mins before takeoff. The previous SPECI at 1927 was showing 5/8SM.
Okay, so that just makes it moderate snow with a HOT of 6-10 minutes from initial application. Do you think you could use a garden sprayer to clean the plane, get in, close the door, start the engines, finish all your checks, set up the avionics, taxi out, and depart in under ten minutes?
As mentioned previously in this thread, using a garden sprayer to de ice an aircraft DOES NOT mean you can use the hold over times. The fluid is not applied at the proper pressure and temperature, and therefore should only be used to clean the aircraft wings (deice) at times where there is no active freezing precipitation (snow etc) or active frost.

If they used a garden sprayer, their hold over time is unknown, and I would take a guess that it would be even shorter than the published hold over times when correctly applied.
---------- ADS -----------
  

CpnCrunch
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2843
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#35 Post by CpnCrunch » Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:39 am

Canuck1988 wrote:
Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:15 am

As mentioned previously in this thread, using a garden sprayer to de ice an aircraft DOES NOT mean you can use the hold over times. The fluid is not applied at the proper pressure and temperature, and therefore should only be used to clean the aircraft wings (deice) at times where there is no active freezing precipitation (snow etc) or active frost.

If they used a garden sprayer, their hold over time is unknown, and I would take a guess that it would be even shorter than the published hold over times when correctly applied.
Do you have a reference for that? This winter's HOT guidelines say that only type 3 fluid has a temperature requirement, and there is no mention of pressure.

http://176.62.164.158/tables/HOT_Guidel ... iginal.pdf

TP14052 just says to follow the fluid manufacturers recommendations for temperature:

https://www.tc.gc.ca/Publications/en/tp ... 14052e.pdf

"The following points should be noted regarding heating Type I fluids:...Heating for application. Follow the fluid manufacturer’s recommendation. Typically, temperatures
should be in the range of plus 60C to plus 82C."

and:

"Fluid manufacturers may also have specific operational procedures to be followed to maximize fluid
effectiveness. For example, there may be specific pressures, temperatures and procedures to ensure that
the fluid is effective in removing frozen contaminants from aircraft surfaces. Always consult the aircraft
maintenance manual for fluid application restrictions such as maximum fluid pressure to be applied to
aircraft surfaces."
---------- ADS -----------
  

jakester
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:40 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#36 Post by jakester » Sat Mar 03, 2018 7:46 pm

who really cares about temps, pressure, heated or not heated fluid .....fact of the matter is all the wayward examples of previous piloting experiences by this dude culminated in a near miss for fatalities, the pilot got the worst injuries and it would be hard to shed a tear quite frankly over a complete disregard for the passengers safety, it will probably mean the demise of the company and the loss of so many jobs there, the current calculation of the monetary loss as per previous incidences of a commuter type crash is around the $ 4.5 million bucks in lost everything at the end of day.......learn by the mistakes of others
---------- ADS -----------
  

sunk
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:51 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#37 Post by sunk » Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:43 am

De icing is a joke. At the airport I work at calm air does the ground school, but no actual training on the use of the equipment. They have people off the street on the drive machine that don't have a clue about the effects of icing on aircraft. Fast air comes and goes with all types of ice on the wings. Perimeter is just as bad.
---------- ADS -----------
  

goingnowherefast
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#38 Post by goingnowherefast » Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:12 am

Are you saying there is ice remaining on the wing after the spray?
Or that they simply don't spray?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Rowdy
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4897
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:26 pm
Location: On Borrowed Wings

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#39 Post by Rowdy » Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:08 am

Snow in the greater vancouver area is always WET. We don't get that light powdery stuff that the rest of the country gets.
---------- ADS -----------
  

7ECA
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#40 Post by 7ECA » Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:16 pm

UPDATE TSB Report #A18P0031: C-GIAE, a Beech B100 King Air aircraft operated by Island Express Air, was conducting flight IAX640 from Abbotsford, BC (CYXX) to San Bernardino Intl, CA (KSBD) with one pilot and 9 passengers on board. Weather conditions at CYXX at the time of departure consisted of a temperature of -2°C in moderate to heavy snowfall with winds of approximately 10 knots. Prior to the departure, the fuel tanks were filled to capacity and the pilot and passengers boarded the aircraft inside the operator’s heated hangar. The aircraft was towed outside of the hangar without being treated with anti-ice fluid, and taxied for the departure on Runway 07. Due to an inbound arrival at CYXX, C-GIAE was delayed for departure. Once cleared for takeoff, the aircraft had been exposed to snow and freezing conditions for approximately 13 minutes. After becoming airborne, the aircraft experienced power and control issues shortly after the landing gear was retracted. The aircraft collided with terrain within the airport perimeter. 4 passengers and the pilot sustained serious injuries as a result of the accident which destroyed the aircraft. CYXX ARFF responded, as well as local police and EMS.

Oh boy, somebody's gonna get sued...
---------- ADS -----------
  
Honour is a man's gift to himself ~Duke Elegant
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.

User avatar
telex
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 211
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:05 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#41 Post by telex » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:38 am

Dryden III. Fantastic.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Zaibatsu
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#42 Post by Zaibatsu » Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:33 am

I think the wings could have fallen off and this guy still would have tried to fly. A very dangerous and unprofessional attitude to have in aviation that nearly cost lives.

I bet a few thousand dollars worth of Type I and IV or waiting until the next day looks cheap now.

Good riddance.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#43 Post by pelmet » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:45 am

7ECA wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 9:16 pm
After becoming airborne, the aircraft experienced power and control issues shortly after the landing gear was retracted.
Would be curious to hear more detail on "power issues"
---------- ADS -----------
  

goingnowherefast
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#44 Post by goingnowherefast » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:57 am

It didn't accelerate and climb like it normally does, so "must" be related to engine power.

I suspect the "power issue" is an attempt to dodge the real problem. That hypothesis most likely came from a statement from an involved party made to the TSB.

Is the TSB going to do a full investigation on this?
---------- ADS -----------
  

JL
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:56 pm
Location: Edmonton

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#45 Post by JL » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:24 pm

Looks like it as they have a web page for it:

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/enquetes-i ... 8p0031.asp
---------- ADS -----------
  

C.W.E.
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#46 Post by C.W.E. » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:43 pm

It is quite possible it was a power problem.

Maybe there was not enough power to overcome the amount of frozen contamination on the airplane that reduced the lift component?
---------- ADS -----------
  

GARRETT
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:46 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#47 Post by GARRETT » Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:58 am

Hey Rowdy, what deicing app. do you guys use if you don't mind me asking? Sounds like something my company may find useful. Even with all the hold over/vis. charts, deicing still seems to be a very subjective area. One guys wants type1 & 4 and another guys thinks type1 is fine. Too many interpretations. An app would solve that. Pilots LOVE apps!
---------- ADS -----------
  

PostmasterGeneral
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#48 Post by PostmasterGeneral » Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:32 am

It’s a proprietary app called “Jazz-HOT” available in our company catalog. Not sure if there are “generic” versions available.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ahramin
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 5551
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#49 Post by ahramin » Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:26 pm

We were using DAN-ICE for a while. My understanding is they have sensors and algorithms for various airports and when you request a HOT it gives one number for each type that is usually much better than the generic tables. I don't know why we got rid of it but it's possible the longer HOT wasn't needed often enough to justify the cost.
---------- ADS -----------
  

J31
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 960
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Abbotsford Commuter Aircraft Mishap, Feb 23, 2018

#50 Post by J31 » Sun Apr 15, 2018 2:19 pm

ahramin wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:26 pm
We were using DAN-ICE for a while. My understanding is they have sensors and algorithms for various airports and when you request a HOT it gives one number for each type that is usually much better than the generic tables. I don't know why we got rid of it but it's possible the longer HOT wasn't needed often enough to justify the cost.
Westjet now owns Dan Ice.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”