Westwind

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

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

Post Reply
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by Cat Driver »

So far there does not seem to be any idea of why it ended up there.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
North Shore
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 5602
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Straight outta Dundarave...

Re: Westwind

Post by North Shore »

Cat Driver wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:21 pm
Now to this comment by you:
That's pure bullshit, Cat, and you know it.
You are basically calling me a liar and I am not prepared to accept such a comment from anyone.
Simmer down, and stop putting words into my mouth. Nowhere did I say that you're a liar - we're simply having a difference of opinion about the accuracy of TSB investigations. I think that your contention that the "chances are we will be no closer to knowing the true cause than the day it happened" is BS. As I'm understanding your words, you are saying that based on your experience with one case - 40 years ago- (and a few others, perhaps?) out of literally thousands of accident investigations, the chances are - so in a significant number of cases - the TSB will get it wrong. I simply don't think that's the case..
---------- ADS -----------
 
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?
Happiness is V1 at Thompson!
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.
User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4403
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by rookiepilot »

170 to xray wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:55 am Many years ago I had lunch with a retired accident investigator. I asked how he liked working for the the NTSB. His respones was, "I didn't work for the NTSB, I worked for IACO."

He explained to me that when an accident happens 'teams' of investigators are sent to investigate the accident. Engine manufacturers, tire manufacturers, air plane manufacturers, avionics manufacturer..you get the point...they all send investigators to the accident. He said that they were all there to investigate their components, as experts to help the NTSB.

He also said that they were there to show that it wasn't their component that contributed to the accident, unofficially of course.

He was there to represent the pilots. He felt that the experts from industry were too eager to blame the two dead pilots and call it pilot error.

Is any of it true? I have know idea, but that's how it was told to me.
Investigators....or Lobbyists in everything but title?

Awwww....I should behave and believe everyone has the best of altruist intentions.....always safety above (Cough) the mighty dollar......... :shock:
---------- ADS -----------
 
PostmasterGeneral
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by PostmasterGeneral »

Did they fuel up before leaving? Have to imagine that losing both engines after takeoff could have been from a fuel contamination issue.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by C.W.E. »

Maybe it'll be classified as a hard landing and not a crash.
What is the difference between a hard landing and a crash?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4403
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by rookiepilot »

PostmasterGeneral wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:01 pm Did they fuel up before leaving? Have to imagine that losing both engines after takeoff could have been from a fuel contamination issue.
Ice in the fuel?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
EPR
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 520
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:38 am
Location: South of 60, finally!

Re: Westwind

Post by EPR »

Northshore, I took the NTSB reports as gospel up until I read the Air Canada "hard landing" report.
I can not believe how "white washed" that report is, when compared to a private independent report that was published.
That topic is available to read on this site, I just can't recall exactly where, but boy, what an eye opener!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by EPR on Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Keep the dirty side down.
Cliff Jumper
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Westwind

Post by Cliff Jumper »

EPR wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:52 pm NTSB report .... Air Canada report. ....private independent that report
I must have missed that... can you explain?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
EPR
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 520
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:38 am
Location: South of 60, finally!

Re: Westwind

Post by EPR »

Here is a link to the AC624 A320 "hard landing" accident critique of the TSB report that blew me away!
http://www.picma.info/sites/default/fil ... %201_4.pdf
---------- ADS -----------
 
Keep the dirty side down.
'97 Tercel
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:19 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by '97 Tercel »

I guess If you crash onto a runway it's a hard landing.

And if you do a hard landing anywhere else it's a crash.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gilles Hudicourt
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
Location: YUL

Re: Westwind

Post by Gilles Hudicourt »

EPR wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:27 pm Here is a link to the AC624 A320 "hard landing" accident critique of the TSB report that blew me away!
http://www.picma.info/sites/default/fil ... %201_4.pdf
I agree that that this report put a nasty dent in the TSB's credibility.........
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Westwind

Post by CpnCrunch »

Gilles Hudicourt wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:01 am
EPR wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:27 pm Here is a link to the AC624 A320 "hard landing" accident critique of the TSB report that blew me away!
http://www.picma.info/sites/default/fil ... %201_4.pdf
I agree that that this report put a nasty dent in the TSB's credibility.........
I had a look at that critique, and a lot of the comments don't seem to make much sense (like the cold correction, which is above the altimeter setting source, not above sea level). Anyway, it's thread drift, so I'd suggest starting a new thread to discuss it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pdw
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:51 am
Location: right base 24 CYSN

Re: Westwind

Post by pdw »

rookiepilot wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:02 pm
PostmasterGeneral wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:01 pm Did they fuel up before leaving? Have to imagine that losing both engines after takeoff could have been from a fuel contamination issue.
Ice in the fuel?
Not so likely if all fuel around there was WAY below zero all week; unless moisture along from previous/warmer departure (where nearby Airpts South or West are 5C at-the-time) already in the tanks. That's (the only way IMO) possible for making freezing H20 at Fond-du-lac (-9C in wx-hist).. or if topping with some minus 10-15C fuel (holds chill from previous nights -20/-30).

Seeing impact angle must have been fairly shallow (800ft debris field/TSB) it still could be that when weedwacking along, starting with smaller branches of the tallest treetops, that would eventually stop props anyway ... wouldn't it ? At which point in this accident sequence would the pilot have shut off the fuel (as per forced approach lesson / flying 101) when pending touchdown among trees became clear ?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
schnitzel2k3
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:17 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by schnitzel2k3 »

rookiepilot wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:02 pm
PostmasterGeneral wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:01 pm Did they fuel up before leaving? Have to imagine that losing both engines after takeoff could have been from a fuel contamination issue.
Ice in the fuel?
Only fuel that far north is Stony. So they would've had one full 20 minute cycle.

S.
---------- ADS -----------
 
PostmasterGeneral
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by PostmasterGeneral »

schnitzel2k3 wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:07 pm
rookiepilot wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:02 pm
PostmasterGeneral wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:01 pm Did they fuel up before leaving? Have to imagine that losing both engines after takeoff could have been from a fuel contamination issue.
Ice in the fuel?
Only fuel that far north is Stony. So they would've had one full 20 minute cycle.

S.
Uh, no... What about points North or ZFD? Havent been to either in awhile mind you...
---------- ADS -----------
 
spruceair
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by spruceair »

PostmasterGeneral wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:42 pm
schnitzel2k3 wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:07 pm
rookiepilot wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:02 pm

Ice in the fuel?
Only fuel that far north is Stony. So they would've had one full 20 minute cycle.

S.
Uh, no... What about points North or ZFD? Havent been to either in awhile mind you...

Fuel in points, stony and the mines but not fon du lac (zfd)
---------- ADS -----------
 
PostmasterGeneral
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by PostmasterGeneral »

All the Cameco mines had the same fuel provider from what I remember, I think even Points shared with Collins Gay. Oops I meant bay..

Is it unreasonable to think that they took on fuel and when the poured the coals to 'er she shit the bed just after rotation? Everyone is focused on icing but what about the gas, man?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
schnitzel2k3
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:17 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by schnitzel2k3 »

PostmasterGeneral wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:42 pm
schnitzel2k3 wrote: Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:07 pm
rookiepilot wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:02 pm

Ice in the fuel?
Only fuel that far north is Stony. So they would've had one full 20 minute cycle.

S.
Uh, no... What about points North or ZFD? Havent been to either in awhile mind you...
Apologies, Points has fuel, but it's not as far north as Stony. La Ronge - besides the mines - is the next furtherst north, then comes Buffalo Narrows.

ZFD = Fond Du Lac - no fuel last I was there - unless you meant a different airport.

I would be surprised if it was a fuel icing / contamination issue. All I hope is that it was not a crew or mx related malfunction.

Tough for it not to be because those ATRs are pretty bullet proof.

Cheers.

S.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FlyGy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 549
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Westwind

Post by FlyGy »

Only fuel that far north is Stony. So they would've had one full 20 minute cycle.

According to their schedule, the previous stop for WEW280 was LaRonge. Stony Rapids was their next stop.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Diadem
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: A sigma left of the top of the bell curve

Re: Westwind

Post by Diadem »

Both engines were turning at the time of the crash:
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/sask ... -1.4458032
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”