Continental Flt 3407 Crash at Buffalo/Niagra Intr'nal

[Mad Flying Ace]

I know this NASA video is standard part of groundschool every year at Borek.

Not sure if anyone else incorporates it into their recurrent programs though.

regards,

Mad Flying Ace

[Letterhead]

Generally, no aircraft accident is the result of a single factor. The thing that has struck me is the lack of experience of the crew. 3000 hours and you can be a Q400 captain? In the U.S. the training, in my experience, is less than exemplary. Cost pressure on training departments, poor wages and working conditions and I wonder whether the industry in the U.S. is properly equipping its pilots with the skills necessary to properly and safely do their jobs.

[Donald]

The thing that has struck me is the lack of experience of the crew. 3000 hours and you can be a Q400 captain?

The last couple boom years in Canada have seen guys making left seat of 705 turbo-prop aircraft with less than 3000 hours.

So what is the magic number that makes it alright (regardless of what the insurance company might say)?

[FICU]

In the US all right seat hours count towards an ATP so you will see low time Captains in a mandatory 2 crew aircraft. I remember when Mesaba(Northwest feeder) had a minimum of 2000 hours for a Saab 340 Captain and 500 hours for an F/O.

Years ago I ran into 2000 hour bizjet(Citation, Learjet, Gulfstream) Captains at SimuFlite in Dallas... when our company minimums were 5000 hours for a Learjet left seat... it's a very different animal south of the border.

[Prairie Chicken]

I know this NASA video is standard part of groundschool every year at Borek.

Not sure if anyone else incorporates it into their recurrent programs though.

It's part of TC's g/s & icing training as well. Excellant video, and thanks for posting the link as I'll add it to my 'library'.

[Tim]

i was quite surprised by that video, both by the incredible information and insight it provided as well as the fact that i and many others here had not seen or heard of it. its unfortunate it took yet another crash to bring it back to our attention. id certainly heard of tail stalls before but the majority of what i saw in that vid was new to me.

with that info in mind, how is it that CRJs do not have tail de/anti-ice (they dont right?)

i suspect that we will be seeing it in a lot more groundschool. good to hear borek is doing so already.

[yfly]

The thing that has struck me is the lack of experience of the crew. 3000 hours and you can be a Q400 captain?

The last couple boom years in Canada have seen guys making left seat of 705 turbo-prop aircraft with less than 3000 hours.

So what is the magic number that makes it alright (regardless of what the insurance company might say)?

Insurance companies are in the risk assessment business. They use actuarial figures which are based on historical data. I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the requirements of insurance companies. We all know a lower time pilot can handle an aircraft, but can he/she do so when the matter hits the fan? Maybe, but maybe not. That is where risk tolerance makes the decision and you will find "the magic number".

[ettw]

In the US all right seat hours count towards an ATP so you will see low time Captains in a mandatory 2 crew aircraft. I remember when Mesaba(Northwest feeder) had a minimum of 2000 hours for a Saab 340 Captain and 500 hours for an F/O.

Years ago I ran into 2000 hour bizjet(Citation, Learjet, Gulfstream) Captains at SimuFlite in Dallas... when our company minimums were 5000 hours for a Learjet left seat... it's a very different animal south of the border.

I have always figured this discrepency was due to the size of the economies/corporate markets. Here we don't have alot of corporate work so the operators can pick and choose who they want to fly their iron, and they generally choose higher hour types. Our southern neighbor has a huge economy which means a huge corporate market and they can't be as picky if they want their iron to move. I think this also applies to the airline sector.

I don't personally subscribe to the "more hours is better" philosphy. I am currently flying with Capts in the 2500-3500 hours range on an ATR 42 and quite frankly, they're some of the smartest, most capable pilots I've seen. And yes, I think they're smart enough to deal with the unexpected despite not having a gajillion hours.

On the ATR the icing systems still give me a headache! Level 1 then 2 then 3 but you cant go back to 1 until.....ah Fark!

And in the time I've been at this business we have really changed our approach to flight in icing conditions. It is now generally and should be universally accepted to activate your aircraft deice/antice systems at first indication of ice accumulation at least, if not in anticipation of entering conditions which "may" be conducive to ice accretion. The one thing that I think should be required for certification of all aircraft is the installation of a deice system that will run continuously, not just a 1 shot timed cycle.

My condolences to all those touched by this tragedy.

ETTW

[Letterhead]

There really is no hard line on the number of hours. However, in my opinion the U.S. regional carriers do not provide the same level and quality of training as you will find elsewhere. 3000 hours maybe ok if the educational standard is set very high.

The question I am raising is that given the generally lower training and educational standards in the U.S. is 3000 hours enough experience to be responsible for the lives of 75+ people in a complex aircraft like the Q400? The results of February 12, 2009 in my view answer that question. My observations are that the pilots at the U.S. regional carriers, receive sub-standard training, are poorly paid, and overworked. Personally, I will not fly on regional carriers in the United States and have not done so in over a decade. The only sector in the industry that sets the bar lower are Part 121 charter operators. And forget about Part 91, they literally have no standards under the FARS.

[Bushav8er]

I don't think any operators teach this stuff. At least none that I have ever worked for.

Is this video not common knowledge? It sure seems like good stuff to know.

Sounds like some are working for companies that don't keep up with policies; ANs, Ad circs, Pol Letters etc.

TC mandated more ice training including tailplane icing/stalls awhile ago and most operators that teach it use the NASA video.

It is also available from the TC Pub store on a cd http://shop.tc.gc.ca/TChtml/ibeCCtpItmD ... item=40201 for the huge sum of $3.50.

There are a lot of good pubs, CDs, DVDs, course materials there - a lot for free or a small fee.

As pilots, interested (I assume) in keeping up to date and constantly learning, I suggest that more dig deeper than the AIM / CARs.

here's one relevant to the ice post -
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/syste ... f/menu.htm

Here are a few more links:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/syste ... 5/menu.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/certi ... n/menu.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/comme ... s/menu.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/comme ... y/menu.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/certi ... y/menu.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/certi ... t/menu.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/comme ... S/menu.htm
http://shop.tc.gc.ca/TChtml/ibeCCtpSctD ... CLbx0Ta0--

Thoughts to the families and crew - fly safe all.

[Tim]

However, in my opinion the U.S. regional carriers do not provide the same level and quality of training as you will find elsewhere. 3000 hours maybe ok if the educational standard is set very high.

two questions. what are you comparing their training to and what type of education makes you a better pilot?

[Lost in Saigon]

Sounds like some are working for companies that don't keep up with policies; ANs, Ad circs, Pol Letters etc.

I guess I have been at Air Canada for too long....

[Cat Driver]

what type of education makes you a better pilot?

Type specific training by an organization that has a top notch training program on type.

Recurrent training by the same organization.

3000 hours equals 15 times the hours it takes to get a commercial license.

The problem with skills levels and decision making abilities is person specific, not time specific.

[contrite]

"The pilot, Capt. Marvin Renslow, had been with the airline for nearly 3 1/2 years and had more than 3,000 hours of flying experience with Colgan, which is nearly the maximum a pilot can fly over that period of time under government regulations." - msnbc

i.e. He had more than 3000 hours total time.

[bobcaygeon]

Would another 2-3000 hrs really help if the crew wasn't given the proper training to deal with a tailplane stall?

In a tail plane stall the corrective actions are not likely to be completed without proper training (except maybe "undoing what you just did" ie-flaps). If "george" is engaged and kicks off like Roselawn, you may not link flap selection with the loss of control if the A/P was able to maintain control initially. Would you link control issues with a flap selection you made +60 secs prior? The corrective actions for a tail plane stall are different than a wing stall and misidentification will likely make it worse.

Without the proper training a positive outcome heavily involves luck.

I hope Colgan provides it.

PS I worked with a capt. who had it happen in a HS-748, he said the only reason they walked away was because their hand was still on the flap lever and they instinctively just "undid what ever they had just done" ie reactive instinct, not skill or training., more like just plane old luck

[WhereNext]

Generally, no aircraft accident is the result of a single factor. The thing that has struck me is the lack of experience of the crew. 3000 hours and you can be a Q400 captain? In the U.S. the training, in my experience, is less than exemplary. Cost pressure on training departments, poor wages and working conditions and I wonder whether the industry in the U.S. is properly equipping its pilots with the skills necessary to properly and safely do their jobs.

Im a long time lurker of this board and think it is a great place to share ideas, help one another and offer constructive advice and critisism. I believe that the captain of this flight has apprx 3600 hours and the F/O 2500 hours. Now that being said, I dont know how anyone would have reacted to this or even what they could have done.... I believe that whatever took this A/C down was a result of something happening very rapidly and the crew did everything they knew what to do. I will go further to state that I have a few thousand more hours than the captain and I dont think that guarentees anything. If that captain has been at his airline and flying and training in that type of environment for 5+ years, I would think that he is quite qualified to be in the seat. I dont think you or I could have done any better. I have seen that nasa video many times...The reality of it was that the captain of the Twin Otter was somewhat surprised at the effects and reactions of the aircraft he was flying.... he was also WAITING for this to happen. Now what do you think the crew of the aircraft in question was expecting at 2300ft? speculating that this is what actually happend....Surely not expecting the aircraft to violently change pitch attitude.

I Think this is a wake up to us all..... No matter what company we are in or AC that we fly, we should all start training for this mentally and in our training. Im not stating that this is what happend and im surely not wanting anyone to think that I am. We are all here to learn something... I have personally been through training many many times in Level D sims and never have I seen a tail plane stall. I think this should be added to the sim's databases and crews be trained in real exercises and not just watching a video.

WN

[Pratt X 3]

"The pilot, Capt. Marvin Renslow, had been with the airline for nearly 3 1/2 years and had more than 3,000 hours of flying experience with Colgan, which is nearly the maximum a pilot can fly over that period of time under government regulations." - msnbc

i.e. He had more than 3000 hours total time.

Those numbers might be coming from the same press release that is floating around. They are probably based on this:

Following are the names of crew members on flight 3407:

Captain Marvin Renslow joined Colgan on September 9, 2005. Captain Renslow had flown 3,379 hours with Colgan Air.

First Officer Rebecca Shaw joined Colgan on January 16, 2008. Ms. Shaw had flown 2,244 hours with Colgan Air.

The FAA limits airline pilots to a maximum of 1000 hours per year (vice 1200 here in Canada) so the Captain might have been able to acquire those hours with Colgan. However, it is highly doubtful that the First Officer flew almost 2250 hours in just over a year so those times could be their total times.

[2R]

Any pireps for ice from other flights in the area ?

[Siddley Hawker]

I wonder if the a/p was engaged, and what is that company's procedure on the use of the a/p in icing conditions.

[2R]

Eliminate the obvious first ,
If it was a low time pilot issue: more planes would be falling out of the sky on a daily basis.Since that is not occuring the training is obviously adequate.

The weather may be a huge factor ,the sad part is that some of the plane burned and a lot of the evidence that would give us absolute certainty and integrity as to the cause of accident may be lost.Ice on the windscreen was mentioned in one press release but not how much or where on the windscreen .That may help determine what kind of icing conditions they where in .If ice was present in a heated part of the windscreen it is usually a clue that the windscreen may not be working or that the icing is worse than what the plane can handle.

So we are really just guessing as to the cause and or probable causes that contributed to this rare accident.No one can with absolute certainty, apportion the true cause of this accident with out all the facts and materials of the accident .Basing our opinions on what the press is reporting would be premature and a great disservice to our industry .
We must await all the facts before we can add to the safety and prevent any other rare occurances such as this from happening again.We owe that much at least to the dead , their families and future generations.

[rum-runner]

Any pireps for ice from other flights in the area ?

Listen to the audio links posted earlier.
Pretty well every aircraft was reporting ice, some to a different degree than others, but it was out there.

[fogghorn]

I wonder if the a/p was engaged, and what is that company's procedure on the use of the a/p in icing conditions.

The a/p would have almost definitely been in use, you have enough work load in that type of aircraft to not be hand flying on top of everything else. Their should have been no chance of a tailplane stall if boots were either clicked over to manual for one cycle during descent to clear everything off (which is what I do, because quite often you pick up a considerable accumulation in cold enough temps that pneumatic boots plain and simply will not remove anything until you descend into warmer air - real rocket science), or set to an auto cycle. It sounds like tail stall, none of it makes sense.

[Pratt X 3]

...how is it that CRJs do not have tail de/anti-ice (they dont right?)

Not sure about the CRJ but quite a few jets do not have any ice protection on the tail. The story that was told to me was an early Boeing jet originally did have tail anti-ice using hot bleed air. Once, after landing, it was noticed that the tail had a large accumulation of ice either from the system malfunctioning or being forgotten to be activated. So Boeing did some testing to see if it was needed. They strapped some 2X4's to the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer and went flying. Flew like a charm and from then on, no tail ice protection was built into Boeing airplanes. Now, I imagine that is not the real story; more likely that extensive research and testing was done but most larger jets do not have any ice protection on the tail; its just not needed.

[_dwj_]

Are you for real?

The smoke has hardly cleared and you're declaring case closed.

And then you start criticizing the actions of the crew.

I really should not be giving you credit by responding to your garbage.

This thread has been respectful up to this point and continues to be and I applaud those that have taken the time to make respectful comments and provide thoughtful insight. This weather will continue and we all will be flying into it. This is a wakeup to us all.

I really am disgusted by your ignorance. I know that can't be helped. Ignorance is what it is.

I won't start speculating what area of aviation you are in, but I'm assuming that you are involved in the industry seeing as you've contributed a few responses to this forum.

Please take this response seriously friend. You are completely out of line. Your accusations towards airline pilots that they "just push a button and hoping for the best" have no place here. I realize this is a public forum and everyone is entitled to say what they want.

I'm telling you that what you said is completely fkd.

Please go back to whatever world you exist in where icing conditions are something you read about.

If you want to comment on a recent crash where good people have lost their lives, think about what you are going to say very carefully before your fingers start typing. I know it's easy to hide behind a pseudonym and believe that what you say has no consequences...

But let's agree to show some dignity.

My prayers are with the families of those effected.

Truly a sad day.

Fly safe.

Officejet

Ha! Looks like I started a shitstorm. I am a private pilot and I own my own plane. I am very interested in flight safety, both for myself and my passengers, and frankly it makes me very angry when I see a fatal accident which was caused by pilot error (as is the case in 83% of accidents, according to the Nall report). So in this accident, as in all other fatal accidents, pilot error is by far the most likely cause.

Getting back to the facts: they knew they had severe icing on the critical surfaces (we hear them saying this on the tape). They knew, or should have known that their plane was not certified for this and that they were in serious trouble. They did not declare an emergency. They did not do a flapless landing. These are the facts. Perhaps the aircraft design was partly to blame - maybe it is more susceptible to icing. However with the right conditions any plane can get into a severe icing situation no matter what kind of deicing equipment it has, and it it purely down to the actions of the flight crew as to whether everyone lives or dies that day.

Oh, and I'm not hiding behind a pseudonym (like you appear to be). My login name here is the initials of my real name. If you spend 5 mins searching the TC database and other places you'll find all my details. I have nothing to hide.

[Cat Driver]

maybe it is more susceptible to icing. However with the right conditions any plane can get into a severe icing situation no matter what kind of deicing equipment it has, and it it purely down to the actions of the flight crew as to whether everyone lives or dies that day.

On three occasions I have encountered severe icing that was not expected according to the forecast and the conditions that were apparent at the time.

Severe icing changes the flying characteristics of any airplane so fast you may not be able to do much about it.

I am alive today more through luck than anything else.

Severe icing is generally very localized.

and it it purely down to the actions of the flight crew as to whether everyone lives or dies that day.

Really? Maybe you can educate the rest of us so when we run into this problem we can do the right thing.