I know nothing about the CRJ2, but there must be more to this story, no? From the sounds of the article they were flying at FL410, and it was implied that this ended up causing a double engine flameout... Makes no sense to me...
---------------------------------
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/ ... 8341.shtml
Moments before a double engine failure and a crash that killed them, one of the pilots aboard a regional airliner told an air traffic controller they had "decided to have a little fun" by flying at the plane's maximum altitude.
There were no passengers on the plane and no one on the ground was injured by the Oct. 14 crash in a residential neighborhood of Jefferson City, Mo.
Transcripts the St. Louis Post-Dispatch obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration describe the rapid descent of the Pinnacle Airlines Corp. plane after it lost engine power.
The problem was first mentioned in the transcripts when an air traffic controller in Kansas City told the pilots it was rare to see the plane, a Canadair CRJ2, flying at an altitude of 41,000 feet.
"Yeah, we're actually ... we don't have any passengers on board, so we decided to have a little fun and come up here," one of the pilots said. The transcripts don't identify whether Capt. Jesse Rhodes or First Officer Richard Peter Cesarz made the statement.
The pilot soon told air traffic controllers that the CRJ2 wouldn't remain at that altitude for long.
"I don't think he had enough gas up there; he was so slow," one air traffic controller said.
The pilots said first one and then the second engine shut down.
"We're going to need a little lower to start this other engine up, so we're going to go down to about 12 or 11 (thousand feet). Is that cool?" the pilot said.
The last contact that controllers had with the crew was at 9,000 feet, when the pilot reported an airport beacon in sight.
Earlier that day, the crew had called off a scheduled flight with passengers from Little Rock, Ark., because an indicator light went on for part of its "bleed air" system, which takes hot, compressed air from the engines to heat other components of the plane. After a repair, the plane took off for Minneapolis with just the crew on board.
Phil Reed, Pinnacle's vice president of marketing, said he could not comment.
"A little fun" just before fatal CRJ2 crash
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
Elliot Moose
- Rank 3
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: CYYC
Flying at 410 in a 200 will not cause a flameout--and didn't. The problem is more "how do you get a 200 to 410". The CRJ 200's engines were carefully set to have exactly the right amount of power. It is a regional airliner which should seldom be doing legs for which FL410 is required. You don't hear 747-400's at those altitudes unless it is at the end of a very long flight, and the RJ200 is no different. Unless you are very light (like at the end of a long leg) and it is coldish, you shouldn't need such altitudes, and so they didn't give it the power to do it except in those conditions. If they had, its fuel consumption would have suffered at other altitudes.
Since the CRJ has a very high speed wing, and with this lower excess power at high altitudes, it basically won't climb into the "coffin corner" at a normal climb speed and that is a good thing. We don't have to go through all that buffet boundary calculation that some aircraft do (remember the DC9 stuff from the ATPL?). Generally speaking, if you climb at a minimum of mach .70, it will stop climbing well before the buffet boundary becomes an issue, and so flight planning is based on a 500fpm climb ceiling. When it gets so it's only doing 500fpm--level off because you aren't gaining anything.
The only other real danger is getting too slow. Generally climbs below .70 are not recommended, because doing so will put one behind the power curve at higher altitudes. The disadvantage of a high speed wing is that it doesn't like to go slow! If you're behind the curve at high alt, you may not be able to accelerate through to the other side of the curve, and you may in fact lose speed trying to maintain level. The only recourse is to descend. Try doing a stall in a good sim at high altitude and you'll see what I mean. The only way to get out is to trade a lot of altitude for airspeed.
The accident aircraft was empty, but was only on a two hour leg (or something like it) and the temperatures were well above ISA. I flew through the region a within a couple of days of the accident and we were at ISA +9 at FL350. With a full load on, that was stretching is for the aircraft. Read through the 10 or so pages on this subject over on the PPRUNE board, and you will see a lot of speculation (not all of it is crap either) and facts about this accident.
Since the CRJ has a very high speed wing, and with this lower excess power at high altitudes, it basically won't climb into the "coffin corner" at a normal climb speed and that is a good thing. We don't have to go through all that buffet boundary calculation that some aircraft do (remember the DC9 stuff from the ATPL?). Generally speaking, if you climb at a minimum of mach .70, it will stop climbing well before the buffet boundary becomes an issue, and so flight planning is based on a 500fpm climb ceiling. When it gets so it's only doing 500fpm--level off because you aren't gaining anything.
The only other real danger is getting too slow. Generally climbs below .70 are not recommended, because doing so will put one behind the power curve at higher altitudes. The disadvantage of a high speed wing is that it doesn't like to go slow! If you're behind the curve at high alt, you may not be able to accelerate through to the other side of the curve, and you may in fact lose speed trying to maintain level. The only recourse is to descend. Try doing a stall in a good sim at high altitude and you'll see what I mean. The only way to get out is to trade a lot of altitude for airspeed.
The accident aircraft was empty, but was only on a two hour leg (or something like it) and the temperatures were well above ISA. I flew through the region a within a couple of days of the accident and we were at ISA +9 at FL350. With a full load on, that was stretching is for the aircraft. Read through the 10 or so pages on this subject over on the PPRUNE board, and you will see a lot of speculation (not all of it is crap either) and facts about this accident.
You can't make honey out of dog sh!t
-
complexintentions
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2186
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
- Location: of my pants is unknown.
Good points, I agree with you the altitude in itself didn't cause an engine failure. Very much more inclined to believe they got slow...sure, you can get a jet above it's book figures for altitude/weight/ISA....there's some margin in the chart....but when you use that up, and any other little factor gets added, say, a little turbulence..look out!
So why DID the engine(s) flameout? More importantly, why weren't they able to restart them? And if it was indeed a stall or other aerodynamic condition, why couldn't they recover? We've run all kinds of stuff in the sim, high-alt stalls, aileron buzz, lots of bizarre stuff, but essentially with enough altitude and time, virtually all of the scenarios were recoverable.
Pretty weird. Which forum on PPRune has the thread?
So why DID the engine(s) flameout? More importantly, why weren't they able to restart them? And if it was indeed a stall or other aerodynamic condition, why couldn't they recover? We've run all kinds of stuff in the sim, high-alt stalls, aileron buzz, lots of bizarre stuff, but essentially with enough altitude and time, virtually all of the scenarios were recoverable.
Pretty weird. Which forum on PPRune has the thread?
For what it's worth to this discussion board, I spoke with a Pinnacle pilot in the customs lineup at yyz this past week, and he said that (unofficially, of course) there is major speculation in his company that the captain was not in the cockpit at the time of the accident.
-
Intentional Left Bank
- Rank 5
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:31 am
A few more details from http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 060902.htm
Crash transcript shows plane was at rare altitude
Associated Press
ST. LOUIS, Mo. - A pilot aboard a doomed regional jet told an air traffic controller moments before an October crash that he and his co-pilot "decided to have a little fun" by flying at the plane's maximum altitude.
Cockpit transcripts the St. Louis Post-Disptach obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration describe the rapid descent of the Pinnacle Airlines Corp. plane after it lost engine power on Oct. 14. An emergency landing was attempted, but the plane crashed into a residential neighborhood in Jefferson City, killing Capt. Jesse Rhodes and First Officer Richard Peter Cesarz.
There were no passsengers on the plane and no one on the ground was injured.
Federal investigators said shortly after the crash that they were studying whether altitude contributed to the loss of engine power in the 50-seat plane affiliated with Northwest Airlines.
The problem is first hinted at in the transcipts when an air traffic controller in Kansas City told the pilots it was was rare to see the plane flying at an altitude of 41,000 feet.
"Yeah, we're actually . . . we don't have any passengers on board, so we decided to have a little fun and come up here," one of the pilots said. The transcripts don't identify whether Rhodes or Cesarz made the statement.
But the pilot soon told air traffic controllers that the CRJ2 wouldn't remain at that altitude for long.
"I don't think he had enough gas up there; he was so slow," one air traffic controller said.
The transcripts then describe the conversations between the pilots and the air traffic controllers as the first engine loses power followed by the second engine at 13,000 feet.
"We're going to need a little lower to start this other engine up, so we're going to go down to about 12 or 11. Is that cool?" the pilot said.
A few moments later, he reported double engine failure, according to the transcripts.
The last contact that air traffic controllers had with the plane was at 9,000 feet, when the pilot reported an airport beacon in sight.
Earlier that day, the jet had aborted a scheduled flight with passengers from Little Rock, Ark., after an indicator light went on for part of its bleed-air system. The system pulls hot, compressed air from the engines to heat other components of the plane. An airplane indicator light signaled a potential problem with the bleed-air sensing loop, which uses heat to determine if air is leaking from the engine.
The plane's loop was replaced before it took off for Minneapolis with just the crew.
Phil Reed, Pinnacle's vice president of marketing, said he was unable to comment because the National Transportation Safety Board precludes him from doing so.
Crash transcript shows plane was at rare altitude
Associated Press
ST. LOUIS, Mo. - A pilot aboard a doomed regional jet told an air traffic controller moments before an October crash that he and his co-pilot "decided to have a little fun" by flying at the plane's maximum altitude.
Cockpit transcripts the St. Louis Post-Disptach obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration describe the rapid descent of the Pinnacle Airlines Corp. plane after it lost engine power on Oct. 14. An emergency landing was attempted, but the plane crashed into a residential neighborhood in Jefferson City, killing Capt. Jesse Rhodes and First Officer Richard Peter Cesarz.
There were no passsengers on the plane and no one on the ground was injured.
Federal investigators said shortly after the crash that they were studying whether altitude contributed to the loss of engine power in the 50-seat plane affiliated with Northwest Airlines.
The problem is first hinted at in the transcipts when an air traffic controller in Kansas City told the pilots it was was rare to see the plane flying at an altitude of 41,000 feet.
"Yeah, we're actually . . . we don't have any passengers on board, so we decided to have a little fun and come up here," one of the pilots said. The transcripts don't identify whether Rhodes or Cesarz made the statement.
But the pilot soon told air traffic controllers that the CRJ2 wouldn't remain at that altitude for long.
"I don't think he had enough gas up there; he was so slow," one air traffic controller said.
The transcripts then describe the conversations between the pilots and the air traffic controllers as the first engine loses power followed by the second engine at 13,000 feet.
"We're going to need a little lower to start this other engine up, so we're going to go down to about 12 or 11. Is that cool?" the pilot said.
A few moments later, he reported double engine failure, according to the transcripts.
The last contact that air traffic controllers had with the plane was at 9,000 feet, when the pilot reported an airport beacon in sight.
Earlier that day, the jet had aborted a scheduled flight with passengers from Little Rock, Ark., after an indicator light went on for part of its bleed-air system. The system pulls hot, compressed air from the engines to heat other components of the plane. An airplane indicator light signaled a potential problem with the bleed-air sensing loop, which uses heat to determine if air is leaking from the engine.
The plane's loop was replaced before it took off for Minneapolis with just the crew.
Phil Reed, Pinnacle's vice president of marketing, said he was unable to comment because the National Transportation Safety Board precludes him from doing so.
At PPrune the thread is called the Pinnacle Airlines aircraft accident, 8 pages now and located here:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread ... did=148490
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread ... did=148490
I second that. I have yet to see a CRJ200 (at least Jazz CRJ's) climb at more than 600 fpm above FL260 and usually it's alot less. In the middle of winter it usually takes 200-250nm from the departure airport for a Jazz CRJ to level at 350/360. How long will it take in the middle of summer?FamilyGuy wrote:When it gets so it's only doing 500fpm--level off because you aren't gaining anything.
That's pretty funny. I guess the 200's should just stay below 280 cause they don't/won't/can't climb much faster than you stated above it.
This climb rate is coupled with a slower than normal (compared to cruise) ground speed. Usually by around 60kts. Most aircraft when climbing slow at least have a good forward speed.
-
Elliot Moose
- Rank 3
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: CYYC
I'm wondering what you're doing to get that kind of performance out of an RJ. Unless it's seriously clapped out, it should do a little better than 650fpm at 260. I took off in an early S/N at 53000 lbs and ISA+8 at altitude last fall and made 330 straight away.
I've seen that good with the wing anti-ice on! That said, a 290/.74 climb will get you the best rate most of the time. Lots of folks climb them too slowly, and end up with poorer performance than they could get. It's a JET--it climbs and cruises at the same speed. So who cares even if it is only doing 650 fpm at 260? Keep climbing until it's just starting to go below 500, because that will put you closest to optimum.
I've seen that good with the wing anti-ice on! That said, a 290/.74 climb will get you the best rate most of the time. Lots of folks climb them too slowly, and end up with poorer performance than they could get. It's a JET--it climbs and cruises at the same speed. So who cares even if it is only doing 650 fpm at 260? Keep climbing until it's just starting to go below 500, because that will put you closest to optimum.
You can't make honey out of dog sh!t
This may be the reason. I agree all the other jets I deal with climb at virtually the same forward speed as they have in cruise. With the CRJ200 however, once the aircraft levels off, the ground speed increases by between 40 and 60 knots. This isn't the case with other jets, at most their ground speed will increase by 10 to 20 knots.Lots of folks climb them too slowly, and end up with poorer performance than they could get. It's a JET--it climbs and cruises at the same speed.
The fact that the CRJ200 doesn't mix well with the other aircraft that operate in the same altitude strata, either with climb rates or cruise speeds.So who cares even if it is only doing 650 fpm at 260?
It's not uncommon to ask a CRJ to be level at FL360 in 5 minutes for traffic when the CRJ is passing FL340. This isn't a problem for most jets, however, 75% of the time the pilot comes back to us after a minute or so to say he/she can't make the restriction.
Not a huge deal, once we got used to the performance, we anticipated such responses.
Maybe the CRJ200 is underpowered? The CRJ700 doesn't seem to have the same problems.
Is it the way JAZZ flies the aircraft? Optimal fuel burn climbs?
P.S. Sorry for hijacking the thread.
-
DragEraser
- Rank 3
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 8:21 am
- Location: CYYC
- Contact:
Get vectors and requests to climb or descent all the time. FL390 and above seems to have less traffic, so we're left alone for the most part up there.
