Behchoko Crash NWT??

[arctic_slim]

If you remain in ice long enough to be thinking separator, or no seperator, (from a power or a large chunk of ice breaking off point of view) you sir, are an idiot.
Illya

Jesus, I'm just asking a question, no need to be ass about it. No wonder less and less people come to this site. Nobody can have a normal discussion anymore.

My apologies. When somebody crashes an airplane that should not have been there in the first place, I tend to be an ass about it. Not aimed at you.
Illya

Not a big deal, Ive been on this site long enough to know you're pretty vocal when it comes to things like this. I was just asking about the inertial separator thing because I thought I might learn something new. Anyway, what happened happened, and I agree that a turn around is probably the best thing you can do. Ive only had to do it once in my caravan career, and I'm glad I did. I always come to this site to hopefully have some interesting discussions and to learn from the more experienced guys, and I hope it stays that way.

[arctic_slim]

I'm not trying to claim that I am wiser or smarter than the guys who designed the Caravan. I don't have as much experience as most of you high time guys, but I do have several thousand hours in Caravans, in the mountains, in the north. Here is my reasoning behind prefering the Sep Closed in most icing situations.

1) The 100 mile safe from the airport I primarily operate out of is 11 300'. Unfortunately the stock caravans lack the power to operate effectively at the altitude required. With the Sep closed, I can still pull full torque at those altitude, with it open I cannot. Without full power, in an upgrossed stock engined caravan at 12 000'+ without full power, it can't "get on the step" and mushes through the air, Ice builds where I can't shed it, and things go down hill from there The super van and the blackhawk do much better as they can maintain speed and a better AoA for shedding ice.

2) There are not a whole lot of airports where I operate, and of those there are even fewer that have useful approaches (2 ILS's in the territory), with that in mind, I don't spend much time in ice by either turning around, descending below it if VFR is an option, or climbing through it, If I deam it to be safe.

3) I'm more affraid about deploying the sep and it shedding ice into my engine, then ice shedding on it's own into the engine. I have never been iced to the point (or had the speed) to shed ice off the inlet, wings, tail or any other surface.

4) Heavy precip is different then icing, I do use the Sep and the ignitors, I don't think I've ever seen heavy precip in the Yukon. but hey, I've only been up here for 30 or so years.

5) The POH is designed around what the Caravan was designed for, which is not what we use it for. It's not a bush plane, it wasn't designed for 9062, and to get "certified for known icing", well I'm sure you know that the level of icing it's certified for is quite minor. Full flap, back side of the power curve approaches into short boxed canyon strips and lakes were not high on the designers lists of needs.

I've also had the opportunity in my thus short career to fly almost every iteration of the caravan, 600hp baby, 675hp baby and grand, Blackhawk, Garret, boot equipped and TKS. I've found that most are capapble of operating safely in LIGHT icing, provided some common sense is used. The Caravan sim, does a terrible job demonstrating icing, I spent most of my last sim time experimenting with icing. The problem is you let the ice build, loose airspeed to 120, blow the boots, and magically you gain 30kias. This is simply not the case, with the exception of hte garret which seems to be able to maintain it's speed with more ice than I am comfortable with. Techniques that should be in the POH at some place (in my opinion) are things like, if you are at a safe altitude, descending 500' to pick up speed to blow the boots, then climb 750 with the extra airspeed and cleaner wing.... repeat as needed. It's surprising how well this technique works, although it's a little harder to do in controlled IFR environments. I've found that the POH's icing speeds are far to low, and generally unsafe in all but the mildest of icing.


E

Thank you for that detailed description of your experiences. After you describe your use of the inertial separator use, it makes a lot more sense to me. I have been taught the 1 down, 2 up technique, similar to yours. Descend 1000 feet to gain airspeed and blow the boots, then climb about 2000 before doing it again. I hope to never find myself in a situation where I need to do that but it's good to know. I'm lucky that I get to fly the Van over flat ground so I always have the option to climb over and duck under the icing, if I don't have at least 2 ways out, I don't go.

[trey kule]

After you describe your use of the inertial separator use, it makes a lot more sense to me. I have been taught the 1 down, 2 up technique, similar to yours. Descend 1000 feet to gain airspeed and blow the boots, then climb about 2000 before doing it again. I hope to never find myself in a situation where I need to do that but it's good to know. I'm lucky tha

Yes perfect sense....if you dont think impacted ice in your intake will be a problem.
The bypass is there for a reason...dont use perfect reasoning to come to the wrong conclusion or you may find yourself sitting in cloud with a quiett engine one day...

Did you learn the...turn around and get out of the icing procedure?

Be careful with good ideas. They can make you overconfident and willing to push on when you should have turned around.

I hate icing in small aircraft. And it upsets me to no end to read on here pilots who seem to think there is some nifty technique or another for getting through it. the best way to know about icing is to never experience it in the Caravan. The next best way is to learn to do a perfect 180 and return home.
Or, after reading accident threads you can offer up and share great ways to ignore that and try and plow through...it does not work every time.

[arctic_slim]

After you describe your use of the inertial separator use, it makes a lot more sense to me. I have been taught the 1 down, 2 up technique, similar to yours. Descend 1000 feet to gain airspeed and blow the boots, then climb about 2000 before doing it again. I hope to never find myself in a situation where I need to do that but it's good to know. I'm lucky tha

Yes perfect sense....if you dont think impacted ice in your intake will be a problem.
The bypass is there for a reason...dont use perfect reasoning to come to the wrong conclusion or you may find yourself sitting in cloud with a quiett engine one day...

Did you learn the...turn around and get out of the icing procedure?

Be careful with good ideas. They can make you overconfident and willing to push on when you should have turned around.

I hate icing in small aircraft. And it upsets me to no end to read on here pilots who seem to think there is some nifty technique or another for getting through it. the best way to know about icing is to never experience it in the Caravan. The next best way is to learn to do a perfect 180 and return home.
Or, after reading accident threads you can offer up and share great ways to ignore that and try and plow through...it does not work every time.

Oh yeah, ive had to turn around once in my caravan career, no other plane around the airport turned around except me but I still think it was the right decision. There was no FZRA/FZDZ forecast or reported but it sure looked like it after take off, I went right back to the airport and landed just as a CRJ reported heavy icing coming in to the same airport. Sat down in a comfy chair and watched tv for a few hours until it passed then proceeded to de-ice and head home. I'm not trying to say im some kind of superior pilot or anything, it's just my experience in the caravan. How the decision making process went for the air tindi pilot I don't know, i hope to see a report on it and learn something from the incident.

I am very cautious of icing, it's not worth messing with it in my opinion. If I encounter icing, I start a climb/descent right away and inform center of what i'm doing. I may be overcautious according to some people I have talked to but i'd rather be overcautious rather than get into a position I don't want to be in. I don't want to ever find the limits of the carravan.

[Cat Driver]

I am very cautious of icing, it's not worth messing with it in my opinion. If I encounter icing, I start a climb/descent right away and inform center of what i'm doing. I may be overcautious according to some people I have talked to but i'd rather be overcautious rather than get into a position I don't want to be in. I don't want to ever find the limits of the carravan.

You keep thinking like that and you will live to be as old as me without ever having wrecked an airplane....fu.k what others think

[AuxBatOn]

What is it? A superior pilot will use his superior judgement so he doesn't have to use his superior skills?

[Axial Flow]

I thought only the good die young. Just kidding CAT

[Illya Kuryakin]

I am very cautious of icing, it's not worth messing with it in my opinion. If I encounter icing, I start a climb/descent right away and inform center of what i'm doing. I may be overcautious according to some people I have talked to but i'd rather be overcautious rather than get into a position I don't want to be in. I don't want to ever find the limits of the carravan.

You keep thinking like that and you will live to be as old as me without ever having wrecked an airplane....fu.k what others think

Never let turning around bother you. You're alive and kicking, so you obviously did the right thing. As for living as long as Cat? Not sure what the world will look like in 200 years.
I've had times when I've turned around, and one or two where I should have. Turning around is way more fun!!
Illya

[Cat Driver]

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]

+1 to what Cat said!

[stef]

I want to comment on a couple things a little off topic as I think they are important.

Regarding the "1000 down then 2000 foot up method," I had never heard of this before and it sounds pretty illogical. So you're sitting in ice and slowing down to the point where your boots are ineffective, and now you want to descend to blow your crappy boots, then try to climb back through where you ran into the problem to begin with? Or, you've been trying to climb through ice, you're not making it so you descend to blow your crappy boots and now you want to take another run at it? That's bs. Use your knowledge of the weather reports and your experience to get yourself out of the ice as quickly as you can. Keep it simple.

Regarding the advice to keep the inertial separator closed in icing conditions to have more power, that's bs logic too. You're liable to give yourself a compressor stall or worse doing this. For god's sake kids, just do what the manual says. You're not smarter than the designers of the engine, or you wouldn't be a pilot to begin with.

[Meddler]

+1 to the above. If you have to resort to creative thinking outside the manual to keep going, I'm confident your passengers, maintainers and employer would all be happiest if you just came back.

Particularly the separator thing-it's there to prevent engine damage that could potentially cause problems for someone else down the road. Other people have to fly the thing too.

[Illya Kuryakin]

I want to comment on a couple things a little off topic as I think they are important.

Regarding the "1000 down then 2000 foot up method," I had never heard of this before and it sounds pretty illogical. So you're sitting in ice and slowing down to the point where your boots are ineffective, and now you want to descend to blow your crappy boots, then try to climb back through where you ran into the problem to begin with? Or, you've been trying to climb through ice, you're not making it so you descend to blow your crappy boots and now you want to take another run at it? That's bs. Use your knowledge of the weather reports and your experience to get yourself out of the ice as quickly as you can. Keep it simple.

Regarding the advice to keep the inertial separator closed in icing conditions to have more power, that's bs logic too. You're liable to give yourself a compressor stall or worse doing this. For god's sake kids, just do what the manual says. You're not smarter than the designers of the engine, or you wouldn't be a pilot to begin with.

When you're correct, well, you're correct. The 1000 down, then 2000 up is (first place iv seen it BTW)about the dumbest thing ever said on the matter. HELLO....TURN AROUND!'
Illya

[esp803]

To be clear, these are not things to get your trip done.... these are methods to save your ass when you fucked up or the weather has changed drastically from what was forecast. A 180 is not ALWAYS the best option. For example is you are 200 miles into a 250 mile leg and you start picking up ice (assuming you are imc), everybody assumes that the ice will stop the second you do a 180.... this isn't always the case. Blind adherence to anything is foolish imho, 99.99% of the time I wouldnt encourage either of these to be attempted. If it's the difference between being a smoldering crater at 11,000' or possibly writing off an engine, you can be damn sure which one I'm going to choose. And for the record, I've never come close to icing up a van to the point of not maintaining altitude. I'm much happier being on the ground drinking my scotch then in the air.... ever.... especially in the ice in a caravan,

E

[esp803]

Here's a question for all of you. Would you rather over torque an engine passed transient or crash into a hill top? And don't give the chicken shit answer of "I'd never get into that situation in the first place" Every pilot who has ever had a CFIT has thought along those lines.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Here's a question for all of you. Would you rather over torque an engine passed transient or crash into a hill top? And don't give the chicken shit answer of "I'd never get into that situation in the first place" Every pilot who has ever had a CFIT has thought along those lines.

Easy answer....What is it, this over torque, of which you speak?

Try giving my answer to the jet crew who flew into a bridge on the Potomic because they didn't understand the simple concept of "dashboard" power.
Illya

[GyvAir]

I'm surprised that there would even be a thought process involved in a situation where the choice was hitting the hill/trees vs. cooking an engine. Wouldn't the self preservation instinct bypass the brain and connect straight to muscles controlling one's elbow, straightening it out until your knuckles are in the panel? Or does that typically not happen until the last seconds, when it's already too late?

[esp803]

The next question of course is: that being the case if an extra 200lbs of torque would save you from crashing on a might be frozen enough lake or making it back to the field and possibly writing off an engine.... which would you take?

[pdw]

Beyond the wired limit ... there was actually a little more than 200 ...

GYVair, I attended one of those Van icing safety seminars that included Video of what happens once the pilot gets into that type of survival situation. Sounds about right. Not saying that's what happened here, .. just want to add that it's so fortunate that the young ice held the 3000lbs or so at each main wheel as they got out and clear ....

[arctic_slim]

Just for the record, I never said that's how I get through icing. As another poster said, the 1000 down and 2000 up technique is one of those 'save your ass' things. It's from some book, forgot the name, about flying Caravans. Not sayhing I go find icing because I know I can use this to get through it. The logic behind it is to pick up speed and blow the crappy boots to get as much ice off as you can and climb up again if your only option is to go up. Obviously you'd already be in a bad spot if you have to use this. I don't know how well it works, it's just something that I have heard from some other Caravan guys and that book.

Anyway I think this subject is being beaten to death here. Everyone has their own opinions and experiences on this. Everyone flies as safe as they can.

[trey kule]

ESP, I gotta ask....

What is overtorque through transient mean? I thought the whole point of your leaving the bypass closed was because you could not pull max torque...Now we are talking about transient

Now, in one post you state the procedures are only if you screwed up or the weather was drastically different than forecast....and you give an example, so allow me to do the same.

You are quietly motoring along oblivious to the OAT, and are taken by surprise that you are picking up ice, because.....it was not forecast! Really? a quick check of the OAT while you are heating things up and turning will tell you lots. ( You can alway turn again and continue on after you decide to risk you and your pax lives.) Or....you can just keep on going, confident that if you are wrong you can drop , shed, and zoom back up...but only if you now realize you have screwed up.
Yet in a previous post, you tell the readers they should try this as it works surprisingly well.

So how many times have you f'''kd up to have used this and know it works surprisingly well as you posted?

It is interesting that all us old, and still alive guys, are big chickens when it comes to icing in small planes. No special techniques....we get out of it now. And it is those who really dont have the experience that come up with all sorts of good ideas to allow them to keep going when they should turn around.

As to your question. About overtorqing and your continious reference to altitude. At that altitude in cloud you are not going to overtorque the engine, and if you manage it because of the cold, so be it. It is the ITT emergency limit ((IIRC...about 850), that you have to be concerned about, and in practice only when you are safe. Any pilot who would not push power to the wall in an emergency does not deserve to fly...BUT....pilots tend to do that when it is to late, or due to their thinking, do it to early " just to be safe". In one case you are going to wreck a plane. In the other you may just have to explain to the boss why he should be spending $20,000 because you decide to be " Safe. " And yes, you can be unnecissarily safe.

Lastly, as to your example, how close you are to your destination should not be a considerstion.when it comes to ice. kind of a get home itis attitude even mentioning .

Some really disturbing ideas posted here....To bad the Caravan is being blamed for poor pilot judgement and procedures.

[B-rad]

.

[stef]

A lifelong resident of Missouri, LeRoy Cook had been a flight instructor 5 years before becoming an author. How much experience in icing conditions do you think this guy has? Buyer beware!

Swiss Army Knife with wings....gimme a f'ing break!

[pdw]

What is overtorque through transient mean?

That Q was about this one :

Would you rather overtorque an engine passed transient or crash ....

I believe here "past transient" ("passed") is referring to 'beyond the temporary period' when ITT has spiked above the limit during normal operations ... then immediately checked with torque reduction/adjustment ... and only acceptable for very short duration, in seconds. (More often an issue in 'hot and high' operations.)

[trey kule]

Huh??

Ah, PD, I am pretty sure that torque and ITT are different.
There is no such thing as transient torque that I am aware of
There is transient ITTs
As to the seconds, I think you are confusing the 2 second ITT max limit on a start( over 1000) , with a 5 minute continious emergency ITT ( in the 800s)
I believe if you go the POH, all these are laid out in a nice little table

In any event, lets keep the thread drift going and let our fellow pilot alone, as I am sure he has other issues to deal with for the next while.