Strange B200 icing incident

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

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

User avatar
GA MX Trainer Dude
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 4:36 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Strange B200 icing incident

Post by GA MX Trainer Dude »

Beech 1900 Surface De-ice Schematic

Image


Notice where the 5 indicator switches are located.

It is possible and I have seen it myself where pinholes in the boots will allow water to enter the system - remember the boots have low pressure source that is constant when they are not in the inflation mode. This water can fill up the delivery system tube preventing the air pressure from inflating the boot but since the frozen plug is between the pressure switch and the actual boot the indicator light will illuminate but the boot will not have inflated.

Once the aircraft is back into warmer temperatures the boots will work fine as the ice plug has melted - thus one of the common reasons for maintenance to find nothing wrong. It should be mandatory for an issue like this that maintenance perform a leak test on the boot system to check for pin holes and to drain / blow out the lines as well.

I am still amazed that no one has developed an inexpensive external mount camera for things like this - one on the top of the fuselage so you can see everything on top and one on the bottom so you can see underneath. A lot less expensive than the loss of the aircraft because the flight crew didn't have the information to make good judgement calls. Of course with the common beancounter mentality that is the norm today it would be unjustifiable as an expense!!

Just my .02 worth today!!

Stay safe guys!!

Mx
---------- ADS -----------
 
You can train a monkey to ride a bicycle but you can't train it to fix it!!!
goldeneagle
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1294
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm

Re: Strange B200 icing incident

Post by goldeneagle »

GA MX Trainer Dude wrote: I am still amazed that no one has developed an inexpensive external mount camera for things like this - one on the top of the fuselage so you can see everything on top and one on the bottom so you can see underneath. A lot less expensive than the loss of the aircraft because the flight crew didn't have the information to make good judgement calls. Of course with the common beancounter mentality that is the
The system itself could be dirt cheap, using off the shelf stuff. But, do plan to spend close to a million bucks getting it certified for use on an airplane, along with all the certifications required for the mounting etc. A camera is cheap, but that paperwork to allow things like punching a hole in the skin to mount it, and run all the wiring, that's not gonna be inexpensive by any stretch of the imagination.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
GA MX Trainer Dude
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 4:36 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Strange B200 icing incident

Post by GA MX Trainer Dude »

Yup - Like I said - "Economic considerations take precedence over safety." IE - the beancounter mentality where they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!!


Having added a number of different things on pressurized aircraft the design process for poking a hole through the skin is not really that big of a deal - it is done after all for your added GPS units, radio antennas, etc. I somehow don't think that it would actually run into the millions of dollars but it might run into the thousands of them.

Again my point here is simply that until we as an industry decide that the losses are significant enough to demand changes in how safety is actually accomplished rather than just paying lip service to it by doing a mickey mouse "Risk Analysis" and determining that the "Risk is Acceptable" and in fact decide that even 1 death is 1 too many and we as the industry need to improve the existing (Mediocre) standards.

Where do you draw the line???? - Is a $30,000.00 mod to add a camera to the top of a B200 too much considering the least amount of people it could save here in Canada would be 2?? Two pilot aircraft - on a positioning flight scenario. Are you going to tell me and the pilots widows that $15,000.00 each was too much for the company to pay for their ability to check on the condition of the exterior of the aircraft and allow them to make an informed decision?? If we could get the cost down to $5000.00 per pilot would you put it in then??

What actually is the value placed on people in the aircraft???


From the "Plane Crash Attorney" Website
Commercial airline disaster settlements often land on page one in the newspaper because the awards can be very large.

In March, 2008, a record $165 million settlement for the crash of an Air Philippines Flight eight years earlier splashed across the headlines. While it took seven years of litigation to reach the agreed figure which is cited as the largest settlement for an Asian airline accident the compensation awarded to each family of the 103 passengers amounted to $1.5 million per victim.

Charter and private plane disasters tend to produce smaller settlements than commercial airline crashes but not always.

Record small aircraft settlements include the following:

In 2006, a $26 million settlement paid for the wrongful deaths of a couple with eight children following a 1999, North Carolina plane crash (highest aviation settlement in U.S. history for the death of a husband and wife).
In 2005, a $38 million settlement paid to a woman severely injured in a 2001 helicopter crash at the Grand Canyon (highest settlement in U.S. history for helicopter crash injury).
In 2003, a $25-million settlement was agreed to by the air charter company which owned and operated the small plane involved in the 2002 crash deaths of six passengers and the plane’s two pilots. The estate of a Minnesota senator who was killed in the crash -- along with his wife, daughter and three campaign aides -- was the plaintiff.
In 2001, a $27.5 million settlement was reached on behalf of skydivers killed in a 1998

Sure the above is not directed fully at the need for a camera to see what is happening outside the aircraft - but also on the site was this quote that should be cause for some thoughts - the bold emphasis is mine.
Disparity in Airline Liability Law:

Prior to 1997, passengers who held tickets on international flights which crashed could not receive more than $75,000 in damages even if the accident occurred on or over U.S. soil.

After 1997, most airlines agreed that they can be sued for the allowable damage amount in the passenger’s domicile country. Victims or their families only have to show that the airline was negligent in causing their injuries.

The one exemption that airlines use against unlimited damage liability is if the airline can prove it took "all necessary measures" to prevent the damage.

Interesting Facts

The odds that any single person will be involved in a plane crash are about one-in-twenty thousand. However, more than fifteen thousand Americans will be involved in at least some type of aviation accident during their lifetime. If you have been involved in a place accident, notify a personal injury lawyer or place crash attorney.

Approximately 80 percent of all plane crashes occur shortly before, after, or during takeoff or landing. While mid-flight disasters happen, they are rare.
An accident survey of 1,843 aircraft accidents (excluding military, private and charter aircraft) from 1950 through 2006 determined the causes were:

53%: Pilot error
21%: Mechanical failure
11%: Weather
8%: Other human error (air traffic controller error, improper loading of aircraft, improper maintenance, fuel contamination, language miscommunication etc.)
6%: Sabotage (bombs, hijackings, shoot-downs)
1%: Other causes
Are we really "Taking all necessary measures"????

Stay safe,

Mx
---------- ADS -----------
 
You can train a monkey to ride a bicycle but you can't train it to fix it!!!
co-joe
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4734
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME

Re: Strange B200 icing incident

Post by co-joe »

That incident has tail plane icing written all over it. I had an abnormal and very large buffet from such an encounter in the tops of a tcu which went away with descent into warmer air. Maintenance found small holes in the tail boots. Between inflation cycles, suction is applied to the boots to keep the leading edge shape smoothe. This can cause moisture to get drawn into the boots which then freezes rendering them useless. Without that 20' ladder it's impossible to inspect your boots and finding pin holes is next to impossible.

There is no way to see the boots in flight and the pneumatic guage does little to confirm their operation. The only way to really test them is doing a runup having someone outside make a visible observation that they are functioning but that still leaves the possibility of pin holes undetectale.
---------- ADS -----------
 
boeingboy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1624
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:57 pm
Location: West coast

Re: Strange B200 icing incident

Post by boeingboy »

There is a simple solution. Every couple of months have your mx guys mist some DC200 into the de-ice system. It is a silicone based fluid and will keep everything from freezing together.
---------- ADS -----------
 
GyvAir
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1810
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:09 pm

Re: Strange B200 icing incident

Post by GyvAir »

What boeingboy said. ^

http://aerotwin.com/products/deice_boot_mister.html
Image
This system is used for servicing the Caravan's BFGoodrich pneumatic de-ice system using the 'flow-through' method, in accordance with BFGoodrich Service Newsletters No. 91-015 and 91-016.

Injecting an atomized mixture of isopropyl alcohol and Dow 200®100cs silicon fluid prevents system freeze-up due to ingested moisture and lubricates system valves; all in one operation.

We have assembled all the required pneumatic components, and housed them in a protective aluminum frame. A delivery hose (not shown) is included.
Does a fantastic job of showing just how many pinholes your otherwise flawless looking boots may actually have in them too.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”