Air Tindi Twin Otter Down

[godsrcrazy]

The lake at the Lac De Gras winter road camp is runs North South. I am thinking the hit the hill on the North end. You can google earth 64.25'06.02N 110.06'36.11w. That will show you the area.

[SpyPilot]

PDW:

Consider re-thinking all of your subsequent posts as well.

[-42]

Poor people that work and or fly there now. Back in the day before Discovery takeover/bankruptcy there was lots of good experienced pilots/AME’s there and slowly but surely dumpster fire ensued. Fortunately no one was killed but judging by the recent history of incidents it’s a matter of time before another incident occurs. I am sure current management will mitigate that.

[Hawtstart]

You'd think they were describing an accident that occurred on an ILS approach at 200 ft...

I can't tell from your comment whether or not you have experienced how driven snow in Arctic conditions behaves. It's difficult to picture if you haven't seen it. It can be utterly transparent from any viewing angle besides horizontal. It stays very close to the ground; I suppose it's a boundary-layer sort of effect, and is often only about fifty feet thick, often only twenty or even less.

I can remember many times approaching a skiway in the Arctic that I'd previously set up, marking it out using the time-honoured tradition of stuffing orange plastic leaf-bags with snow to mark the boundaries of the safe area. Flying overhead under a blue sky, and being able to see the bags perfectly clearly down below, all through the downwind, base, and final approach, only to have them completely disappear in the flare: pretty late for a safe go-around. One time I landed in such conditions with the second load of the day, and even though we were on the ground, I couldn't for the life of me find where I had left the first load. The tracks from our previous arrival had blown in and my F.O. wanted to look for the stuff on foot but I thought that wasn't a great idea. I wasn't sure we'd be able to find the plane again if we walked away from it. Remember, overhead it was blue sky with unlimited viz. If anyone had flown over at that moment, they would have seen us as clear as day, parked on the ice, standing beside our plane with the sun shining on us. I'm not kidding.

I know nothing about this accident, but I think people who have done this kind of flying won't be as quick to judge as those of you who have not. And I would hazard a guess, without excluding myself from this comment, that none of you are as free from the effects of distraction, complacency, and "get-there-itis" (a term I deplore) as you think you are. "That guy" who was lost against the side of a mountain along with his crew in Antarctica was a great guy: a mentor to many pilots over the years, particularly to those who chose to use their skills doing something other than scheduled 705 passenger work.

This is all very accurate to the challenges of working in that area during the winter months. Whiteout, flat light and blowing snow can come on quick even on the nicest days. Here’s a shot from an exploration camp about 20 miles NE of Diavik on a sunny clear day with a 20 knot wind.

IMG_1260-compressed.jpeg (99.9 KiB) Viewed 4728 times

[pelmet]

One can easily become lost if they wander way. I remember that CFS Alert had lifelines for use between buildings during storms. You can see a diagram of it at this link.....

https://campingcdn.blogspot.com/2013/10 ... -link.html

[pelmet]

Don't get me wrong i have nothing but respect for these guys. Let's not forget they picked this job and get trained and paid to do it. Just like Police getting shot at and going into buildings wondering if someone will take them out. Firefighters that go into burning structures to rescue people. The list goes on. I don't see articles going on for days about them.

It is annoying that no one is talking about or interviewing the “Mine works” that jumped on 4 snowmobiles and road across the Tundra in a “Blizzard”. From what i understand they arrived same time as the military. I guess it doesn't matter that they don't get paid to do this. They are just miners riding snowmobiles in a "BLIZZARD" to help.

For those of you on here that never experienced a Blizzard in the Barren lands you can’t imagine just how bad it can be. I have been there done that. You can’t see 5 feet in front of you but can look up and see clear sky. It’s not a great feeling. I know 2 guys that got caught in a Blizzard. They spent 5 days in scrub brush until the helicopters from the camp could get find them. It was extremely frustrating for the pilots they could see the clear blue sky but couldn’t see their helicopters 200’ away from the camp.

To be honest this is politics at its best justifying the money the tax payers pay to support this. I have no issue with that. In my opinion Hercules aircraft complete with medics are based in the wrong area. From the time of any call in the Arctic they are looking at 4 hours to Yellowknife for instance out of Winnipeg or Trenton. The Twin Otters based in Yellowknife are a joke.

It seems to me that you may be able to recognize blowing snow by things appearing to be just a bit fuzzy. The more the wind, the fuzzier it gets(obviously snow quality matters as well). Of course, at a regular airport with buildings, etc, you have a situation where the fuzziness stands out against a darker background. At a place like an offstrip location where the background may be all white, it is more difficult. A nice, sunny day should make it more easy to recognize this but if it is not sunny then it will be more difficult as it is already whiteout conditions.

Of course, one may be able to get an idea of windspeed using their GPS groundspeed to get an idea of wind speed while flying along fairly low. That being said, they were near Diavik so they may have had a wind source if none was available at their landing spot. It wouldn't surprise me if the Tindi crew were aware that it was fairly windy out but who knows. And it sounds like they had plenty of experience overall.

It is a class 3 investigation, so there will be a report.

While it was more for making sure we were not landing downwind, I used to check the groundspeed versus airspeed as we maneuvered closer to ice strips/offstrip for confirmation. It did happen once that we had been given opposite direction winds and changed the initially planned landing direction because of it.

[JL]

TSB final report:
https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... w0158.html

[Bede]

TSB final report:
https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... w0158.html

Thanks for posting. This should be required reading for all pilots (and especially low time pilots working the ramp waiting for a spot). 4 approaches, all home-brew? Going down to 50'? I've worked in the Arctic and flown on skis. This PDM (or lack thereof) is unbelievable. The fact that management implicitly endorsed it is negligent to an almost criminal level.

[Meatservo]

TSB final report:
https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... w0158.html

Thanks for posting. This should be required reading for all pilots (and especially low time pilots working the ramp waiting for a spot). 4 approaches, all home-brew? Going down to 50'? I've worked in the Arctic and flown on skis. This PDM (or lack thereof) is unbelievable. The fact that management implicitly endorsed it is negligent to an almost criminal level.

Just to move the conversation along past the “criminal level” bit. If one was predisposed towards fairness, one might consider that a few of these so-called “approaches” were probably for the purpose of locating a touchdown spot amid the drifts on the lake surface. As you will remember from your Arctic ski-flying experience, the drifts north of the treeline are as hard as cement, and often a safe landing is assured by one or two passes over the site to try and see a relatively flat path amid them. One pass to find the spot, maybe another one if the first pass didn’t reveal a good enough spot; then a low pass, possibly with a touchdown, to assess the chosen spot for its actual suitability, followed by a full stop. It doesn’t surprise me in the slightest that four runs were taken at this location. I would have serious questions about anyone who doesn’t do things this way in the barrens.

[Bede]

Just to move the conversation along past the “criminal level” bit. If one was predisposed towards fairness, one might consider that a few of these so-called “approaches” were probably for the purpose of locating a touchdown spot amid the drifts on the lake surface. As you will remember from your Arctic ski-flying experience, the drifts north of the treeline are as hard as cement, and often a safe landing is assured by one or two passes over the site to try and see a relatively flat path amid them. One pass to find the spot, maybe another one if the first pass didn’t reveal a good enough spot; then a low pass, possibly with a touchdown, to assess the chosen spot for its actual suitability, followed by a full stop. It doesn’t surprise me in the slightest that four runs were taken at this location. I would have serious questions about anyone who doesn’t do things this way in the barrens.

Of course, but I didn't get that impression from reading the report. They didn't see anything at 500' hence having to go down to 50'. They're fishing for something, anything until eventually the end up at 50' hitting the hill.

I'll be the first to admit that I've done some measure of home brew approach, but 4? down to 50'? That's nuts.

[Dry Guy]

Extremely common in northern Canadian aviation.

[‘Bob’]

TSB final report:
https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... w0158.html

Thanks for posting. This should be required reading for all pilots (and especially low time pilots working the ramp waiting for a spot). 4 approaches, all home-brew? Going down to 50'? I've worked in the Arctic and flown on skis. This PDM (or lack thereof) is unbelievable. The fact that management implicitly endorsed it is negligent to an almost criminal level.

Just to move the conversation along past the “criminal level” bit. If one was predisposed towards fairness, one might consider that a few of these so-called “approaches” were probably for the purpose of locating a touchdown spot amid the drifts on the lake surface. As you will remember from your Arctic ski-flying experience, the drifts north of the treeline are as hard as cement, and often a safe landing is assured by one or two passes over the site to try and see a relatively flat path amid them. One pass to find the spot, maybe another one if the first pass didn’t reveal a good enough spot; then a low pass, possibly with a touchdown, to assess the chosen spot for its actual suitability, followed by a full stop. It doesn’t surprise me in the slightest that four runs were taken at this location. I would have serious questions about anyone who doesn’t do things this way in the barrens.

They hit ground a mile away from their intended destination….

[pelmet]

Extremely common in northern Canadian aviation.

Not admitting anything but 50' without depth perception is not a good idea. Summertime is better for depth perception.

[co-joe]

I just feel like you have to make a decision between going ifr and going vfr. If you chose vfr and enter imc, you chose poorly and should probably go to your alternate. Especially if the landing spot has no approach and no ifr altitudes. both pilots flying solely by reference to Foreflight is just wrong.

[Dry Guy]

Nice idea but the reality is homebrew GPS approaches are how flights are operated every day in the North. It's taught to new hire pilots by the management and training pilots of the airlines and then heavily implied that this is how you are to operate your aircraft. There's no way Transport Canada doesn't know this. They just turn a blind eye.

[Donald]

Operating under VFR ops spec at 300 feet with 1 mile vis, north of the tree line, in the winter, is different from IFR.....how?

[BTD]

Operating under VFR ops spec at 300 feet with 1 mile vis, north of the tree line, in the winter, is different from IFR.....how?

One starts with the letter V. The other an I.

[goingnowherefast]

And if the weather was actually 300-1, they probably wouldn't have crashed.

Accidental VFR into IMC should be an immediate climb to a safe altitude. Figure out the rest from there. That's what I have done in the past.

[Sulako]

The accident report said the crew was IMC on all 4(!) approaches, and they descended below 50' agl in IMC and hit a hill on the 4th approach. Oof.