Dash 8/Q400 Stall Recovery stats...

SurferLucas said:
To be honest, by the time we're on the glideslope, we're still at Flaps 5. Our books call for the flaps to be at 15, 1/2 dot below glideslope...however, in practical application, this doesn't work all that well.

I was taught in Initial for the Q400, to intercept the GS...and keep the Power Levers at roughly 15% trq...that would allow one to use the flaps and continue to slow while flying down the GS.

To answer the first question though, if I were in ice with Gear DOWN and Flaps at 15 (roughly 25-28% trq to maintain airspeed), the aircraft would accelerate while trying to maintain GS if you left the Power Levers at the same position.

To answer the second question, the main reason we do Flaps 15 landings for HGS/CAT III-A ops has to do with IRS and that the aircraft is being hand flown. There is such a large change in pitch when going from Flaps 15 to Flaps 35, that it would cause the HGS not to allow us to go into AIII mode.

For HGS operations, we have to follow these proceedures:

- Input the Rwy Length, TDZ elevation and GS angle into the HCP.
- Verify both ARCDU's and Nav#3 on the correct Localizer Freq.
- Select the Inbound Course on each PFD.
- Set DH and MDA bugs.
- Set Airspeed Bugs.
- ILS approaches in AIII mode MUST be flown with flaps set to 15 only.
- HGS must be in AIII mode, with gear and flaps in the landing config prior to passing the FAF.
- Autopilot must be disengaged prior to FAF.
Click to expand...

I won't lie and pretend I understand everything you just said, but it would seem to me that by comparison of what we've seen, Colgan 3407 configured much earlier than a Horizon crew might. Am I correct in that statement?
 
Just to educate myself on Colgan's SOP of the Q400, I went in and reviewed the NTSB's docket for the accident.

- I just want everyone on here to know that I'm in no way "monday morning quarterbacking" the Captain, nor am I saying that Horizon is the world's best Q400 operator. I'm just stating from a personal stand point, based upon my experience in the Q400, what I would have thinking/doing in the same situation for the approach. You Colgan pilot's are a class act and I've enjoyed the chance to have a few of y'all ride in the jumpseat on our airplanes.

Colgan's SOP and Horizon's SOP differ in a quite a few areas. Colgan's SOP call for the Before Landing Checklist to be complete 1nm prior to the FAF, at Horizon we have to call Flaps 15, or Flaps 35/Below the line (which complete's our Landing Checklist) and be fully configured 1000' above field elevation. (The only exception is for AIII ops, which Aircraft must be configured for landing prior to crossing the FAF)

Given my basic knowledge of Colgan's SOP for the Q400...I have the feeling that there may be a rush to get the aircraft configured prior to the FAF. I know that flying the Q400 into SEA, they would ask us to hold 170 to (DGLAS, SODOE, or FINKA) the FAF. Being able to configure the aircraft after the FAF, allows us to "keep our speed up" and still be configured prior to 1000' AFE.

So all that being said (and probably too long winded), if it were myself flying the same approach in the same conditions...I would have probably been in the range of 160-170 kts with the Flaps at 5 and the Gear DOWN...prepairing to intercept the GS, become established, and calling for Flaps 15.
 
SurferLucas said:
Just to educate myself on Colgan's SOP of the Q400, I went in and reviewed the NTSB's docket for the accident.

- I just want everyone on here to know that I'm in no way "monday morning quarterbacking" the Captain, nor am I saying that Horizon is the world's best Q400 operator. I'm just stating from a personal stand point, based upon my experience in the Q400, what I would have thinking/doing in the same situation for the approach. You Colgan pilot's are a class act and I've enjoyed the chance to have a few of y'all ride in the jumpseat on our airplanes.

Colgan's SOP and Horizon's SOP differ in a quite a few areas. Colgan's SOP call for the Before Landing Checklist to be complete 1nm prior to the FAF, at Horizon we have to call Flaps 15, or Flaps 35/Below the line (which complete's our Landing Checklist) and be fully configured 1000' above field elevation. (The only exception is for AIII ops, which Aircraft must be configured for landing prior to crossing the FAF)
Click to expand...

Could it be, perhaps, that an operating procedure regarding checklists diverts flight crew attention from more immediate tasks, such as GS intercept?

Coupled with a 'given' practice of retarded power levers until GS intercept to slow to configure, something seems amiss.

No wonder Colgan has been browbeating its pilots and has worked so hard to divert attention away from its training procedures, etc.

Smear the crew, no worries for the company, right? What's the crew gonna say?

Smear the airline, well, golly, that's our whole business right thar!

This reeks to high heaven. Being fully configured by 1 nm prior to the FAF would potentially leave a crew with a VERY 'dirty' airplane and way behind the power curve.. in level flight, instead of descending on the GS. Given that it appears that LOC intercept had not yet occurred, therefore GS intercept was unlikely (and descent not yet legal), it seems as if they found themselves a bit rushed by ATC not meshing well with their own SOP. End result, things got rushed. Dark cockpit, long day, insufficient rest.. accident stew.

I hope the people digging into this at the NTSB, etc.. are seeing this the way we are.
 
SurferLucas said:
Just to educate myself on Colgan's SOP of the Q400, I went in and reviewed the NTSB's docket for the accident.

- I just want everyone on here to know that I'm in no way "monday morning quarterbacking" the Captain, nor am I saying that Horizon is the world's best Q400 operator. I'm just stating from a personal stand point, based upon my experience in the Q400, what I would have thinking/doing in the same situation for the approach. You Colgan pilot's are a class act and I've enjoyed the chance to have a few of y'all ride in the jumpseat on our airplanes.

Colgan's SOP and Horizon's SOP differ in a quite a few areas. Colgan's SOP call for the Before Landing Checklist to be complete 1nm prior to the FAF, at Horizon we have to call Flaps 15, or Flaps 35/Below the line (which complete's our Landing Checklist) and be fully configured 1000' above field elevation. (The only exception is for AIII ops, which Aircraft must be configured for landing prior to crossing the FAF)

Given my basic knowledge of Colgan's SOP for the Q400...I have the feeling that there may be a rush to get the aircraft configured prior to the FAF. I know that flying the Q400 into SEA, they would ask us to hold 170 to (DGLAS, SODOE, or FINKA) the FAF. Being able to configure the aircraft after the FAF, allows us to "keep our speed up" and still be configured prior to 1000' AFE.

So all that being said (and probably too long winded), if it were myself flying the same approach in the same conditions...I would have probably been in the range of 160-170 kts with the Flaps at 5 and the Gear DOWN...prepairing to intercept the GS, become established, and calling for Flaps 15.
Click to expand...

Really, we just need to be configured by 1500ft agl for stable approach criteria.

Our profiles are changing a lot, but, normally we try to stay as fast as we can as long as we can. This results in long periods at flight idle. Example being PWM. We cross NEETS at 11,000 feet, 280-284kts. if we take vectors to the approach from there, we will be at flight idle untill maybe 1500-2000 ft agl just to configure... sometimes we have to click off the autopilot and pull it back above GS to get it slowed somewhere near 2-3000 feet. If we did not have to worry about configuring by 1500 feet, we could easily fly the entire approach to landing at flight idle.


If you are not in a huge rush, configuring at 5 miles is pretty normal. Newark normally gives us 180 till AYRON, or 5 miles... so typically this is what "I" end up doing:

180kts ~25-35% Tq, Flaps 5 to keep the deck angle down
GS intercept - Flight idle - 11% Tq, maintains 180kts
1 mile prior, call for gear down, advance the power with props to the nominal 13-14% for the rest of the approach.

If you were to configure from 180kts at GS intercept, the power will drop close to 11% with the props coming up, so if you were at 30% to hold 180, configured at GS intercept, the Tq would drop to 19%... which means you would over speed, or at a minimum, not slow down... requiring a reduction in power. In this case, most pilots i have seen, pull power to idle or close to it, then call for gear down.

Other case would be high speed, say getting vectored in before SW, so your going 250 as long as you can. This pretty much means the entire approach will be at flight idle.. again.

The only thing i would really take from this, is that it is not uncommon to be at flight idle in the Q. Maybe if we could use those spoilers in flight it would be different.
 
Does Colgan not have the Reduced Np on the engine control panel? I'm just curious is all. Just to clarify for myself, you're saying the SOP is to be fully config'd prior to 1500' AGL? I ask because at 1500', that is typically where I would be calling for Flaps 35 and slowing to maintain Vref ICE minimum to 1000'.I'm enjoying this chance to talk about how different airlines operate the same aircraft.
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
Really, we just need to be configured by 1500ft agl for stable approach criteria.

Our profiles are changing a lot, but, normally we try to stay as fast as we can as long as we can. This results in long periods at flight idle. Example being PWM. We cross NEETS at 11,000 feet, 280-284kts. if we take vectors to the approach from there, we will be at flight idle untill maybe 1500-2000 ft agl just to configure... sometimes we have to click off the autopilot and pull it back above GS to get it slowed somewhere near 2-3000 feet. If we did not have to worry about configuring by 1500 feet, we could easily fly the entire approach to landing at flight idle.


The only thing i would really take from this, is that it is not uncommon to be at flight idle in the Q. Maybe if we could use those spoilers in flight it would be different.
Click to expand...

Okay, your profiles are changing a lot. Suddenly. Lately. Gee, does that raise an eyebrow lately? What was it back in February?

What's wrong with your spoilers?
 
The Q400 spoilers operate on the ground once Weight On Wheels has been achieved. They provide backup to the ailerons in the event of a roll control jam. They cannot be used in flight like those on a jet.
 
SurferLucas said:
The Q400 spoilers operate on the ground once Weight On Wheels has been achieved. They provide backup to the ailerons in the event of a roll control jam. They cannot be used in flight like those on a jet.
Click to expand...

I see.

Hmm. I suppose with a straight wing, the need isn't quite so large as with a swept wing, in flight, anyhow.
 
Firebird2XC said:
What's wrong with your spoilers?
Click to expand...
They only work on the ground :)

For us to meet stabilized approach criteria in the Q, we have to be configured by 1500 agl, with checklists complete, so usually at 1550 ft, it goes either, flaps 15 or flaps 35, before landing checklist... I would also say that flaps 15 are the norm. at colgan, and (knocking on wood) we have yet to drag a tail.

The profiles are changing, because the ones we started with were "not" what happened on the line. The new ones are pretty much the same, but they give more guidance... In the end, they still say we can do what we need to meet requirements of atc, and situation.

As far as I have seen, nobody is changing how they actually fly the approaches, except for a short period of retarded knee jerk, in which any time we slowed below 180 kts, we had to configure. We now have "discretion" to configure.

To answer Surfer, we have the systems installed, but the buttons are not in the panel yet. Word was, that they were going in "Soon" in feb... then it got put on the back burner. CAL wants it though, so we will prob. see it soon.

I am amazed that your seats don't recline. That is ultimate crap... ours also have individual leg height adjustments, lumbar support, and height adjust, adjustable arm rests... and headrest with coat/hat hanger.. are the rest of the features the same?


I have doubts that the "profile" cause much of an issue. Much more likely would be the negative learning associated with have lots of time in a different airplane... and being new to the Q. As i said before, many transition FO's have exhibited a tendency to expect the airspeed to "not change" One of the big gotcha's in the Q, is that it will appear stabilized, but in reality, start to speed creep. Esp. when slowing. There will not be much of a speed change at all, until the nose starts to come up, then the speed bleeds mega fast. You can see this in the ntsb video. The power levers are at the same point, but the speed isn't changing much.(for a good amount of time) then, once the plane has slowed enough to require a pitch change, the speed just falls off. This catches a lot of the guys that came from the beech or Saab (which did not do this) off guard.

I've said it before, the Q is a different breed of animal. It's not like most TP's, and it's not like a jet.. more of a crossover vehicle.
 
Firebird2XC said:
I see.

Hmm. I suppose with a straight wing, the need isn't quite so large as with a swept wing, in flight, anyhow.
Click to expand...


They would also blank out part of the ailerons... and flaps - so I'm sure popping them in flight (or could) be a surprise waiting to happen (surprise control reversal?)
 
kellwolf said:
So, why are they called "flight spoilers?" :)
Click to expand...
They're not...

Just Spoilers, with 2 positions... Taxi and flight

Really just means "stowed" or Armed... If you were to take off with them in "taxi" the airplane smacks you around, and then changes it for you.


ohhhh... i'm not deft tonight.. yes, they would "spoil" your flight were they to go off :)

Lots of people seem to wonder about them. There are inboard and outboard spoilers on the Q, hydraulics power both. Below 185 knots, both operate together with the ailerons to reduce yaw, and assist with role rates... ( it is a 93ft wing span) above 185 knots, the inboards only operate. In the cockpit we can deselect individual systems (inboard/outboard) the plane will normally tell you which one is not playing nice, you just push the illuminated button to turn it off. They deploy as Surferlucas said, with WOW, and power levers below a certain threshold.

When we take position, we are at DISC (maybe up to Flight idle) with WOW, and Flight/Taxi in the flight position... so they will deploy untill the PL's are advanced. This isn't a self test, like many seem to think - rather a simple system who's conditions are being met.
 
Doesn't the Q400 have flight spoilers as well? The 200 does, ailerons and spoilers. Of course they kind of put the spoilers on at the last minute so maybe they took them out of the 400.
 
I will say, I bet every Q driver out there has had times where they wished either we had spoilers, or that ATC would learn that a Q can't fall out of the sky like the other props (If we are already at the baber pole, the best you will get from us in descent is 2200fpm... more likely too be 1700fpm)
 
Yeah, from a few hours in the sim it flies more like a jet than the other Dashes. On the 200 we can be doing max forward speed and then drop out of the sky like a rock, or do 220KIAS to the outer marker then slow fast enough to be stabilized and configured prior to 1000ft.
 
LAX is bad about trying to "drop us in" like most of the jets (I guess it's those "Jet Like Speeds")...SEA is probably the best, mainly because they deal with us 200+ times a day.

The Q400, in my humble opinion, should have been a "new type" instead of a "common type" of the Dash 8. The airplane has too many "quirks" that don't apply to the other Dash 8's. In the cockpit, they could have gone with a "full glass" cockpit similar to the Do-328, instead of a hodge podge of avionics.

To answer your question Tuck, our seats don't recline. They do adjustable armrest, and the coat hangers. I suppose the offer of free beer makes the ride alittle more bearable! Hahaha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top