NTSB - Colgan 3407 Follow-Up

ppragman said:
What is more likely? Tailplane stall, or wing stall, I vote wingstall. Especially in icing conditions (== greater weight, less lift). Lower the nose call for max power, and pull the flaps up a bit.

'Sides, a tailplane stall is likely to drop the nose anyway, so if you get one (you're not going to get a stick shaker) the nose will fall on its own, and you'll know what to do. Read nasa stuff.

This is pilot error.
Click to expand...
You can vote all you like, but what happens is not up to vote, and it is not necessarily all that easy to recognise (according to the studying I've done, since I do command a turboprop into known icing)
Actually you should not call for max power ( I think you better brush up on your tail stall procedures. NASA has a great video on this) you are supposed to return the flaps to the last configuration and REDUCE power to its previous setting, and then PULL THE YOKE BACK TO YOUR CHEST . . . YOU MAY NEED HELP FROM THE OTHER PILOT!


Look man, I am trying to demonstrate to those with any common sense at all that we do not know what was in the guys head . . .
I am well versed in the Tailplane stall recovery, although the Bro isn't that suseptible to it (we are more inclined to a roll upset) but with all of the briefs that have been pounded into our heads it very well could be that the poor guy made the wrong assessment. (yes that would be pilot error) but I really don't get (or appreciate) the superior attitudes being tossed down from the cheap seats.

Finally, you speak in absolutes, the only thing that is absolute is that nothing is absolute.
you do not always "pull the flaps up a bit"
you may get a stick shaker if you get slow at the same time you get a tail stall, there are som many gray areas here that when you speak in black and white it doesn't fit in context. How about just a little humility.
 
aloft said:
THANK YOU DALE!! Was wading through the rest of these posts to see if somebody made that point.


Um, no. Ice buildup happens quicker on the smaller surface: the tailplane. And remember, the tailplane isn't there to produce lift, it's there for control. In virtually all flight regimes, losing control is worse than losing lift.
Click to expand...


No, it acrues at the same rate, however it's a smaller surface. Thus the percentage of saturation grows much faster. That being said, I've flown in some serious frickin' ice, and had more problems with running out of speed and lift than I had running out tail.

Regardless, how many tail plane stalls have killed transport category airplanes? How many stall/ spin accidents have killed TC airplanes?
 
Bumblebee said:
You can vote all you like, but what happens is not up to vote, and it is not necessarily all that easy to recognise (according to the studying I've done, since I do command a turboprop into known icing)
Actually you should not call for max power ( I think you better brush up on your tail stall procedures. NASA has a great video on this) you are supposed to return the flaps to the last configuration and REDUCE power to its previous setting, and then PULL THE YOKE BACK TO YOUR CHEST . . . YOU MAY NEED HELP FROM THE OTHER PILOT!


Look man, I am trying to demonstrate to those with any common sense at all that we do not know what was in the guys head . . .
I am well versed in the Tailplane stall recovery, although the Bro isn't that suseptible to it (we are more inclined to a roll upset) but with all of the briefs that have been pounded into our heads it very well could be that the poor guy made the wrong assessment. (yes that would be pilot error) but I really don't get (or appreciate) the superior attitudes being tossed down from the cheap seats.

Finally, you speak in absolutes, the only thing that is absolute is that nothing is absolute.
you do not always "pull the flaps up a bit"
you may get a stick shaker if you get slow at the same time you get a tail stall, there are som many gray ares here that when you spek in black and white it doesn't fit in context. How about just a little humility.
Click to expand...

I was going for the wing stall recover there, not the tailplane stall in my post. Maybe that wasn't clear. Out of curiosity, how many people on here have actually experienced a tailplane stall?
 
At Horizon we're told that the Q400's tail is the least susceptible to a tail stall. Due to design, powered elevator, and advanced de-ice boots.

Q400 has flaps 0, 5, 10, 15, 35.

At Horizon, FO's fly landings with flaps 35 (restricted from flaps 15, unless single engine, but those are supposed to be flown by the Capt, go figure).

Really the only time we fly Flaps 15 is for single engine or for CAT III (A) landings.

For a typical ILS approach for me flying the Q400. I start to configure 6/7 miles from the FAF. Flaps 5 first (can be combined with Gear Down/Landing Checklist). Flaps 10 if needing to keep some speed up, if not Flaps 15 about 3 miles from FAF. Flaps 35 (Below the line on our checklist) at/near the FAF.

Also at Horizon we set a Vref and Vref (ICE) on our bugs...I don't know what it is that Colgan does for the airplane.

During my intial sim training in the Q4, we did full stall recoveries, but my intructor also had me take the airplane to stick pusher just so I could feel how much force it pushes with.
 
ppragman said:
I was going for the wing stall recover there, not the tailplane stall in my post. Maybe that wasn't clear. Out of curiosity, how many people on here have actually experienced a tailplane stall?
Click to expand...

I see what you meant with the stall recovery there, I did misunderstand that (oops a little pilot error!)
It's more that there has been a lot of focus on tailplane stalls in training and the NASA research, so it is formost on our minds.
 
The Twin Otter is not a t-tail...

83556main_fs009fig3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top