I wasn't trying to toot my own horn at all because the times I got hired with aren't very impressive....ill be the first to admit the timing was lucky. Just trying to point out that high(er) time doesn't always mean more experience in certain areas.
Update on 3407
- Thread starter SteveC
- Start date
- Status
I wasn't trying to toot my own horn at all because the times I got hired with aren't very impressive....ill be the first to admit the timing was lucky. Just trying to point out that high(er) time doesn't always mean more experience in certain areas.
Bignellyxx
Well-Known Member
What do you suggest that this so called bridge be. FBO after FBO keep dropping multi engine airplanes left and right since faster cheaper singles came onto the scene and fuel went up. 135 operations keep having to rethink their operations. Checks are getting few and far between. I can imagine that companies will find cheaper options for hauling medical supplies and whatever else. Just my gut feeling but i think in the next 10 years this situation will not get better.
motoboy
Well-Known Member
NTSB animation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxywEE1kK6I
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
That vid is interesting.
c172captain
Well-Known Member
Of the three levers on the bottom right of the video, what does the "condition lever" depict?
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
I was thinking the same thing. It would seem pulling the gear up would help but raising the flaps would be catastrophic?
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
Count me among those. But then when i flew GA IFR I knew where the freezing level was. If there was no buffer I just avoided it.
motoboy
Well-Known Member
Could anybody explain the video a little bit to me. After they turned heading 260 they were maintaining 2300' at 180kn. It seems that after the landing gear call out they lost excessive speed, and then at around 2:06 in the video they were slowed to less then 130kn and starting to aggressively pitch up. I'm not understanding why they called for flaps 15 at this point, and why was there such a loss of speed after the gears were dropped- too aggressive of a power reduction?
The approach went down hill when the Captain who was flying failed to add power after the gear down call. The FO as part of the checklist also put the condition levers(props) in high, some of you may have missed this. When you put the props in high mode that essentially turns your props into giant speed breaks because they have more bite into the air. The airspeed kept decreasing and the CA never added power for some reason. Eventually when you have those big spinners which are essentially 10 foot speed brakes, add the gear and the flaps you are going to stall unless you add power. That is what happened. No crew coordination. No doubt the FO didn't help with her random flap up selection but if you have looked at the video of the fdr it was very clear that the CA was not using the proper recovery procedures they would have crashed anyways even if the FO had kept the flaps. At no point in time did the CA ever put the nose lower than the horizon until the airplane actually spun to the ground. He was trying to get out of a stall by pitching up and trying to maintain the horizon while the VSI was rapidly decreasing. At the last bank while in the stall he used full rudder into the lower wing, that caused the spin. All he had to do was maintain pitch or let the pusher do it's thing with wings level and add max power. The airplane would have flown itself out the potential stall. Panic, lack of piloting skills both on the CA and the FO, pilot error.
You know, from the peanut gallery here from my comfy hotel room desk, I'll bet you they would have lost additional low speed protection, but technically speaking, I have no idea.
Like a clean manuevering speed on the MD-88/90 is as high as 247 knots, but if you've got slats out, manuevering speed is as 199 for the same weight. Don't even ask how I remember those speeds for a particular gross weight. So theoretically, if you're in the first phases of a stall, and then you retract the flaps, you're losing almost 50 knots of protection.
But again, I'm not a test pilot, I've never done that and my mere presumption may not be material to the case at hand whatsoever.
Florida_Flyer
Well-Known Member
A friend of my did a recent checkride with another Q400 operator. Before going into the sim he was told what Bombardier believed to have happened. The plane was a bit high, on paper a bit fast so he idled the power levers and got the props to max. 100% normal IF you remember to put the power back in. They are big props on that plane and will slow it fast! Rather than figure out why he was on the shaker he made the wrong move by figuring it was a tail stall caused by icing. The (ill) FO pulling the flaps left them doomed.
They say the gear handle is the career handle, forget to put it down and it's all over. I wish I could think of something as poetic for the power levers. It's not the first time a turboprop has crashed this way. Back in '94 an American Eagle J41 crashed for the same reason. Same scenario, new on type Captain, not comfortable with the plane, fast and high, big workload....
This talk of the Captains failed checkrides does not seem 100% relevant. Sure lots of guys fail checkrides. When a crash occurs the NTSB love to drag it back up again. There rarely seems to be a connection between the pink slips and the accident. I don't judge the CA by these failures. However, I do judge him by the fact in his ugly past he "worked" for Gulfstream airlines. The fact this guy paid to fly, for me is the mark of Marvelous Marvin Renslow.
They say the gear handle is the career handle, forget to put it down and it's all over. I wish I could think of something as poetic for the power levers. It's not the first time a turboprop has crashed this way. Back in '94 an American Eagle J41 crashed for the same reason. Same scenario, new on type Captain, not comfortable with the plane, fast and high, big workload....
This talk of the Captains failed checkrides does not seem 100% relevant. Sure lots of guys fail checkrides. When a crash occurs the NTSB love to drag it back up again. There rarely seems to be a connection between the pink slips and the accident. I don't judge the CA by these failures. However, I do judge him by the fact in his ugly past he "worked" for Gulfstream airlines. The fact this guy paid to fly, for me is the mark of Marvelous Marvin Renslow.
youngpilot85
New Member
Not sure if I agree with this statement. May be just the way you worded it. Putting the props to high allows the blades to go into a fine pitch (lower blade angle), essentially giving more surface area to the relative wind, and so leading to the huge increase in drag. Hence the reason why we feather in the event of an engine failure. The props are only able to get a greater 'bite of air' when there angle is increased with respect to their plane of rotation, which occurs as a result of pulling the condition levers/prop controls back.
Just watched this video. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/30710275#30710275
May have already been posted. If so, do forgive me. Very disturbing. Bone chilling actually. Can't imagine how the victims felt after hearing/watching this. We as pilots can only learn from this.
Baronman
Well-Known Member
Nobody is saying that the failures caused the accident or were even directly related, I don't even think that stalls showed up on those pink slips.
What I think though (and others) is this sheds some light on the overall set of skills brought to the table. We can look back and see through multiple checkrides that the Captain (at times) had a hard time handling aircraft.
IMO speaking from what I've seen since I started flying...There are many people that have been pushed through the career. Every level requires retraining etc. Sure they have good attitudes and continue to progress but at the end of the day not everyone is cut out to fly passengers, some should have stayed weekend warriors.
USMC-SSGT
Well-Known Member
This was not even what happened though. He was not high or fast and he called for flaps 5 at a normal time at a normal speed. The captain then called for gear down when they were NOT fast OR high and the only reason the props came forward was not to correct a problem but because it was in the FOs flow and is done after the gear down call.
The 400 is a little different from what some people recall about throwing props forward in other planes as well. It is not very drastic at all and will not put you forward in your seat belts as some planes do. It is a mundane event that makes a little noise and causes a bit of drag but it is not typically a big help when speed reduction is needed. Dont get me wrong, it certainly helps and will slow the plane down a bit but not nearly as much as we would think 13' of prop would do.
cool92092
Well-Known Member
I would hope that there is something to blame so that we can work at preventing it in the future. A witch hunt, maybe by the sensational media, but the NTSB investigation is nothing short of professional and thorough IMO. There's nothing wrong with discussing the fact of the investigation.
Trip7
Well-Known Member
I think the result of this crash will be mandatory stickpusher flight training for all pilots, and maybe airlines being more strict on checkride failures at the 121 level.
Regional training as be scrutinized alot in the past few days, but this crash was just a result of a loss of basic airmanship. Every pilot has been trained from Day 1 of private on stall recovery.
Seems like the crew just panicked and forgot basic airmanship and all their actions were reactionary. Capt with the aggressive pitch up and FO bringing the flaps up. Fatigue has to be looked at here. Would the crew had reacted the same way at 12:00pm as opposed to late at night?
I don't think training is the issue. A BTV bound crew was in a similar situation and recovered just fine.
Regional training as be scrutinized alot in the past few days, but this crash was just a result of a loss of basic airmanship. Every pilot has been trained from Day 1 of private on stall recovery.
Seems like the crew just panicked and forgot basic airmanship and all their actions were reactionary. Capt with the aggressive pitch up and FO bringing the flaps up. Fatigue has to be looked at here. Would the crew had reacted the same way at 12:00pm as opposed to late at night?
I don't think training is the issue. A BTV bound crew was in a similar situation and recovered just fine.
- Status
