Author Topic: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo  (Read 307309 times)

kea001

  • Guest
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #100 on: February 13, 2009, 04:34:22 PM »
The NTSB rep specifically said that anti-ice was on _prior_ to the crew conversation about ice.

I heard that as well. Whether it was working or not is another matter.


###

Bloomberg News credits liveatc.net for atc communications recording.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aZz1THkGNt0U&refer=home
« Last Edit: February 13, 2009, 05:43:49 PM by kea001 »

Offline Jason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1260
  • CFI/CFII
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #101 on: February 13, 2009, 05:20:38 PM »
All of the discussion on tailplane stall in icing conditions made me think of this NASA research presentation:

Definitely worth watching.

My sincerest condolences go out to the family and friends of the victims involved in this tragic accident.

Best,
Jason

Offline smoak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #102 on: February 13, 2009, 05:22:38 PM »
"Series of severe pitch and roll 'excursions' occurred within seconds of flaps being extended"

Having no experience is icing conditions like this, only having read about it, could this be the airflow/aerodynamic change being that off when the flaps 15 is engaged?  Like an "uncommanded pitch down of the nose or other severe control problems during flaps extension."

WOW THAT VIDEO ABOVE MIGHT BE SPOT ON!

Recovery from tail stall:

1.  Immediate stick full back
2.   immediate retract flaps
3.   retard power

Lost 300 feet of altitude in 2/10 of a second... No wonder why this is so dangerous.  Scary stuff.

Also, sure sounds a lot like the de-ice system was inop? 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2009, 05:39:41 PM by smoak »

Offline Jason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1260
  • CFI/CFII
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #103 on: February 13, 2009, 05:34:44 PM »
"Series of severe pitch and roll 'excursions' occurred within seconds of flaps being extended"

Having no experience is icing conditions like this, only having read about it, could this be the airflow/aerodynamic change being that off when the flaps 15 is engaged?  Like an "uncommanded pitch down of the nose or other severe control problems during flaps extension."

WOW THAT VIDEO ABOVE MIGHT BE SPOT ON!

Also, sure sounds a lot like the de-ice system was inop? 

The test flight data recorded and presented in the video above certainly points to many of the symptoms that have been speculated by industry experts and the facts released by the NTSB involving this case.

Offline smoak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #104 on: February 13, 2009, 05:40:22 PM »
It sure does Jason.  Thank you so much for posting. 

Also, that recovery sure is different than the wing stall.  If you are thinking about it you are in the ground already.  Scary.  And, those force pressures could be too much for the crew. 

Offline smoak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #105 on: February 13, 2009, 05:48:27 PM »
Sorry one more folks:

That warning at 21:40 of the video is just about as eerie as it gets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That could be this accident for sure.

Offline laylow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #106 on: February 13, 2009, 05:51:19 PM »
I'm watching the video as well.  Obviously until the NTSB releases their report we won't know, but it sure sounds like NASA was talking about 3407 in that video.

Offline dska22

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #107 on: February 13, 2009, 05:56:47 PM »
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29173163/

haha.  This map is completely wrong:  It shows the plane crashing in Lancaster, NY which is about 5 miles south of Clarence Center.  They used Flight Tracker's path and assumed the last data point for 3407 is where it crashed.  In fact, 3407 continued North then turned left to become established on the localizer for 23.  THEN, the plane crashed.  The media is aggravating me way too much today.

kea001

  • Guest
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #108 on: February 13, 2009, 06:13:20 PM »
..., but it sure sounds like NASA was talking about 3407 in that video.

Well I'm not convinced. Rime ice problem, probably, but specifically tailplane icing stall?
I see the severe pitch but what accounts for the severe rolling?

Having said that, the discussion on

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/36891-colgan-q400-crash-outside-buf-22.html

is interesting, to say the least.

>>>
Quote:
Originally Posted by undflyboy06 
Slow speed, configured, inclement weather......does anyone think that it might be a tail stall? I know that I shouldn't guess, but for some reason my gut is telling me of a possible tail stall scenario.
Thinking the same. A tail stall is almost unrecoverable, especially at such low altitudes. Plus, we don't train well how to recover from such. Completely opposite to a wing stall.<<<<

>>>
I would like to add my experience flying the 400 in ice. I have experienced MANY different icing conditions in this type of A/C including "roll upset" due SEVERE icing while in a climb to altitude. I do not believe that the icing reported in the pireps would have caused this aircraft to come down on approach. Moderate clear ice in freezing rain on approach and amazingly this airplane still handles normally (aside from the shotgun blast noise of ice coming off the props.) I will add though, that it was VERY VERY VERY (can i make it any clearer) EXTREMELY common to have deicing malfunctions on this a/c. I am talking about two to three write up's a trip in the winter. If you heard DING on desent 98% of the time it was a DEICE PRESSUE caution.<<<<




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29173163/
 This map is completely wrong: 

Don't sweat the small stuff.

The map is probably one of 200 tasks that artist had to do to get paid for his/her 8 hours of hard labor today.
plus MSNBC, from my experience, is very adept at holding your attention by YELLING with very little solid information behind it. 
That is their mode of operating.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2009, 06:55:56 PM by kea001 »

Offline maydayfire

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #109 on: February 13, 2009, 07:16:18 PM »

djmodifyd

  • Guest
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #110 on: February 13, 2009, 08:09:28 PM »
UGH
im so sick of the news.  Watching this just proves how bad they are at delivering the news.

half of the transcripts of the ATC communications were wrong...sometimes WAY off.

maybe im just used to hearing the radio's and understanding, but holy CNN, get your stuff right before you broadcast


godspeed to all souls lost

Offline xerox227

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #111 on: February 13, 2009, 08:21:56 PM »
I'm watching the video as well.  Obviously until the NTSB releases their report we won't know, but it sure sounds like NASA was talking about 3407 in that video.
This is really interesting stuff. Sure does sound like the incident at BUF

My prayers to the souls lost on 3407

Offline napper505

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • 75 th anniversary
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #112 on: February 13, 2009, 10:07:07 PM »
Sad day

Dash 8 Q400 has hydraulic powered elevators plus redundant backup. De-ice boots on wing,  V-stab & H-stab.

Lets just wait and see what the Black box(Orange) has to say.  a/c 4200 was equipped with an 88 parameter " FDAU"  all pilot input and corresponding control surface movement and  forces will have been recorded for scrutiny.  I find the Co-pilots last transmission Chilling compared to the previous one where she sounds like the A/C is being buffeted.

Scary stuff   :x

Napper505

Were can i find  the the warning tape for the second 400 on approach  to Buffalo



 

Offline smoak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #113 on: February 13, 2009, 10:43:14 PM »
The more I read on other forums and the more I think about this, it really has to be a tailplane icing situation that simply was not recovered from in enough time. 

The link to http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional is insightful and another poster there is really thinking the same thing.  I think Jason here is really onto something with this folks. 

I am just really shaking my head thinking how this happened.  So scary, so possible!

Offline tvccs

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #114 on: February 14, 2009, 01:24:36 AM »
As a long-time member of the media...and one who has been saddened for years by the dumbing-down of our business, especially in the news end, I wanted to thank the folks on this forum for their insights, links and information on this issue. 

It's sad to say that I have learned far more from following the conversations and related materials here than listening to CNN and Fox News put together, which is a very sad commentary on the state of the news business in the U.S.  A post over on CNN's iReport from a 19-year old teen describes what were likely a couple of reporters from the Buffalo ABC affiliate last night talking a kid into taking his home video camera into the crash scene at close range as their primary interest, which ended up getting him arrested and directly exposed to that toxic inferno.  Getting an "exclusive" is what matters, rather than getting it right, and CNN in particular this morning was just horrible in the accuracy and detail of their reporting and entire approach, down to being concerned with getting a "tease" in for what they were about to report...as if the tease was either needed, or important.

I want to thank the folks here for their many insights and information...I'm not a pilot but learned about ATC over the years due to being involved in tower construction proposals, and had the opportunity to work with a very fine FAA consultant and former controller who could answer nearly any question immediately and with depth.  When I fly United, etc., I listen to the ATC channel when available the entire flight. 

I heard a lawyer many years ago, who had had his own media problems, say "You can believe everything you read in the newspaper (or hear on TV) expect those stories of which you have first-hand knowledge."

I have taken that credo to heart as a challenge ever since in my own work...I only wish there was some tiny semblance of same left in our business as a whole.  The Cronkites, Huntleys, Murrows, McNeills, Jennings and Rathers of the world are ashamed at what passes for credible reporting in the present day, where TV should be at its very best. 

Keep up the good work here...in times like these, forums like this take on ever greater importance. 
« Last Edit: February 14, 2009, 01:49:46 AM by tvccs »

Offline claver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #115 on: February 14, 2009, 04:08:07 AM »
Look at the weather history for KBUF. Check out the winds aloft, temps and rainfall rates. Look a the WX radar history. Look at the coldfront passing over KBUF. Once you look at the weather and the windshear and icing you realize that this airport should have been closed until the front had passed. Conditions at the airport even if acceptable are deceptive since you must fly through the ice and wind shears to get there. Every plane that went though this was also taking on unacceptable risk. Another case of get-there-itis.

Offline KSYR-pjr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #116 on: February 14, 2009, 09:31:01 AM »
Once you look at the weather and the windshear and icing you realize that this airport should have been closed until the front had passed. Conditions at the airport even if acceptable are deceptive since you must fly through the ice and wind shears to get there. Every plane that went though this was also taking on unacceptable risk. Another case of get-there-itis.

Huh?  From those comments I'll take it you are neither an experienced nor a professional pilot and have no idea of the weather these aircraft fly through on a daily basis here in the Northeast US throughout the six months that make up icing season.   Intelligence and logic suggest waiting until the final NTSB conclusion comes out before passing critical judgment publicly rather than standing on one's  soapbox spewing ignorance as the wreckage still smolders.

Do you know what asymmetrical flaps deployment is?  Could you personally vouch for the operating health of the anti-ice/deice system of that aircraft?  Do you know for certain that crew responded in a timely and appropriate manner to the threat of the building ice well before it became critical?  I am betting a paycheck that you could not answer in the affirmative to at least two of those three questions so I perceive your comments here as nothing more than an emotional, knee jerk response so typical of the ill-informed.


Offline flygirltammy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #117 on: February 14, 2009, 09:39:31 AM »
All of the discussion on tailplane stall in icing conditions made me think of this NASA research presentation:

Definitely worth watching.

My sincerest condolences go out to the family and friends of the victims involved in this tragic accident.

Best,
Jason

I haven't posted anything on this yet, so 1st I would like to express my condolences for every single soul on board Flight 3407 and their families. It's always very disturbing and saddening when fellow "brothers and sisters in arms" have had their last flight. It's almost like losing a friend. After listening to the audio, I just had to sit quietly and think for a while.

That NASA video does seem to hit this possible cause right on. I can honestly say that not once in all of my training was this particular icing condition even off-handedly mentioned. That is not good. I want to try to learn all I can about this. Thanks for the link.

Offline GuessWho08

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #118 on: February 14, 2009, 09:45:01 AM »
My Gut feeling keeps me thinking it very well could have been a Tail stall,  At the low Altitude,  Possibly Icing enhanced this problem (Who's to say the De-Ice / Boots were or were not operational).  And please correct me if I'm wrong but at that approximate 5mile marker would they not have been starting to get into there landing configuration?  As Stated above, Possibly asymmetrical flaps...     I really think all of the above played a roll in this accident.



-added:  Just watched that NASA Video myself, Scary how it does seem to hit this one on the nose as a possible explanation. 
« Last Edit: February 14, 2009, 10:15:33 AM by GuessWho08 »

Offline cessna157

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
    • facebook
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #119 on: February 14, 2009, 10:11:18 AM »
Look at the weather history for KBUF. Check out the winds aloft, temps and rainfall rates. Look a the WX radar history. Look at the coldfront passing over KBUF. Once you look at the weather and the windshear and icing you realize that this airport should have been closed until the front had passed. Conditions at the airport even if acceptable are deceptive since you must fly through the ice and wind shears to get there. Every plane that went though this was also taking on unacceptable risk. Another case of get-there-itis.

Is that supposed to be a joke?  Airports don't close for weather.  Occasionally an airport will close after a large snowstorm so trucks may clear the runways without interruption.  Or a hurricane may force the evacuation of all facilities. 

What are your credentials to say that "Every plane that went though this was also taking on unacceptable risk"?  It is the crew's discretion as to what weather they may fly in to.  Part 121 aircraft are certified into known icing.  My aircraft has excellent ice shedding capibilities.  We wouldn't even think twice before flying into this weather.  Who are you to say that EVERY aircraft of all types should have crashed after flying here?  It has been shown that deice boots are not as effective as bleed air fed hot wings.

I'd like to think that all of the training that I have gone through, from my first private pilot flight, all the way up to my recurrent sims that I have to go through every year, have prepared me for what is out there.  And it is my choice as to whether I deem it safe to fly through.  Just because there is windshear reported (which I don't believe there was in this case) doesn't mean an aircraft shouldn't fly through it.  We take appropriate steps to protect ourselves from it, whether it be to carry 10 extra knots, or to put the ignition on in the engines.

These guys were professional pilots flying a new, very advanced aircraft.  Lets not jump to any conclusions as to what happened, from pilot error, to aircraft system failure, to abnormally high ice rates.  Let the NTSB do their job, and please don't help.

Offline cessna157

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
    • facebook
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #120 on: February 14, 2009, 10:32:08 AM »
I refuse to believe that this crew did not have the boots turned on at this time. 
Let's take in the facts:
The Q400 is a new aircraft with vairous protection systems.  It is not some 1970s diesel burning puddle jumper.  That being the case, there are many levels of protection in anti-ice systems.  While I am not familiar with this specific model, I do fly aircraft from this manufacturer, and therefore some basic systems will be similiar. 

To prevent any speculation at all, let me use my aircraft as an example (which is of the same age and manufacturer as the Q400).  Anytime the engines are running and everything is set for flight, if I were to turn the left cowl anti-ce on (heats the leading edge of the engine cowl to prevent ice from forming and breaking off into the fan blades, we'll just call it cowl), I get a green advisory message that says "L COWL ANTIICE ON."  If I were to then turn on the other engine's cowl, the system recognizes that fact and the previous message changes to "COWL ANTIICE ON".  If I were to then turn the wing anti ice on (heats the leading edge of the wing, we'll just call it wing), the previous message would then be replaced with "WING/COWL ANTIICE ON".  These are all green messages, green meaning good.  If, with all of this icing equipment on, we were to fly into icing conditions, and the ice detectors on the sides of the aircraft detect an ice buildup, another geen advisory message pops up: "ICE".  That is all that happens.

Now let's take an example of what happens if we don't have everything on.  If, for example, we have the cowls on but not the wings (as would be the case when flying into an expected icing area), and the ice detectors find ice, the following things happen:
1) We get an aural "ding" in our headsets and over the speakers
2) The master caution lights start flashing brightly in our face
3) A yellow caution message appears on the EICAS that says "ICE"
4) A yellow light appears on the overhead panel next to the antiice switches.

Pretty hard to ignore, right?  If we were to then turn on all of the anti ice (wings and cowls), all of the yellow lights go out, the caution message goes away, and the green "ICE" advisory message comes on.

Sounds simple?  Not really.  Let's briefly examine everything that just happened.  This is to prevent any speculation that there was a system failure that the crew wouldn't know about.

Here is a partial list of all systems/parts that just came into play:
Ice detectors
PRSOVs (modulate bleed air from the engines)
Left and Right cowl anti ice valves
Left and Right wing anti ice valves
Wing overheat detection
Cowl overheat detection
Wing low pressure detection
Cowl low pressure detection
Bleed air duct leak detection
Wing duct leak detection

Have I made my point yet?  No, that's not all of the systems/peice that just came into play.  There's a lot more that just happened, al behind the scenes.  The point I'm tyring to get acrossed is if just one of any of these systems and valves and sensors, etc, were to fail, the crew would know about it.  I'd get a "ding" or a "ding ding ding, ANTI ICE DUCT" or "ding ding ding, BLEED AIR DUCT" aural warning plus the EICAS would show exactly what was broke.  Then I'd run the QRH procedure fixing the problem, or finding out how we were then limited.

Sorry for rambling.  Let's not speculate as to what happened.  These pilots were professionals.  They weren't just out flying around in ice willy-nilly without a care in the world not knowing what they were doing.

Offline KSYR-pjr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #121 on: February 14, 2009, 11:13:00 AM »
Cessna, thanks for the explanation.  Strictly for discussion purposes, one question I have about the cockpit voice recording bullet point relating to the crew's discussion of the ice buildup is this: 

From the media reports of the NTSB CVR findings there was mention by the crew of ice buildup on the windshield (and airframe) of the aircraft.  I would assume that this aircraft had heated windshields as its defense against ice build-up.   Thus, would there still be a noticeable build-up of ice somewhere on the windshield with the heated anti-ice system on? 

Offline cessna157

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
    • facebook
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #122 on: February 14, 2009, 11:22:43 AM »
Excellent question.  Thats something that I asked when I learned to fly the jet.  "How do we know how much icing we're getting if we never let any build up".

Our windshields and side windows 3 panes of glass and are heated by an internal/invisible element.  The windows actually get quite warm to the touch in flight.  But just ahead of the windows are the windshield wipers.  When they are parked in their normal position, the are on the center post between the windshields, vertical and parallel to the airflow.  Ice usually builds up on these pretty fast.  That is our primary means of telling how much ice there is.  Another way is to look at the leading edge of the winglets(that is only possible on the 100/200 and 700 series, the -900 is too long to really see the wings at all).  Only once did I see ice actually form on the heated windshield.  When that happens, we turn the windshields to their high setting (usually they're kept on low).  When ice builds up on the windshields, that is usually a moderate or greater icing encounter.  It is not necessarily dangerous, but it does indicate a very heavy icing potential.

Offline Hollis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 403
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #123 on: February 14, 2009, 12:02:09 PM »
One more comment. This is an email I just rec'd from a retired engineering test pilot:
...
That was a tragic aircraft accident last night in Buffalo.
Icing,I am sure was the major cause factor especially the freezing rain element.
I suspect that as they were approaching the outer marker beacon they were slowing down and configuring the aircraft for landing by lowering the landing gear and extending the flaps.
I suspect that not only were they getting too slow while they were exercising the inflatable wing leading-edge  de-ice boots,the horizontal tail stalled as the flaps were going down resulting in a rapid nose down pitching moment.
Normal icing they could have handled with the de-ice system,however,when one has runback ice forming behind the de-ice boots from the freezing rain that is a more serious situation.
As the flaps extend the airflow aft of the wings creates a greater downwash(angle of attack) on the horizontal tail that may stall if the tail surface is contaminated with ice.
That type high wing aircraft with the high T-tail is similar to the smaller Canadian Twin Otter aircraft that was prone to pitch down rapidly in icing when the flaps were lowered and many accidents occurred.  Otter pilots was later instructed to only use partial flaps while in icing conditions and to use faster airspeeds for approaches.  Much training was done using the Otter experience for pilots expected to operate in adverse wx parts of the country.  Also pilots were taught to rapidly undo any configuration changes that gave  unexpected results.
The NTSB will come out with more findings as the tapes are reviewed further.  My initial conclusion is "Tail stall"
Take care.
...

Offline KSYR-pjr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
Re: Continental (Colgan)-3407 -8 Crash in Buffalo
« Reply #124 on: February 14, 2009, 12:10:47 PM »
As the flaps extend the airflow aft of the wings creates a greater downwash(angle of attack) on the horizontal tail that may stall if the tail surface is contaminated with ice.

I have a hard time envisioning  how the disturbed air from lowered flaps would affect the horizontal stab of this particular aircraft, given how much higher the horizontal stab is above the main wings.  I am not an engineer so clearly I must be missing something but it seems to me that the horizontal stab is well above the downwash of the main wings, flaps or no flaps.  Explanations welcome.