DeadHead

The media is the media, I'm never surprised by their ignorance and arrogance.

The real insensitive idiots are the pilots who decide to call in and try to capitalize on some sick 15 minutes of fame by speculating about the crash.

I'm not referring to the experienced pilots who have been contacted by the media, but rather the jerks who decide to call in to recite lines from their Jeppsen manuals.

fullflank

I love how the and the NTSB spend months trying to come up with the decisions that the crew had seconds to make. And then the media has the nerve to blame this on experience? are you kidding?

KC10 FATboy

I watched the NTSB's briefing and here are my thoughts. Flame away if you think I am off base.

I think the problem the NTSB has is that they must find out what category of icing 3407 flew through, were the de/anti-icing systems working properly, and whether there is a phenomenon that makes this aircraft more susceptible to icing (perhaps flying in moderate icing is a big problem).

While thinking about what category of icing 3407 perhaps flew into, I stopped and asked myself, do I know what constitutes the different categories of icing??? Remarkably, I became honest with myself and said, "no I don't."

To me, icing was ...

Trace - you barely notice it, but its disippates right away from melting or sublimation (no systems required)
Light - you notice the build up, turn on the ice systems, and the aircraft sheds the ice almst immediately
Moderate - the ice definitely gets your attention, the ice systems work, but it takes much longer
Severe - the ice rate of buildup scares you, the ice systems seem to have no effect, and you must take immediate action (getting yourself out of icing)

Well, I checked my companies OpSpecs, and this is what I learned ...

Trace - Ice is perceptible, rate of accumulation is slightly greater than rate of sublimation
Light - rate of accumulation may create a problem if the flight is flown more than one hour in this condition
Modertate - rate of accumulation is such that even short encounters become potentially hazardous
Severe - rate of accumulation is such that de/anti-ice equipment fails to reduce or control the hazard. Immediate diversion or level change is required.

So where am I going with this? I don't know if my company's definitions are out of whack with those generally accepted by the FAA and the manufacturer's, but, everything greater than trace *can* cause problems (something I didn't know about until now). I never would have thought twice about flying into an area of moderate icing, but after reading the definition, the words potentially hazardous are alarming as I thought my aircraft would be fine to fly into moderate.

What I fail to realize is, the category of icing doesn't just depend on the amount you are seeing or accumulating, it also depends on how well your aircraft is getting rid of the ice. In other words, an aircraft having difficulties shedding light icing over a period of time (1 hour according to my OpSpec) is potentially going to experience a problem.

The takeaway. The more I read, the more I learn that flying in any icing condition is hazardous. Perhaps the Colgan 3407 pilots didn't realize how bad the ice buildup had become. Other aircraft (jets) may have had no difficulty shedding the ice; therefore, they only reported light or occasional moderate. Therefore, leading the Colgan pilots down the path of an unrecoverable situation?

Thoughts? Flames?

-Fatty

Pontius Pilot

Even better: I was watching the news (National) and they had some reporter that is "also a pilot" discussing whether or not turboprops are safe. He says something along the lines of "lets look at the Q400" and he draws attention to the video they are playing - they proceed to roll footage of an ATR-72 while discussing the Q400. Yeah, he's a real expert on the subject of aviation. Can't even tell the difference between the Q and the ATR. He lost all credibility in my eyes in about 0.005 of a second.

EmbraerFlyer

does anyone have a link to the brief..?

plasticpi

I can't find a video or even just a transcript of the briefing. ntsb.gov had an announcement of the briefing earlier, but now has nothing about it. All I've been able to find are news stories that spend more time trying to connect the dots than just telling me what the dots are.

Anyone know where I can get the uninterpreted briefing?

Klako

I recall that Horizon Air’s Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) for the Q400 required if severe icing is encountered, the pilots must disconnect the autopilot and immediately request priority handling from air traffic control to exit the severe icing conditions. Ice accreting on the side windows is just one indication of severe icing conditions and considered to be not "normal" icing for the Q400, that the airplane is flying in icing conditions that it is not certified for and is outside its flight testing envelope.

Seatownflyer

Makes me wish we had a "jumpseat scab list" for members of the media.

BoredwLife

The media again is utterly and completly worthless. I find more and more reasons not be proud of this country anymore. I did email the Associated Press and let them know what their errors were, but I feel that in doing that I just wasted a few minutes my life. They report what they want to report and what pulls the best headlines.

A headline stating that "Pilots did Everything They Could" ends the story and makes them need to find another story.

A headline stating that "Pilots Screwed Up" allows them to keep the headlines juicy(like a soap opera) and strech the story out.

Just sickening.

Dougdrvr

If you need a flight manual to tell you that, you should thow it overboard to lighten the load.