Plane with 48 aboard crashes into house in suburban Buffalo

Thanks, I'm not familiar with airline SOP's.

I'm guessing that they can determine if there was engine inlet icing based on the power demand signal sent to the FADEC or throttle position and actual torque output - but I haven't heard that brought up as a possibility...

from the Buffalo evening news
By Jerry Zremski
News Washington Bureau Chief
WASHINGTON — The crew of Continental Connection Flight 3407 violated federal regulations banning extraneous conversation or activities on approach to landing, prompting the airline that managed the doomed flight to later warn pilots against idle chatter and other inappropriate actions in the cockpit.

Sources with knowledge of the National Transportation Safety Board investigation said the probe will show that the pilot, Capt. Marvin D. Renslow, and co-pilot, Rebecca Lynn Shaw, violated federal rules that require a "sterile cockpit" when a plane is flying below 10,000 feet. Renslow piloted the plane that crashed in Clarence on Feb. 12, killing 50.

And about two weeks after the crash, Colgan Air — the Continental subcontractor that ran the doomed flight — sent its air crews a memo warning them against extraneous conversation and other inappropriate activities such as eating when flying below 10,000 feet, sources told The Buffalo News.

The revelation of the inappropriate conversation or activities of the Flight 3407 crew, which is expected to be detailed when the safety board begins three days of hearings on the crash on Tuesday, is part of an increasing focus on Renslow as the investigation continues.

Renslow, 47, failed three Federal Aviation Administration proficiency checks before joining Colgan in 2005, sources confirmed this morning.

While pilots often fail those tests once or twice, "it is fairly uncommon to fail three," said a source with knowledge of the safety board investigation of the crash. "That's a little high. But then, why did they hire him?"

Colgan's spokesman told The Wall Street Journal, which first reported that Renslow failed those tests, that the company believes Renslow, a former small business owner who changed careers to become a pilot, did not disclose those failed tests when he applied for a job.

Renslow also failed in his first attempt to qualify as a co-pilot on the Beech 1900 aircraft, and also had to try twice on tests to upgrade to captain on the Saab 340 turboprop.

After Flight 3407's stall warning system activated, Renslow pulled down on the plane's yoke — which is just the opposite of what he should have done, several aviation sources have said.

The NTSB hearings are expected to focus on why Renslow did that. And sources close to the investigation said the hearings are likely to point fingers not just at Renslow's abilities as a pilot, but also Colgan's training program.

The plane that crashed, the Bombardier Dash 8 Q400, includes an unusual feature that increases the speed at which the plane's stall warning system will activate when flying in icing conditions.

Colgan never provided pilots with any instruction in that unusual feature until the autumn before the crash, sources said.

In addition, Colgan's training program does not include simulator training into how pilots should react when the stall warning system activates, sources said.

Fatigue also may have played a role in the crash.

Sources told The Buffalo News that Renslow had been working an overnight shift only weeks before switching to the evening schedule that he was on the night the plane crashed.

As for the co-pilot, Shaw, the Feb. 12 flight came the evening after she had flown a red-eye flight to Newark from her home in Seattle, sources told The Buffalo News. Shaw had been with Colgan a little over a year.

The top two training officials at Colgan Air resigned in recent weeks.

Those officials, Darrell Mitchell and Ed Yarid, left the airline voluntarily, and their departures were unrelated to the crash, said Joe Williams, a spokesman for Colgan's parent, Pinnacle Airlines.

Mitchell is scheduled to testify at the safety board hearings.

Sources told The Buffalo News that Renslow had been working an overnight shift only weeks before switching to the evening schedule that he was on the night the plane crashed.

Click to expand...

Dunno how "weeks" would make a difference. You really only need a day or two to adjust from a night-schedule to a day-schedule, and that's if you're doing a 12-hour flip. If you're just going backwards one shift, there's really no lag to speak of. A matter of weeks is more than enough time for him to get used to that shift.

Their sources are idiots...

After Flight 3407's stall warning system activated, Renslow pulled down on the plane's yoke — which is just the opposite of what he should have done, several aviation sources have said.

Click to expand...

Every aircraft that I have ever flown, the control column/yoke moves forward/back, and side to side. Not up/down, so where do they get this info from?
As to what he should have done, that depends on whether the main wing or tailplane was stalled (if it was icing as it seems to be suspected). Push forward if the wing is stalled, pull back if the tailplane is stalled.
avweb.com with NASA video clip

In addition, Colgan's training program does not include simulator training into how pilots should react when the stall warning system activates, sources said.

Click to expand...

Thats part of any Aviation Authority check-ride, no matter what country you're in. If he passed a proficiency check, he would have shown competence in his reactions.
If it wasn't in their procedures for compentency checks, thenteh FAA needs to shoulder soem of the responsibility, as from my understanding, they have to approve all procedures manuals.



Stupid, over-hyped, sensationalist bullsh!t mainstream media....

Thanks! Glad to see I'm not the only one left scratching my noggin over this one. Seemed to be alot of grasping at straws and shooting scapegoats, if you ask me.

gumbyk said:

Their sources are idiots...


Every aircraft that I have ever flown, the control column/yoke moves forward/back, and side to side. Not up/down, so where do they get this info from?
As to what he should have done, that depends on whether the main wing or tailplane was stalled (if it was icing as it seems to be suspected). Push forward if the wing is stalled, pull back if the tailplane is stalled.


Thats part of any Aviation Authority check-ride, no matter what country you're in. If he passed a proficiency check, he would have shown competence in his reactions.
If it wasn't in their procedures for compentency checks, thenteh FAA needs to shoulder soem of the responsibility, as from my understanding, they have to approve all procedures manuals.



Stupid, over-hyped, sensationalist bullsh!t mainstream media....

Click to expand...

Your a pilot I stand in awe.
here is a version that may meet with your approval
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/632585

RabidAlien said:

Thanks! Glad to see I'm not the only one left scratching my noggin over this one. Seemed to be alot of grasping at straws and shooting scapegoats, if you ask me.

Click to expand...

seems pretty clear if the story is true and I've heard from people familiar with event it wasn't the aircraft so that doesn't leave alot of other choices
"Colgan may not have known about the previous check ride failures because of a loophole in FAA requirements about what pilots must tell prospective employers, sources said."


"The sources, who asked not to be named because the National Transportation Safety Board hasn't released the results of its investigation, told The Associated Press that the pilot training provided by the airline – Manassas, Va.-based Colgan – for the Dash 8-Q400 Bombardier, a twin-engine turboprop, didn't include a demonstration or simulation of the stick-pusher system.

The stick-pusher automatically kicks in when a plane is about to stall, pointing the aircraft's nose down into a dive so it can pick up enough speed to allow the pilot to guide it to a recovery.

However, when Flight 3407's stick-pusher kicked in on approach to Buffalo Niagara International Airport the night of Feb. 12, the pilot – Capt. Marvin Renslow – pulled back on the plane's control column, apparently trying to bring the aircraft out of the sudden dive by bringing the aircraft's nose up. Pushing forward to gain speed is the proper procedure.
The activation of a stick pusher can be a jarring experience for any pilot, especially if the pilot has never experienced it before, sources said.

Flight 3407 experienced an aerodynamic stall"

Your a pilot I stand in awe.
here is a version that may meet with your approval

Click to expand...

WTF??

Oh well.


I guess everyone has ruled out the possibility that the TAILPLANE had ice accumulation and stalled? If the stick-pusher checked forward(nose pitch down) and stalled the tailplane(Nose pitch up), there wasn't much he could do about it.

Gents, first rule of armchair accident/incident investigators is to kick back and wait for the facts.

Exactly,
Facts, not media musings.

gumbyk said:

WTF??

Oh well.


I guess everyone has ruled out the possibility that the TAILPLANE had ice accumulation and stalled? If the stick-pusher checked forward(nose pitch down) and stalled the tailplane(Nose pitch up), there wasn't much he could do about it.

Click to expand...

read all the posts rather then the last and you might learn a bit rather then jump to conclusions. I have been following this thing because of its proximity , at the beginning if you had read all the posts. I suggested that because of the weather it might be icing.
Now I know as a pilot that you find it hard to believe that all pilots might not walk on water. I don't guess in air incidents . I'll wager large amounts of money I've been involved in more then yourself.

Sorry, PB, but one thing that really annoys me is the way that the mainstream media very rarely tries to get any correct terminology/research intheir reporting of aviation accidents/incidents. I have been involved in a number of incidents where the media latched on to one minor aspect, and attributed it as a "cause".

Now, as for pilots walking on water, well, I have spent more time working in the maintenance/engineering aspect of aviation than flying, so there's no risk of me thinking that. But, equally, I don't like it when the pilot is damned before the report comes out.

gumbyk said:

Sorry, PB, but one thing that really annoys me is the way that the mainstream media very rarely tries to get any correct terminology/research intheir reporting of aviation accidents/incidents. I have been involved in a number of incidents where the media latched on to one minor aspect, and attributed it as a "cause".

Now, as for pilots walking on water, well, I have spent more time working in the maintenance/engineering aspect of aviation than flying, so there's no risk of me thinking that. But, equally, I don't like it when the pilot is damned before the report comes out.

Click to expand...

well here you go ,todays released stuff from the NTSB
http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/668993.html
all the relevant docs in PDF including all the graphs from the data recorder from the NTSB , one thing that perked my interest was the fact the co pilot had never encountered icing previously .

Easy guys... let's not make this something personal.