Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 54

Thread: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

  1. #16
    Senior Member Delta777LR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,844

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    N200WQ? I got a shot of it on the NJ Airtrain coming from the Newark event on Sept.

    Its between N213WQ and a 738 in this shot!!

    Sergio has been a huge Delta Air Lines fan since 1992!!

    Sergio Cardona

    http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos....e=1&display=15

  2. #17
    Senior Member AirtrafficController's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Middle Village, NY
    Posts
    2,029

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    May all of victims of Continental Connection Flight 3407 R.I.P. The pictures of the crash scene really look bad.
    Aspires to become an Air Traffic Controller at Kennedy Tower.
    http://web01.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=31094

  3. #18
    Administrator PhilDernerJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    12,470

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    I'm hearing that it might be either due to ice, or that the pilots were asked to perform an s-turn, made a sharp bank, and didn't correct with any rudder, making the nose drop and dive once lift was lost. :(

    Very sad time.
    Email me anytime at [email protected].

  4. #19
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Dix Hills, NY
    Posts
    669

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    What a tragedy! Regardless of the cause, our condolences thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families and friends, and the Colgan/Continental family as well.
    It's the fares, stupid

  5. #20
    Senior Member Delta777LR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,844

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    My prayers go out to the families of the victums aboard the flight. God be with them RIP
    Sergio has been a huge Delta Air Lines fan since 1992!!

    Sergio Cardona

    http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos....e=1&display=15

  6. #21
    Moderator Matt Molnar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    9,302

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Seems the death toll has risen to 50. There was an off-duty crewmember on board who had not previously been counted.
    Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem.
    All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get them under control.
    I trust you are not in too much distress. —Captain Eric Moody, British Airways Flight 9

  7. #22
    Senior Member Delta777LR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,844

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Quote Originally Posted by GothamSpotter
    Seems the death toll has risen to 50. There was an off-duty crewmember on board who had not previously been counted.
    True!,, but they also did counted a man on ground that also got killed.. Now im hearing more that the possible cause of the crash was icing, as Phil stated, it has been said that there was alot of icing happening at the time. It was snowing and it was also moisty, but the investigation is still on. I will keep up to whats happening.
    Sergio has been a huge Delta Air Lines fan since 1992!!

    Sergio Cardona

    http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos....e=1&display=15

  8. #23
    Senior Member cancidas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    traffic two o'clock two miles southbound flight of four C-130s
    Posts
    6,088

    Re: Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Quote Originally Posted by njgtr82
    I just saw this... wow, very eerie feeling. I talked to them when they departed EWR tonight
    it's a worse feeling when you know the dispatcher and some of the crew that were onboard the flight. this sucks! i even know someone who was on the very same flight the day before doing her fam rides on the Q. it's a very bad day within the colgan family, and i for one am getting a little anxious about the amount of close calls lately.
    it is mathematically impossible for either hummingbirds, or helicopters to fly. fortunately, neither are aware of this.

  9. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brick, NJ
    Posts
    1,876

    Re: Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Quote Originally Posted by cancidas
    Quote Originally Posted by njgtr82
    I just saw this... wow, very eerie feeling. I talked to them when they departed EWR tonight
    it's a worse feeling when you know the dispatcher and some of the crew that were onboard the flight. this sucks! i even know someone who was on the very same flight the day before doing her fam rides on the Q. it's a very bad day within the colgan family, and i for one am getting a little anxious about the amount of close calls lately.
    Sorry to hear that buddy. Here's a video on tailplane icing from Nasa I found very interesting http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0735779946

  10. #25
    Administrator PhilDernerJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    12,470

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    I understand the Q400 to be very nmodern in terms of anti-ice. Does anyone have detailed info about the aircraft?
    Email me anytime at [email protected].

  11. #26
    Senior Member HPNPilot1200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    222

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil D.
    I understand the Q400 to be very nmodern in terms of anti-ice. Does anyone have detailed info about the aircraft?
    From a friend who flies the Q400 for Colgan. Note that this is his personal opinion, and not in any way a statement by or onbehalf of Colgan Air, Continental, or any other group/organization.

    A lot of people have asked about the ice detection/protection systems on the Q. This is a great ice handling plane. I've seen a little over an inch on the unprotected surfaces with no detriment to speed or controllability. Lightly loaded as it was, the Q has an incredible amount of extra power. Below 8,000feet we cruise at 245KIAS at only 44-47% torque. Where they were on the approach, they were between 150-180 kts at about 25-33% torque. They would have had flaps 5 and gear down as they approached the marker.

    According to the NTSB, the ice system was selected on and picking up ice, so their ref speeds would have been quite high. As they approached the marker (KLUMP), they would have called for "Flaps 15, before landing checklist." Below 171kts, the non-flying pilot (Bekki) would have moved the flaps through 10 degrees to the 15 degree mark. The Q tends to balloon a lot when flaps are extended, as the flaps on this plane are very large. According to the NTSB, this is where things started to go wrong.

    The CVR recorded 2 hours worth of data, to include the crew brief of the ILS approach, weather, and discussion of significant ice build up on windshield and wings. They discussed airframe deice and verified as on. The flight director shows severe pitch and roll after the flaps went to 15. The crew attempted to raise gear and flaps just before the end of the recording.

    The Q has bleed air supplied pneumatic boots on the wing leading edges, engine inlets, verticle, and horizontal stabs. It also has electric boots on the props. The pneumatic boots operate in six cycles of six second inflations, followed by either 44 seconds or 144 seconds of dwell time between cycles (fast vs. slow mode). The boots have to be turned on manually, but then will continue to operate on their own until the pilot shuts them off. There is also an option for manually operating one of the six boot segments individually, though that is rarely used. The heat for all three pitot tubes is on at all times from the after-start to the after-landing checklists. The front windows are heated electrically, as is the CA's side window. We also have defrost blowers that feed off the cockpit heat system through piccalo tubes at the base of all the windows.

    As far as detecting ice: we can see about 1/4 of the prop and outboard along the wing leading edge from there. There is a very bright inspection light mounted in the outboard side of the engine nacelle that shines along the wing leading edge. The tail is not visible from the flight deck. There is an "ice detection probe" mounted on the windshield wiper. The wipers are stowed in a horizontal position, so the probe (a 1 inch tall, solid plastic cylendar mounted to the top of the wipers) sticks up just below the pilots' field of view. There is a light mounted to the top of the glareshield that shines through the windscreen to illuminate the probe. Each pilot has a push button switch next to their knee to turn the light on. Ice usually accretes here before anywhere else.

    There is also an electronic ice detection system. There is a 4-5 inch long, 1.5inch diameter metal probe sticking out of both sides of the fuselage just below the pitot tubes. They vibrate at approx 40,000hz any time AC power is applied to the aircraft. When ice accretes on these probes, their vibration is slowed, and small heaters in the probe are automatically turned on. Once the vibrators return to normal the heat is turned off. If the vibration slows again, the system displays a yellow [ICE DETECTED] message on the Engine Displace (center of our five screens). Memory items when this is displayed are to turn the airframe deice system on, windshields to warmup (then on), and Ref Speeds to Increase (raises the calculated stall speed for the horn/pusher/shaker by 20kts - there is no stall vane/stall probe on the Q, it's all done by the computer). The [ICE DETECTED] message remains displayed until the probes no longer detect ice or the weight on wheels switch is made. The computer handles the rest.

    If this was, indeed a tail stall, it would have been very difficul to detect. The Q's elevator is purly hydraulic with an artificial feel system for the control column. Control forces are normally heavier than most airplanes if you're more than very slightly out of trim. They likely wouldn't have had much if any tactile warning of building ice or an impending stall with the nature of the hydraulics on the elevator. I think it would have probably presented like an uncomanded stick pusher activation.
    Jason
    CFI/CFII
    Part 135 Dispatch

  12. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    3,117

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Some random thoughts about the terrible tragedy near BUF last night.

    Most importantly my heart goes out to the family and friends of those lost, and may the victims RIP. I also feel for everyone in the CO and Colgan family, and the BUF area folks.

    Not to be an armchair NTSB investigator but I believe strongly when all the facts are known, the lowering of flaps and gear during significant icing caused severe flight control changes that could not be overcome in the altitude remaining. It sounds like the flaps and gear where being retracted at time of impact, this might have alowed the crew to regain control if they just had more altitude. I believe the crew did nothing wrong, a crew with the same number of hours as the US 1549 crew would have had the same outcome, there was just not enough time to recover. Keep in mind that not only where they only at 2300 feet, but the field elevation is 728 feet so they where really only about 1500-1600 feet above the ground.

    I find it ironic that:
    a) the aircraft was lost only a few hundred miles from where it was built.
    b) the crash happened about 90 mins before Friday the 13th.
    c) because of the upcoming holiday weekend so many flights where completely full last night but this one had thankfully 30 empty seats. Had it been going BUF-EWR instead or at the other end of the weekend I am almost sure there would have been 30 more victims, as the aircraft has a capacity of 74. A very small bright spot but something somewhat positive IMO.
    d) right before I went home last night I was delayed leaving the tower do to an (uneventful) emergency landing of a Piedmont Dash 8 from SYR. It landed safetly in LGA about 40 mins before the tragedy in BUF, with 6 fire trucks waiting along the runway. But it landed so slow it exited 31 several thousand feet before where the trucks where waiting for it to roll out, almost humorusly.

    For those who remember the AA Eagle ATR-72 crash at Roselawn, Indiana back in 1994 Eagle ended up removing the ATR's from the market and sent them south to be based at SJU. Depending on the outcome and publicity CO recieves from this accident you might at somepoint see (maybe next winter) CO move the Q-400's south to IAH and bring more Expressjet flying back to EWR.

    I also wonder (depending on how much negative public reaction there is) if Horizon ends up regretting going to an ALL Q-400 fleet, as they also serve many markets with significant winter weather.

    HPNPilot1200 thanks for sharing your friends blog, it was very informative.


    Respectfully,

    LGA777

  13. #28
    Administrator PhilDernerJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    12,470

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    I understood that one of the big advantages of the Q400 were its ability to act as an ATR replacement in the north. It's a great shame this may end up being blamed on icing as well.

    I recall FlyBe was having trouble with their Q400s a while back, and the type received a lot of bad publicity after like 3 crashes in as many weeks, right? What was the cause of those and why was it seemingly only limited to Q400s?
    Email me anytime at [email protected].

  14. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brick, NJ
    Posts
    1,876

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil D.
    I recall FlyBe was having trouble with their Q400s a while back, and the type received a lot of bad publicity after like 3 crashes in as many weeks, right? What was the cause of those and why was it seemingly only limited to Q400s?
    Phil that was SAS and they had the landing gear collapse. Those were early models of the Q400 and these they say had the problem fixed.

  15. #30
    Senior Member cancidas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    traffic two o'clock two miles southbound flight of four C-130s
    Posts
    6,088

    Re: Continental/Colgan DHC-8 crash, Newark-Buffalo.

    Quote Originally Posted by njgtr82
    Phil that was SAS and they had the landing gear collapse. Those were early models of the Q400 and these they say had the problem fixed.
    if memory serves it was partly a defect in the structure of the landing gear and partly maintenence procedures. then again, we all know how reliable my memory can be.
    it is mathematically impossible for either hummingbirds, or helicopters to fly. fortunately, neither are aware of this.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •