Dear TSB...Please do your job

[Redneck_pilot86]

Where does it say they were VFR?

It says VFR the CADORS, and I don't see any flight plan in flightaware either. Of course that's not definitive.

Isn't YPL uncontrolled? Flight plan not necessary to fly IFR. Been a while since I've been up there and can't remember.

YPL is uncontrolled. That doesn't mean you can depart VFR in 5/8 SM. I expect its a misprint in the CADORs, and not really relevant to the accident.

[swordfish]

Redneck_pilot86" Where does it say they were VFR?

It doesn't have to. If a NTOFP has not been established for the departure runway, for the type, you are leaving VFR. And in this specific case, it would certainly require a visual climb to a certain altitude, BPOC.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Redneck_pilot86" Where does it say they were VFR?

It doesn't have to. If a NTOFP has not been established for the departure runway, for the type, you are leaving VFR. And in this specific case, it would certainly require a visual climb to a certain altitude, BPOC.

Well, it actually was 5/8 of a mile. The "get 'er done" mentality is alive and well in YPL! As a chap who's spent quite a bit of time operating around the area, all I have to say is WTF kind of a "visual climb to a certain altitude" would you be referring to? A VFR departure in 5/8 off a mile requires a special kind of stupid. Go ahead......defend it.
Illya

[Cat Driver]

Illya that little episode does not count in today's commercial flying because it was an antique and should not be used due to not being a real airplane.

If it was not wing contamination then the only other logical explanation would have to be the pilots were not experienced enough to just climb to a safe altitude on instruments in IMC and they tried to remain visual and flew into the ice.

Where they can learn the most they can about problems with aircraft used in large numbers in the commercial passenger-carrying fleet. Antique aircraft used in small numbers to carry cargo aren't going to give the same return.

[Illya Kuryakin]

If it was not wing contamination then the only other logical explanation would have to be the pilots were not experienced enough to just climb to a safe altitude on instruments in IMC and they tried to remain visual and flew into the ice.
e]

That was actually my first choice, before the contaminated wing thing came into play. A very likely scenario, considering the precip and temperatures. Simple to do. Maintain VFR no horzon, and just drive her onto the ice. Yup.
5/8 of a mile kids. Don't care what your ops spec says ya CAN do......sometimes ya CANT!!!
Illya

[Axial Flow]

I usually take his gusto with a grain of salt but I would agree with Illya on this one.

[pelmet]

Message to Kathy Fox and the TSB provided on this link...

viewtopic.php?f=118&t=114708&p=1003201#p1003201

[devils advocate]

I visited the TSB and NTSB websites and their mandates are not the same.

TSB (from their website):

Our mandate is to advance transportation safety in the marine, pipeline, rail and air modes of transportation by
•conducting independent investigations, including public inquiries when necessary, into selected transportation occurrences in order to make findings as to their causes and contributing factors;
•identifying safety deficiencies, as evidenced by transportation occurrences;
•making recommendations designed to eliminate or reduce any such safety deficiencies; and
•reporting publicly on our investigations and on the findings in relation thereto.

The TSB investigates an occurrence when there is a high probability that it can advance transportation safety and reduce risks to persons, property or the environment (see the Occurrence Classification Policy).

NTSB (from their website):

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident the United States and significant accidents in other modes of transportation – railroad, highway, marine and pipeline. The NTSB determines the probable cause of the accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents.

[pdw]

Both of these organizations do their work very well in determining that a synopsis gets represented accurately in an end report, esp when you look at the many considerations and due diligence that have to come together in coming up with a final narrative. The more of them we read, the more this comes to light.

[pelmet]

I visited the TSB and NTSB websites and their mandates are not the same.

TSB (from their website):

Our mandate is to advance transportation safety in the marine, pipeline, rail and air modes of transportation by
•conducting independent investigations, including public inquiries when necessary, into selected transportation occurrences in order to make findings as to their causes and contributing factors;
•identifying safety deficiencies, as evidenced by transportation occurrences;
•making recommendations designed to eliminate or reduce any such safety deficiencies; and
•reporting publicly on our investigations and on the findings in relation thereto.

The TSB investigates an occurrence when there is a high probability that it can advance transportation safety and reduce risks to persons, property or the environment (see the Occurrence Classification Policy).

NTSB (from their website):

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident the United States and significant accidents in other modes of transportation – railroad, highway, marine and pipeline. The NTSB determines the probable cause of the accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents.

While I appreciate you providing this information, I fail to see why the TSB would not investigate a transport category DC-3 crash which opens up a lot of questions while today, I am reading the report on a Cessna 182 that crashed due to some spatial disorientation. As far as I am concerned, the TSB is not doing their job properly and should be pushing harder for more funding(if they are at all) so they can do proper investigations on these accidents such as the DC-3.

[AirFrame]

While I appreciate you providing this information, I fail to see why the TSB would not investigate a transport category DC-3 crash which opens up a lot of questions...

Probably because you can count on one hand the number of DC-3's flying in commercial service in Canada.

[av8ts]

Really. So we shouldn't try to prevent the others from crashing if we can?? Or what if the cause was relevant to all aircraft?