Air Tindi Pilot "Hero" for Flying into FRDZ

[Meatservo]

I have mixed feelings about contributing anymore to this thread, but guys if you're going to defend this accident by dismissing the forecast that has moderate mixed icing from 2500 to 14000 feet, issued at 1200z, along a TROWAL and right over a LOW, well I've seen some inaccurate FAs in my time too, but I guess this one turned out to be pretty accurate didn't it? That wasn't after-casted, it was legitimately FORE-casted and right there in black and white, not buried in an FT. Freezing precip doesn't need to be present in order for there to be moderate icing aloft.

So the weather turned out to be even worse than forecasted, I have sympathy for this pilot and continue to believe he had some pretty bad luck and our attitude towards him should therefore be charitable.

However from a logical standpoint the argument that you never trust the GFA isn't valid, unless your point is that they are so dangerously inaccurate as to have created a complacent attitude towards them on the part of pilots. That I would believe.

[Axial Flow]

So we are to trust the TAF or the GFA in regards to conditions to expect ? Aren't they put out by the same people and either can have the same reliability.

This discussion is rife with gospel preached by the same people that just haven't crashed due to the accepted risks they take or have taken (myself included so hopefully I should just stop now) in regards to weather et al.

[timel]

So the weather turned out to be even worse than forecasted, I have sympathy for this pilot and continue to believe he had some pretty bad luck and our attitude towards him should therefore be charitable.

I agree.

Management do love you when you bring results and you make "great decisions", it is funny how fast they push you away when you screw up.

I don't think either that this accident and repercussions should be only on the pilot shoulders.

[CpnCrunch]

It looks like a lot of the people posting aren't familiar with the AD that applies to Caravans:

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/regulatory_an ... -10-15.pdf

(1) For Cessna Model 208 airplanes and Model 208B airplanes, all serial numbers, equipped with
airframe deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight in known or forecast
icing: You are prohibited from continued flight after encountering moderate or greater icing
conditions. The airplane can dispatch into forecast areas of icing but must exit moderate or greater
icing conditions if encountered.

Regarding GFAs: if your aircraft is not FIKI certified then it is illegal to depart if there is even any forecast ice (never mind actual reports). So my question is: why is it a good idea to dispatch in a Caravan into conditions that are forecast to be prohibited to fly through? This accident (and the many others like it) would seem to suggest that it maybe isn't such a good idea.

I guess TK is right - pilots never learn and we're probably just wasting our time here.

[trey kule]

There are many managers, customers , passangers who will totally respect a pilots decision......
As long as the decision is to do the flight.

[Illya Kuryakin]

There are many managers, customers , passangers who will totally respect a pilots decision......
As long as the decision is to do the flight.

One must wonder, through the years, how may pilots and passengers have perished solely due to this draconian attitude.
Illya

[Meatservo]

So we are to trust the TAF or the GFA in regards to conditions to expect ? Aren't they put out by the same people and either can have the same reliability.

This discussion is rife with gospel preached by the same people that just haven't crashed due to the accepted risks they take or have taken (myself included so hopefully I should just stop now) in regards to weather et al.

Actually TAFs and GFAs are not generated by the same people.

I'm not preaching any "gospel". I have said on several occasions that the pilot in this occurrence had some bad luck, followed by some really good luck in terms of there being flat ice where the plane drove in rather than rocks and trees. I personally think he deserves some sympathy and I'm not here to preach at anyone about what I think they should do. But from a logical standpoint your argument about GFAs doesn't make any sense. You don't think they are accurate so what-you entirely dismiss them and feel that an aeroplane that ran into trouble with icing conditions by taking off into forecast icing conditions is somehow inexplicable because the forecasts are garbage?..- so what, because they are garbage you must always assume the weather is better?

This is like a busy road that has a crazy old man beside it who says "you're going to get hit by a car" every time you run across it. One day you get hit by a car while running across the road, and you're surprised because the old man always seemed like he was full of shit every other time.

[Diadem]

So we are to trust the TAF or the GFA in regards to conditions to expect ? Aren't they put out by the same people and either can have the same reliability.

This discussion is rife with gospel preached by the same people that just haven't crashed due to the accepted risks they take or have taken (myself included so hopefully I should just stop now) in regards to weather et al.

The TAF is only valid for 5 NM around the aerodrome, so how is that of any value in determining en route icing? Unless the pilot was planning on shuttling up above the icing directly over the aerodrome, he would have to rely on the GFA to determine whether he was likely to encounter icing. If he had the same attitude as you, that the GFA isn't reliable, he probably wouldn't put any faith into it when it does show icing and go flying anyway. Even if it doesn't show icing, if there's a big, nasty system along the route of flight during winter, you're probably going to pick some up anyway. Oh, and I have quite a bit of experience flying in that area, and based on my time up there I would trust that the GFAs are accurate enough to determine whether you're going to be in crap at some point; it's not like the system wasn't actually there.

[pelmet]

As to forecast or not. One drop of frdz and I am in a turn, not even a minute later.

Don't you fly a large jet?

They operate in freezing drizzle regularly.

[Axial Flow]

Diadem: Same attitude as me ? I look at all the information given and when I launch try to compare that to what I am actually getting and see if I can expect what they forecast or is it better or worse. If it's legal, safe and the outcome is highly possible then I am going to go. In a caravan I wouldn't have as many options because there are some serious limitations in regards to available options especially if there isn't an above zero layer to get out of the ice.

There is an old TC poster saying something in regards to: "When you are out in crap weather and wishing you were on the ground, remember who put you there".

As for the GFA/TAF I was pointing out the fact they are forecasts and can be wrong for better or worse. I also didn't know the TAF wasn't used for enroute icing...

No more from me. I just can't sit back when people whom fly out to 25 dme when it's 300 feet and climb up to go to camps with no approaches with the same weather systems associated with Yellowknife go on about stupid choices others make and have a consequence . Must be just that twin otters are better in ice and we haven't had to read an incident you were involved in since the gear is welded down.

[Maynard]

This morning the GFA over NWO was very similar to the one we're discussing here (with the exception it was not an upper front). Go figure, on the icing chart near the trowel, it showed mdt icing for a couple thousand feet. I assumed freezing precip in the area just because I saw the trowal, wouldn't you know it the metar for YRL was -fzdz. Maybe it's just me, but I learned the presence of a trowal means nasty sh*t under it...

[Axial Flow]

Did the Captain tell you the flight was cancelled or did you figure it out on your own ?

[Diadem]

Diadem: Same attitude as me ? I look at all the information given and when I launch try to compare that to what I am actually getting and see if I can expect what they forecast or is it better or worse. If it's legal, safe and the outcome is highly possible then I am going to go. In a caravan I wouldn't have as many options because there are some serious limitations in regards to available options especially if there isn't an above zero layer to get out of the ice.

There is an old TC poster saying something in regards to: "When you are out in crap weather and wishing you were on the ground, remember who put you there".

As for the GFA/TAF I was pointing out the fact they are forecasts and can be wrong for better or worse. I also didn't know the TAF wasn't used for enroute icing...

No more from me. I just can't sit back when people whom fly out to 25 dme when it's 300 feet and climb up to go to camps with no approaches with the same weather systems associated with Yellowknife go on about stupid choices others make and have a consequence . Must be just that twin otters are better in ice and we haven't had to read an incident you were involved in since the gear is welded down.

I don't know where you're getting the idea that I .. run or that I've at some point forgotten about the gear, but I've never flown a Twin Otter. Anyway, here's what you wrote in the other thread:

If the GFA was gospel people wouldn't fly half the time.

You've been implying that the GFA isn't reliable and that the pilot shouldn't have expected to be in icing, even though that's exactly what the GFA showed. You said this too:

Even with the narrow band of moderate ice to 14000 feet and a destination which was just overcast he probably had a good chance of having a normal flight.

But he didn't have a normal flight; if he had believed the GFA, he would have known he was going to encounter that icing, despite your apparent belief that the GFA is always wrong. You've also gone on and on about the TAF (

The early morning forecast I believe did not have the FZRA forecasted and came out as an amended TAF.

,

Here is the TAF the pilot had prior to departure...

) but he didn't encounter that icing within five miles of the departure aerodrome, he encountered it en route.

Here was the metar and speci that was put out just after his departure and 3 minutes after he went down. What an idiot to go with the best information he had to go on.

But that wasn't the only info he had to go on, and I find it odd that you're so focused on the TAF and METAR when he encountered the ice well outside of Yellowknife. Would you take off on a flight from Toronto to Montreal based solely on the weather in Toronto being good?

If it's legal, safe and the outcome is highly possible then I am going to go. In a caravan I wouldn't have as many options because there are some serious limitations in regards to available options especially if there isn't an above zero layer to get out of the ice.

And that's precisely the point: based on the GFA, there was nowhere for him to get above or below the ice, and the outcome wasn't highly possible. He didn't have any options available, and he shouldn't have taken off in the first place.

[Rudder Bug]

SNIP ~ There is an old TC poster saying something in regards to: "When you are out in crap weather and wishing you were on the ground, remember who put you there".

+1

[Maynard]

Did the Captain tell you the flight was cancelled or did you figure it out on your own ?

Actually I was no where near it....

[godsrcrazy]

Not knowing what he knew when he took off, I won't say much about decision making. However, it was dark, he was scared, in a very tight spot that he put himself into. However, he sounded exceptionally calm which counts huge in my book.

And in response to what was said earlier, in the dark in a caravan iced up to the point where it will not maintain altitude, no it is not just a matter of not pulling back till it stalls. There are lots of thing he could have done or not done that would have resulted in a smoking hole, yet he made it onto the ice in one piece. A CFIT does not result in that.

Btw, 9" of ice is almost enough to drive a D9 cat on.

9" and a D9 Cat that my friend is the most ludicrous statement on this site so far. I spent a great deal of my life in the North. Rule of thumb at that time was minimum 4" for a 600 lb snowmobile and you some how thing you can walk a 80,000 lb Cat on 9". WOW you obviously feel you can walk on water.

[Maynard]

[J31]

Not knowing what he knew when he took off, I won't say much about decision making. However, it was dark, he was scared, in a very tight spot that he put himself into. However, he sounded exceptionally calm which counts huge in my book.

And in response to what was said earlier, in the dark in a caravan iced up to the point where it will not maintain altitude, no it is not just a matter of not pulling back till it stalls. There are lots of thing he could have done or not done that would have resulted in a smoking hole, yet he made it onto the ice in one piece. A CFIT does not result in that.

Btw, 9" of ice is almost enough to drive a D9 cat on.

D9 on 9 inches.......hmmmmm The D9 weighs in about 50 tons so you would want at least 48 inches of blue ice. A loaded Grand Caravan would need at least 14 inches of ice to be safe.

There is a lot of cold open water not far south of where this Caravan ended up.

These folks were VERY lucky to stay on top of the ice. In fact I suspect one main went through the ice and was torn off.

[CFR]

Not knowing what he knew when he took off, I won't say much about decision making. However, it was dark, he was scared, in a very tight spot that he put himself into. However, he sounded exceptionally calm which counts huge in my book.

And in response to what was said earlier, in the dark in a caravan iced up to the point where it will not maintain altitude, no it is not just a matter of not pulling back till it stalls. There are lots of thing he could have done or not done that would have resulted in a smoking hole, yet he made it onto the ice in one piece. A CFIT does not result in that.

Btw, 9" of ice is almost enough to drive a D9 cat on.

9" and a D9 Cat that my friend is the most ludicrous statement on this site so far. I spent a great deal of my life in the North. Rule of thumb at that time was minimum 4" for a 600 lb snowmobile and you some how thing you can walk a 80,000 lb Cat on 9". WOW you obviously feel you can walk on water.

9'' inches seems thin to me as well, but don't forget that the D9's weight is spread out over the track area. The spec's from Cat shows it's ground pressure is 16.1 PSI, static. For comparison an average human male exerts 8 psi. A wheeled ATV is 35 psi. The big thing to worry about is a woman in stiletto heels, she's a whopping 471 psi!!! These are all static pressures (standing still) a walking man exerts almost twice his static pressure. A passenger vehicle's tire ground pressure is roughly equivalent to it's air pressure.

edit: Just cause I'm curious I checked a number of guidelines for over ice operation's with Cat's and it is recommended that a 50 ton machine have a min 36" to operate safely.

[Jack Klumpus]

9'' inches seems thin to me as well.

That's what she said.

[co-joe]

9'' inches seems thin to me as well.

That's what she said.

My understanding is that in the fall 6" can be enough but in the spring 3' might not be enough. It all depends on how it forms.

That's a chilling radio conversation.

[GyvAir]

in the spring 3' might not be enough.

oi... I'm pretty sure she never said that!

[Donald]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/air ... -1.2848689

[Maynard]

Wow, that article needs a whole new thread. At least I know what clear conditions are now. What a joke.

[Liquid Charlie]

If you have ever driven a cat d9 or even a d4 the vibrations from the cleated track would destroy 9 inches of ice -- and obviously increase you weight/sqcm considerably now add snow on top if there were any if might spread the load out but thinking back a few years there was a very unfortunate accident just north of YK on Prosperous with a lighter vehicle and more ice --

Now back to the subject at hand -- Me -- I'm thinking that this type of incident could happen to anyone here who makes their living at this -- all the naysayers can sit here and throw stones but at the end of the day we face these decisions on a daily basis -- if we let the swiss cheese model holes line up then we all know the possible results -- were there mistakes made -- certainly but all I can say "good recovery" -- not the best outcome but all walked away

This morning the GFA over NWO was very similar

-- I was flying that day and strangely enough conditions were good -- the day before when nothing was been reflected in the GFA was nasty -- go figure -- so at the very best it's always a crap shoot for the "small" airplane world -- heavy jets a very different world -- operated through out the Ottawa ice storm and never missed a beat -- deicing lines were long but airlines were all flying -- so all I can say is the "ata boy" days are gone so err on the side of caution but even then be prepared for the worst and hope for the best --