[Express]

will anyone realize that you DO NOT FLY PROP PLANES IN COLD/ICE CONDITIONS?


does it seriously take crashes and lost lives to realize what is so easy to see?

prop planes DO NOT WORK WELL in snow/ice.

icing KILLS.

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by express705

will anyone realize that you DO NOT FLY PROP PLANES IN COLD/ICE CONDITIONS?


does it seriously take crashes and lost lives to realize what is so easy to see?

prop planes DO NOT WORK WELL in snow/ice.

icing KILLS.

That is such a dumb statement...
We don't know what really caused the crash, could be many other things, we're speculating at this point.

And not true about the props at all. They fly all over the world in any condition without any problems...

Every crash (mostly) is due to a few factors that fall together, not just one. These guys were over the outter marker (7 mi out, usually 2100-2600 ft AGL), gear go down, Auto pilot off, and were instructed a 50 degree turn...

[E90SLAM]

so the OP is the aircraft manufacturer?
an experienced pilot???
NTSB investigator?

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

so the OP is the aircraft manufacturer?
an experienced pilot???
NTSB investigator?

More likely a noob.

[krote345]

These jets have de-icing equipment that is made for these conditions. They have been flying this route for forever and this is the first incident that I can remember. Don't jump to conclusions before you have all of the facts. The United States aircraft accident record is pretty damn impressive.

[Jet335i]

^^ but this wasn't a jet....not saying I agree with OP, just noting.

[nmulax]

Stupid comment.
You can't make a blanket statement that prop plans in the cold cause a crash.

I've flown on turbo-props countless times between Detroit and northern Michigan in the middle of winter. You also realize prop planes are used all the time in Alaska to deliver goods.

[WLS]

Turbo Prop planes are perfectly reliable. People fly them into alaska and land them on lakes ice fields, etc, just fine ALL THE TIME

[WLS]

Hahahah, apparently others were thinking the same thing

[Seminole]

Man, how did we ever make it before the jet age? I guess nobody flew anywhere during winter...

[Tondtar]

Originally Posted by Seminole

Man, how did we ever make it before the jet age? I guess nobody flew anywhere during winter...

Dogsleds

[quagmire]

OP you need to learn a few things about flying. If ice brought the plane down, it would most likely be caused by ice on the wings. The ice build up on the wing would get so much that it would disrupt the air flow over the wings. That would disrupt lift and bring the plane down. This would have happened if it was a prop( in this case a turbo prop) or a jet if icing on the wing was the cause.

[FStop7]

OP watched The Day After Tomorrow one too many times.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by quagmire

OP you need to learn a few things about flying. If ice brought the plane down, it would most likely be caused by ice on the wings. The ice build up on the wing would get so much that it would disrupt the air flow over the wings. That would disrupt lift and bring the plane down. This would have happened if it was a prop( in this case a turbo prop) or a jet if icing on the wing was the cause.

That can happen on ANY aircraft....

[E90SLAM]

To OP: At least 100 Dash 8s are operated by airlines in all parts of Canada, where winter in some parts of the country lasts most of the year. There hasn't been even one serious accident or hull loss involving a Dash 8 in Canada since the first one was delivered to a Canadian carrier in 1984.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

That can happen on ANY aircraft....

Hence me saying it could have happened to a prop or jet.......

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by quagmire

OP you need to learn a few things about flying. If ice brought the plane down, it would most likely be caused by ice on the wings. The ice build up on the wing would get so much that it would disrupt the air flow over the wings. That would disrupt lift and bring the plane down. This would have happened if it was a prop( in this case a turbo prop) or a jet if icing on the wing was the cause.

Ahm...almost there, but not entirely true...
Depends on the icing conditions -- could be the tail icing too, and the PROP icing characteristic to the props...
Also, the way de-icing works is different between the jet and turbo-prop...

THis read could be informative: http://forums.jetphotos.net/showpost...8&postcount=39

But the bottom line is that we're just speculating what happened...

[Express]

Originally Posted by dr325i

That is such a dumb statement...
We don't know what really caused the crash, could be many other things, we're speculating at this point.

And not true about the props at all. They fly all over the world in any condition without any problems...

Every crash (mostly) is due to a few factors that fall together, not just one. These guys were over the outter marker (7 mi out, usually 2100-2600 ft AGL), gear go down, Auto pilot off, and were instructed a 50 degree turn...

dumb statement? i think not. your right, they were over an outer marker. and you are right again, usually 2100-2600 feet. i believe this airplane was at 2300ft, from what i read, at the time a "problem" occured. anyone can agree that prop planes fly lower and slower than jets. the lower you go, the more icing conditions you experience. the slower you go, the more icing builds up.

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

so the OP is the aircraft manufacturer?
an experienced pilot???
NTSB investigator?

experienced pilot. youre a good guesser =)

Originally Posted by O-cha

More likely a noob.

nope, experienced pilot.

Originally Posted by krote345

These jets have de-icing equipment that is made for these conditions. They have been flying this route for forever and this is the first incident that I can remember. Don't jump to conclusions before you have all of the facts. The United States aircraft accident record is pretty damn impressive.

thats correct, they have de icing equipent. however, i stated before. props fly lower and slower. which means that de icing might not be enough if ice builds up that quickly, which it does.

Originally Posted by nmulax

Stupid comment.
You can't make a blanket statement that prop plans in the cold cause a crash.

I've flown on turbo-props countless times between Detroit and northern Michigan in the middle of winter. You also realize prop planes are used all the time in Alaska to deliver goods.

i sure do. icing conditions are not all over alaska though.

Originally Posted by Markoni

would you agree with this statement-

a larger aircraft has more de icing elements compared to a smaller one?

Originally Posted by WLS

Turbo Prop planes are perfectly reliable. People fly them into alaska and land them on lakes ice fields, etc, just fine ALL THE TIME

i fly prop planes. they are great. i am not doubting them, i am just stating, that its KNOWN that prop planes have an issue with icing.

Originally Posted by quagmire

OP you need to learn a few things about flying. If ice brought the plane down, it would most likely be caused by ice on the wings. The ice build up on the wing would get so much that it would disrupt the air flow over the wings. That would disrupt lift and bring the plane down. This would have happened if it was a prop( in this case a turbo prop) or a jet if icing on the wing was the cause.

i know plenty. i am WELL certified. thanks for your concern.

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

To OP: At least 100 Dash 8s are operated by airlines in all parts of Canada, where winter in some parts of the country lasts most of the year. There hasn't been even one serious accident or hull loss involving a Dash 8 in Canada since the first one was delivered to a Canadian carrier in 1984.

the Dash 8 is one of, if not THE SAFEST turboprob out there. winter is one thing, but icing conditions are another



i think you all are taking what i said the wrong way. what happened to that plane, from eyewitness reports, is conclusive to icing.

a dive into a home. think about it. when an airplane experiences icing, the aircraft encounters extreme pitch up movements, which cause a stall, that could lead to a nosedive.

perfect example would be air florida, but thats what you get when you put two 23 year old inexperienced pilots in control of a 732.

this is my opinion on what happened. i would be extremely suprised if it were something else.

i didnt mean to come off the wrong way to some of you, so i apologize.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by quagmire

Hence me saying it could have happened to a prop or jet.......

yah....

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by express705

dumb statement? i think not. your right, they were over an outer marker. and you are right again, usually 2100-2600 feet. i believe this airplane was at 2300ft, from what i read, at the time a "problem" occured. anyone can agree that prop planes fly lower and slower than jets. the lower you go, the more icing conditions you experience. the slower you go, the more icing builds up.

There are only 2 situations a commuter turbo prop would be that low, a) takeoff b) landing which last time I checked jets go that low to when they want to go to an airport.

Yes, generally they are slower then jets. The Q400 has a ceiling of 27,000 ft and a max cruising speed of 414 MPH. Compared to 485 MPH and 35,000 ft( 37,000 ft with the 737-400 and 500) with the 737-200 through 737-500. Granted these are old models of the 737, but the Q400 isn't too far off the max cruising speed of 485 MPH. Obviously, they would be slower when taking off/landing.

Most likely, this is a the similar situation that happened to Flight 90( a 737) that went down into the Potomac River, but reversed( it sounded like this flight was descending for a landing).

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by express705

dumb statement? i think not. your right, they were over an outer marker. and you are right again, usually 2100-2600 feet. i believe this airplane was at 2300ft, from what i read, at the time a "problem" occured. anyone can agree that prop planes fly lower and slower than jets. the lower you go, the more icing conditions you experience. the slower you go, the more icing builds up.



experienced pilot. youre a good guesser =)



nope, experienced pilot.



thats correct, they have de icing equipent. however, i stated before. props fly lower and slower. which means that de icing might not be enough if ice builds up that quickly, which it does.



i sure do. icing conditions are not all over alaska though.



would you agree with this statement-

a larger aircraft has more de icing elements compared to a smaller one?



i fly prop planes. they are great. i am not doubting them, i am just stating, that its KNOWN that prop planes have an issue with icing.



i know plenty. i am WELL certified. thanks for your concern.



the Dash 8 is one of, if not THE SAFEST turboprob out there. winter is one thing, but icing conditions are another



i think you all are taking what i said the wrong way. what happened to that plane, from eyewitness reports, is conclusive to icing.

a dive into a home. think about it. when an airplane experiences icing, the aircraft encounters extreme pitch up movements, which cause a stall, that could lead to a nosedive.

perfect example would be air florida, but thats what you get when you put two 23 year old inexperienced pilots in control of a 732.
this is my opinion on what happened. i would be extremely suprised if it were something else.

i didnt mean to come off the wrong way to some of you, so i apologize.

I remember that accident happened at Washington national airport....coz the 732 was lined up for takeoff for too long after its only de-icing....snow and ice accumlate on its wings during the hold....and the crew did not turn on the de-icing switch....
the aircraft had liftoff a little bit but not enough to encounter the disruption of airflow on the wings....finally crashed into freezing river....

[E90SLAM]

I read from airliners.net.....Auto-deicing is not available on the DHC-8-400Q....will the be one of the contribution to the accident?