Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
Posted on 06/15/2005 4:48:00 PM PDT by Capt. Canuck
Excerpts from conversations between Pinnacle Airlines Capt. Jesse Rhodes and First Officer Peter Cesarz just before they died in the crash of a Bombardier regional jet on Oct. 14, 2004. Investigators say the crash occurred after the pilots took the plane to 41,000 feet, an altitude where engine problems can develop.
9:48:44 p.m.
Cesarz: "Man we can do it. Forty-one it."
9:48:46
Rhodes: "(Unintelligible) baby."
9:48:57
Cesarz: "Hundred and eighty knots, still cruising at Mach point six four."
9:51:51
Cesarz: "There's four-one-oh, my man."
9:51:53
Cesarz: "Made it, man."
9:54:19
Rhodes: "Yeah, that's funny, we got up here, it won't stay up here."
9:54:22
Cesarz: "Dude, it's (expletive) losing it." (Sound of laughing)
10:14:36
Cesarz: "We're not gonna make it, man, we're not gonna make it."
10:14:38
Rhodes: "Is there a road? Tell her we're not gonna make this runway."
10:14:46
Rhodes: "Let's keep the gear up. (Expletive) I don't want to go into houses here."
10:14:51
Cesarz: (Expletive) "road right there."
10:14:52
Rhodes: "Where?"
10:14:52
Cesarz: "Turn, turn..."
10:14:53
Rhodes: "Turn where?"
10:14:53
Cesarz: "Turn to your left, turn to your left."
10:14:56
Rhodes: Either: "I see it" or "I can't."
10:14:58
Warning signal in cockpit: "Too low, terrain, terrain."
10:14:59
Rhodes: "Can't make it."
10:15:03
Rhodes: "Aw (expletive). We're gonna hit houses, dude."
Source: National Transportation Safety Board
I worked on the preflight line for Boeing for many years and know a lot of pilots ... many of whom I call "dear friends". I've been fortunate in that I've only lost one friend in a crash....his plane went down in some bad weather over Mt Hood. I appreciate your quote ... thanks for posting it. I hope your friend recovers. Prayers for all involved ~ friends, family and those who are seeing to his medical needs.
You were right, they got permission for FL410, its on the transcript Compilation of CVR, FDR and ATC radio transmissions and other events, on the NTSB investigation site. http://ntsb.gov/events/2005/Pinnacle/exhibits/CVR_Study.pdf
It was still irresponsible to slow the aircraft to 150knots though.
The Challenger recording is an urban legend.
So many armchair experts, so little real knowledge.
If an aircraft is *certified* to fly at a certain altitude, by law it must be able to be operated at that altitude, or else it is *not airworthy* and *must be grounded* until it is *repaired*.
There may have been some operational considerations or special procedures to operate this aircraft at FL410. The NTSB will be very thorough to see if the aircraft was being operated correctly or if there was a mechanical problem that caused the engine flameout.
About 15 years ago a smaller jet crashed less than a mile short of runway 13 at Columbia, Missouri (COU), which is only a few miles from Jefferson City. The cause of the crash was determined to have been ice particles in the fuel that clogged the screen in the sump.
I'm not proficient at linking to websites.
"if you could specifically identify a violation, as opposed to casual cockpit language and perhaps poor phraseology, perhaps it'd help me and others to agree with you based on the facts."
I already have. The Captain and First Officer swapped seats during their departure climb. The first officer in this mishap was not rated in the RJ he was flying. Therefore, he was not authorized to occupy the left seat on this flight. They didn't return to their proper seats until the aircraft was descending through 10,000'. Think about that for a second. You are in a rapid descent from FL410 through 10,000'. Both your engines are flamed out. It is dark outside and in your cockpit. You've been on oxygen because the cabin pressurization failed when the motors quit. And at that point you both have to unbuckle your seatbelts and do a Chinese fire drill to climb back into the seat you never should have left. Now read FAR 121.542 and FAR 135.100 concerning the "Sterile Cockpit" rule below 10,000'. Here is a quote from those regulations...
"(b) No flight crew member may engage in, nor may any pilot in command permit, any activity during a critical phase of flight which could distract any flight crew member from the performance of his or her duties or which could interfere in any way with the proper conduct of those duties. Activities such as eating meals, engaging in non-essential conversations within the cockpit and non-essential communications between the cabin and cockpit crews, and reading publications not related to the proper conduct of the flight are not required for the safe operation of the aircraft."
Indicated airspeed is not the same as true airspeed, and decreases with altitude until you stall. Speed up, and you get Mach buffet. You only have a limited range of airspeeds at which you can stay airborne at high altitudes. That's why they call it Coffin Corner.
They were flying at 180kts IAS, but making Mach 0.64 TAS (64% of the speed of sound). Read the transcript again.
The U-2 used to fly at 80 kts IAS at FL800.
-ccm
>>> I understand how tedious flying can be at times, but this sort of 'fooling around' over populated areas is beyond reckless ~ it is downright irresponsible. <<<
There are no populated areas at 41,000 feet.
"The aircraft slowed to 150knots at FL410. Does that sound ok to you in a 40000 pound aircraft?"
The weight of the aircraft has nothing to do with airspeed at any given attitude. I assume the 150kts is what the pilot saw on his airspeed indicator and or was recorded on the flight recorder box at that attitude. And that sounds about right assuming they where climbing within the allowed Angle of attack at given speed and altitude which seems they would since they are commercial pilots.
True airspeed is the indicated airspeed corrected for air density altitude. As altitude and temperature increase, air pressure is reduced. Because this instrument measures dynamic pressure, true airspeed drops as altitude and pressure increase. Generally, true airspeed is 2% higher than indicated airspeed for each 1000 ft. of altitude.
So at 40K feet roughly: 2% (40) = 80% reduction in what you would see on the airspeed indicator as to what the speed would be at lets say sea level. Put another way. The aircraft was flying at about 270 knots. Well within it's flight envelope. If they actually had leveled out as they reached the intended altitude, then their angle of attack was not exceeding the envelope, therefore the plane would fly just fine at that altitude. OK. What I just wrote was taken verbatim from a Pro Pilot flight manual, and could as well have been taken out of any aircraft manual or other book on aviation. I am not a pilot but have flown literally thousands of hours in Microsoft Flight Simulator as well as other flight simulators using many different type aircraft, that yes, drop like a rock when not flown within their respective flight models.
I sense the final verdict is not in with all the facts, and perhaps some of us are jumping the gun. Plus let us remember that most all these small commerical aircraft such as the Lear Jets, Cessna Citation jets etc., all can safely operate at 40K plus and surely many do for long flights where they want to fly smooth fuel efficient flights.
I for one am not going to side on this issue until the facts are in. And once the facts are assembled and analyzed what the FAA comes up with should satisfy all.
For all we know, they may have experienced engine problems due to a myriad of reasons, lack of sufficient fuel etc., and this tragedy was just that. I sense something really went wrong this time. They should have been able to spin up the turbines as they decended and forced the nose down gaining more airspeed then relite the engines. Another thing, one can stall an aircraft while moving at a great rate of speed as any fighter pilot will attest to. These two pilots may have not done anything wrong from an operational standpoint. A general statement to all, we don't seem to have all the facts at this point.
bump
It's pretty stupid to go to altitudes where you can expect flame-out. What was the max altitude that plane was approved to?
It's the pilot's responsibility to refuse altitudes that are dangerous -- but it sounds like these pilots requested the altitudes flown at.
I know what a flat spin is, but what does 'accelerated' mean in this context, and what is a 'crossover'.
To both of your posts - everything I've read indicates that the aircraft was certificated to FL410 and that ATC cleared the flight to that altitude. If the pilots experienced a flameout at that altitude it was not because they "pushed the limits" but because the aircraft did not perform as expected at an altitude at which it was designed to perform nominally.
Looks to me like FL410 was withing the envelope but there were special procedures for climbing above FL370. Those procedure don't seem to have been followed, apparently causing the airplane to stall and the engines to stall as well. This type of engine seems to have a nasty habit of siezing up which would make an inflight restart most difficult. Sounds to me like poor training by the company, poor engineering by the manufacturer, lousy judgement by the pilots, and God's Grace that no one on the ground was injured. As usual, a long chain of events that no one broke. . . . There are old pilots and bold pilots, but not many old bold pilots. I'll add my prayers for the pilots and their families.
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
Air Travelers Association - doesn't that group make a business of second guessing pilots from the safety of the ground? Just wondered, given the name of the group.
In short...
Accelerated = increased spin rate - you either flattened the spin or "wound it up" and accelerated the rate of the turn.
Crossover = "crossover spin" in aerobatics in which a pilot is too exuberant in the recovery of a spin and causes an inverted spin in the other direction.
Both are very dangerous - usually because you don't realize what you did to create the bigger mess you just got yourself into.
Training Training Training will teach you to identify and recovery from whatever flavor of spin you happen to find yourself in at the time.
" doesn't that group make a business of second guessing pilots from the safety of the ground?"
Reminds me of RC Aerobatic Pilots flying aerobatic maneuvers from a lawn chair on the ground.
How did those "G"s feel to you?!
;-(
I hate when that happens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.