Marc Odien

Buffalo Watchdog

Marc Odien is the founder and Managing Director of WNYMedia.net. A Graduate of Saint Joseph's Collegiate and Niagara University, Marc is an award winning photojournalist with over fifteen years of news experience in radio, television and web based multimedia. Prior to starting WNYmedia.net, Marc worked for various television news stations on the east coast, including WGRZ -TV in Buffalo. Email me at: marc (@) WNYMedia.net

Update from NTSB On Crash of Flight 3407; Public Hearing to Be Held

Buffalo/Clarence Plane Crash

On February 12, 2009, about 10:17 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), a Colgan Air Inc., Bombardier Dash 8-Q400, N200WQ, d.b.a. Continental Connection flight 3407, crashed during an instrument approach to runway 23 at the Buffalo-Niagara International Airport (BUF), Buffalo, New York.  The crash site was approximately 5 nautical miles northeast of the airport in Clarence Center, New York, and mostly confined to one residential house.  The 4 crew members and 45 passengers were fatally injured and the airplane was destroyed by impact forces and post crash fire.  There was one ground fatality.  Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The flight was a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 121 scheduled passenger flight from Liberty International Airport (EWR), Newark, New Jersey to Buffalo.

The NTSB has voted to conduct a public hearing on this accident.  The hearing, which will be held May 12 – 14, 2009, at the NTSB’s Board Room and Conference Center in Washington, D.C., will cover a wide range of safety issues including:  icing effect on the airplane’s performance, cold weather operations, sterile cockpit rules, crew experience, fatigue management, and stall recovery training.  The public hearing is part of the Safety Board’s efforts to develop all appropriate facts for the investigation.

“The tragedy of flight 3407 is the deadliest transportation accident in the United States in more than 7 years,” Acting Chairman Mark V. Rosenker, who will chair the hearing, said.  “The circumstances of the crash have raised several issues that go well beyond the widely discussed matter of airframe icing, and we will explore these issues in our investigative fact-finding hearing.”

The hearing will be held “en banc,” meaning that all Members of the NTSB will sit on the Board of Inquiry.  Parties that will participate in the hearing will be  announced at a later time.

The aircraft wreckage has been moved from the accident site to a secure location for follow-on inspections as may be needed.

A preliminary examination of the airplane systems has revealed no indication of pre-impact system failures or anomalies.  Investigators will perform additional examinations on the dual distribution valves installed in the airplane’s de-ice system.  The de-ice system removes ice accumulation from the leading edges of the wings, horizontal tail, and vertical tail through the use of pneumatic boots.

The dual distribution valves, which transfer air between the main bleed air distribution ducts and the pneumatic boots, were removed from the airplane for the examination. The airplane maintenance records have been reviewed and no significant findings have been identified at this time. The ATC group has completed a review of recordings of controller communications with the flight crew during the accident flight and conducted interviews with air traffic controllers on duty at the time of the accident.  The group has no further work planned at this time.

Further review of the weather conditions on the night of the accident revealed the presence of variable periods of snow and light to moderate icing during the accident airplane’s approach to the Buffalo airport.

Examination of the FDR data and preliminary evaluation of airplane performance models shows that some ice accumulation was likely present on the airplane prior to the initial upset event, but that the airplane continued to respond as expected to flight control inputs throughout the accident flight.  The FDR data also shows that the stall warning and protection system, which includes the stick shaker and stick pusher, activated at an airspeed and angle-of-attack (AOA) consistent with that expected for normal operations when the de-ice protection system is active.  The airplane’s stick shaker will normally activate several knots above the actual airplane stall speed in order to provide the flight crew with a sufficient safety margin and time to initiate stall recovery procedures.  As a result of ice accumulation on the airframe, an airplane’s stall airspeed increases.  To account for this potential increase in stall speed in icing conditions, the Dash 8-Q400’s stall warning system activates at a higher airspeed than normal when the de-ice system is active in-flight to provide the flight crew with adequate stall warning if ice accumulation is present.

Preliminary airplane performance modeling and simulation efforts indicate that icing had a minimal impact on the stall speed of the airplane.  The FDR data indicates that the stick shaker activated at 130 knots, which is consistent with the de-ice system being engaged.  FDR data further indicate that when the stick shaker activated, there was a 25-pound pull force on the control column, followed by an up elevator deflection and increase in pitch, angle of attack, and Gs.  The data indicate a likely separation of the airflow over the wing and ensuing roll two seconds after the stick shaker activated while the aircraft was slowing through 125 knots and while at a flight load of 1.42 Gs. The predicted stall speed at a load factor of 1 G would be about 105 knots.  Airplane performance work is continuing. Since returning from on-scene, the Operations & Human Performance group has conducted additional interviews with flight crew members who had recently flown with and/or provided instruction to the accident crew, as well as personnel at Colgan Air responsible for providing training of flight crews and overseeing the management and safety operations at the airline.  The group also conducted interviews with FAA personnel responsible for oversight of the Colgan certificate, which included the Principal Operations Inspector (POI) and aircrew program manager for the Dash 8 Q-400.  The team has also continued its review of documentation, manuals, and other guidance pertaining to the operation of the Dash 8 Q-400 and training materials provided to the Colgan Air flight crews.

The Operations & Human Performance group continues to investigate and review documentation associated with the
flight crew’s flight training history and professional development during their employment at Colgan as well as prior to joining the company.

Post-accident toxicological testing of the flight crew was performed by the FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) toxicology lab.  Specimens taken from the first officer were negative for alcohol, illicit substances, and a wide range of prescription and over the counter medications.  Specimens taken from the captain were negative for alcohol and illicit substances, and positive for diltiazem, a prescription blood pressure medication that had been reported to and approved for his use by the Federal Aviation Administration.

The Safety Board is also examining several other areas potentially related to the accident, including:

The circumstances of a recent event involving a Dash 8-Q400, operated by Colgan Air, in which the airplane’s stick shaker activated during approach to the Burlington International Airport (BTV) in Burlington, Vermont.  A preliminary review of the FDR
data from that flight shows the momentary onset of the stick shaker during the approach phase of flight.  The airplane subsequently landed without incident.  NTSB investigators have conducted interviews with the pilots and check airman on board this flight and will continue to investigate the incident.

Reports of airplane deviations resulting from distortion of the instrument landing system (ILS) signal for runway 23 at BUF.  There is an existing Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) related to this distortion condition. To date, investigation into these reports has not revealed any connection to the accident flight.

3 Comments

  1. James Wikstrom says:

    I find it incomprehensible that the flight crew of Flt.3407 was still flying the plane on auto pilot in reported icing conditions and while on final approach to Buffalo Int’l Airport. It would have seemed more prudent to be flying the airplane manually due to it’s proximity to the airport and inclement weather reported in the area at the time. I am not a licensed airplane pilot but I do not believe that commercial airline pilots fly planes on auto pilot when only 5 miles from the airport. I would think that they would be busy configuring the airplane for landing. This is a tragic accident and loss of life that I believe could possibly have been avoided if due diligence were exercised by the flight crew.

  2. TommyTrouble says:

    Yep, Pilot Error plain and simple

    1. Pilot asked for and got “Flaps 5 degrees”

    2. Pilot sets throttle to “IDLE”???????? (would be ok if he was going way fast and wasn’t about to lower the landing gear!)

    3. Pilot then asks for and got “Landing Gear Down” (Big drag component hanging out in the airstream “Airspeed starts bleeding off FAST!
    NOTE: Pilot does NOT increase Power to compensate for this extra drag!

    4. Speed Bug set at 118, 114 (Ice mode Bug is ON) – adds 20knots to Speed Bug This means Stick Shaker is going to turn on at 134kts.

    5. Pilot asks for “Flaps 15 degrees” but gets Flaps 10 degrees (more drag that bleeds off more airspeed). Probably good thing he didn’t get flaps 15.

    6. At Airspeed 134 knots Stick Shaker Stall warning activate. (As they should)

    7. Pilot Panics and starts pulling back on the stick!!!! (was he trying to maintain altitude? in the face of a pending stall condition? Sorry “Nose Down” to get airspeed back is what should be done.
    They were close to the ground this may have played a part in his thought processes… too bad!

    8. Finally the Pilot increases POWER, too little too late.

    9. Then to absolutely seal their fate the First Office RETRACTS THE FLAPS on her own, the Pilot didn’t ask her to do this….. well there goes whatever lift margin you may have had – Tragic Indeed.

    10. Not enough altitude to recover so that was that – 50 people dead one house and one 27 MILLION DOLLAR Aircraft!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Total Loss – And the Pilot made $33K per Year and First Office $19K pathetic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. Glen says:

    I’d like to respond to “Tommy Trouble”……I do agree with your assesment….althought I haven’t researched the records …..did the NTSB publish that the FO retracted flaps…? I’ve only been following this accident based on NTSB reports……handed out publicly….

    But it’s quite obvious the crew did fail…….the 1st officer discussioning fears of icing and crashing…….during a period they should have concentrated on approach speeds with a heavy accumulation………obviously the Capt felt it not a concern to discuss and demonstrated later on his lack of ability to control an aircraft during a pre-stall and stall condition……..

    Thus the crew was clearly incompetent and killed 50 people………But again Colgan Air failed to realize they had an incompetent Captain and to NOT teach or demonstrate stall and stick shaker recovery in the simulator is frankly “CRIMINAL”……..to teach “Avoidance” is merely a buzz word to cut costs on training…….how sad……..

    Glenn