Brazil Plane Crash

Worst icing I have ever experienced was around 1990 in a turboprop flying into Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Air Canada DC-8 ahead of us skidded off the runway after landing ( freezing rain ) and ATC shut down arrivals forcing us to divert to Moncton, New Brunswick.

That’s the worst I have flown in.
 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ash-cancer-doctors-killed-cause-b2594898.html

8 of the passengers in the Brazil plane crash were cancer doctors/researchers. They were headed to the Brazilan Society of Bone Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Conference (SBTMO) It was initially going to be 15 of these Oncologist but 7 took a different flight.
So, you claimed 15, but it was actually eight, going to a conference.

And you think your post with "15 on board" was accurate?
 
Worst icing I have ever experienced was around 1990 in a turboprop flying into Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Air Canada DC-8 ahead of us skidded off the runway after landing ( freezing rain ) and ATC shut down arrivals forcing us to divert to Moncton, New Brunswick.

That’s the worst I have flown in.
How much ice accumulation?
 
How much ice accumulation?
Let me check my log book when I get home , I may have made a note of how much ice we picked up. It was definitely severe ice but we obviously weren’t in it too long ( changed altitude ……warm front, freezing rain ). The runway wasn’t in good shape though.

More later about how much runway landing distance calculations have changed over the years. That DC8 might not have gone off the runway today under the same weather conditions due to changes mandated ( after a few Southwest 737 going off the end of runways to be honest ) after a few accidents that made it a requirement ( and pilots given tools to check ) for pilots to calculate the landing distance for every landing.

It’s only in the last 12 years that we ( my airline ) actually calculated landing distances ( always for take off ) , even when runways were contaminated ( well, we did do a very basic calculation but only when contaminated , not wet or dry though ).

Driving home from flying ( coffee break ).

Taking the wife out for dinner ( not subway ) then I will post later tonight.

🙂
 
I have had to make that phone call once.

And once, on Boston Ground, I asked for the phone number to Boston approach, because they had made quite a few mistakes with us on final and caused a high energy go-around. The supervisor and I had a polite, professional, and constructive discussion about the mistakes that they had made. They had a new controller, in training, and the supervisor and I saw things the same way.

All good.
Most controllers despise the Brasher warning. I don’t want them to pull the tapes any more than you do. Invariably I get counseled on something I did completely unrelated because they like to listen to a large swath of before and after conversations.

If you get a Brasher, 9 times out of 10 it’s coming from management or the region headquarters and the controller is just the middle-man. We see them most often for NORDO aircraft (which are monitored nationally and generate a required Brasher from the Domestic Events Network). Other common reasons are airspace violation by VFR aircraft, or clearance deviation. They rarely result in FSDO action.

From a personal standpoint, I don’t issue them ever unless a pilot is being a jerk or a separation loss occurs that ties my hands. If something goes awry but no loss occurs, I try to re-assure the pilot that we’re all good and then I’ll file an ATSAP safety report on one of my breaks. ATSAP and ASAP are confidential sharing programs that routinely talk back to each other flush out root problems and send out advisory briefings or generate change recommendations to local safety councils. I’ve even seen instances where an event had ATSAP reports from controllers and ASAP reports from pilots that were able to be matched together for fuller understanding of what occured. It is significantly more beneficial than the previous system of punitive reporting filed in through management.
 
Last edited:
So, you claimed 15, but it was actually eight, going to a conference.

And you think your post with "15 on board" was accurate?
No but 15 were originally to be on board. I can see how someone would get their info from a preliminary fight boarding info.
 
How much ice accumulation?
Just checked my log books and that flight was on January 27,1990 ( age 25 ).

Nothing is noted in my logbook about the amount of ice ( I tend to keep detailed records of things that happen during flights ) we picked up that night but I remember it was what I would consider severe icing ( aircraft wing boots would be unable to deal with it if we stayed in it too long ).

I do recall the weather was very bad in Halifax and picked up heavy ice during the approach but could not land because the DC8 freighter ( this was around 02:00 ) went off the runway due to freezing rain causing poor runway braking so we had to divert. There were no other runway options in Halifax because we needed the ILS ( was between 100 - 200 feet ceiling that night ) and that runway was closed after the DC 8 went off.

When we diverted, we eventually climbed out of the severe ice but I recall lots being on the aircraft still after we landed at our alternate , Moncton.

I honesty cannot remember how thick it was , but there was a lot stuck on the plane when we landed. The ice was affecting the performance as we had to increase power.

Anyone who says you cannot tell if you fly into severe ice doesn’t know what they are talking about , you can tell, especially if it negatively impacts the performance.

As previously mentioned, I have flown through severe ice on the Airbus ( unintentionally ) but you could not tell performance wise. Even though it was not affecting the performance, I could see ice building up on the unheated areas of the side windows and on the ice probe.

As I was saying earlier, we never used to calculate the required landing distance until about 11 years ago ( pilots ). Flight dispatch ( they still do as per regulations when generating the flight plan ) would calculate the landing distance and as long as it was enough , that was acceptable ( pilots would only know there was enough runway but not the actual amount in feet ). Problem was, this preflight calculation was based on pilots landing on that particular runway with the same weather conditions the flight dispatcher used to calculate how much runway was required but that meant there were no calculations if the pilots landed on another runway , or the weather changed meaning the calculations would be off. That said, pilots did do very basic landing distance calculations ( I mean basic ) if landing in the winter on contaminated runways covered with snow.

Things changed in the industry after a few commercial airliners ( SW B737 that went off the runway and across a highway close to a gas station ) went off the runway ( unstable approaches and touching down too far down the runway ) prompting regulatory authorizes to mandate changes to improve safety relating to approaches ( unstable ) and landings ( touch down in the touchdown zone or do a low energy go around if floating too far ).

About 11 years ago, my airline made it mandatory that we check the required landing distance prior to landing ( even though the flight dispatcher already checked it if landing on the same runway ) and brief the max distance we can float down the runway before doing a low energy go around ).

The landing calculations provide a 15% safety margin for normal landings ( oddly, regulations do not require any safety margin if landing with any type of mechanic problems ).

Lastly, because of the increased risk ( even on grooved runways according to the FAA ) of hydroplaning when moderate to heavy rain, the FAA recommend that pilots assume medium to poor braking ( input landing code 2 for medium to poor braking ) if landing in moderate to heavy rain versus just assume the runway is wet like we used to.

After the airborne landing distance calculation is completed, the pilot flying briefs the level of auto brake ( low, medium, or manual braking ) and if reverse thrust will be used ( I never use it unless the performance requires it use ).

When we put the landing gear down at about 1500 feet, we confirm ( because weather conditions may have changed on final versus what we planned for ) the level of auto braking and either leave it off, low or select medium if we feel the need for increased braking upon touchdown.

Note : our operations do not allow us to intentionally fly through severe ice or take off or land in freezing rain unless its light freezing rain.

https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/talpa

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/about/initiatives/talpa/Airport-Operators-FAQS.pdf
 
Last edited:
Is the weight of the ice or how the ice changes the shape of the wings the issue with icing?
 
Worst icing I have ever experienced was around 1990 in a turboprop flying into Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Air Canada DC-8 ahead of us skidded off the runway after landing ( freezing rain ) and ATC shut down arrivals forcing us to divert to Moncton, New Brunswick.

That’s the worst I have flown in.
Interesting enough, the worst icing I ever experienced was going into Moncton. For the life of me I can't remember the plane type, but I almost always flew a United or Air Canada regional out of Newark heading there. We ended up diverting to Halifax where I learned you can't get a taxi after 11pm and there was no ride share there at the time. I walked over a mile to the hotel lol, no shuttle either.

I have a long time customer in Moncton, I fly in there often.
 
Never heard of it before.

Only issue I gave ever had with ATC was with Toronto Tower when they blamed us for a go around because we didn’t clear the runway where he expected ( wasn’t even mentioned to us on final ) us to clear and he cleared an aircraft that had been holding short of the runway into position after we passed over the threshold expecting us to clear the runway with enough time to clear the aircraft lining up take off clearance.

The controller got annoyed and told us to get off the runway but we still hadn’t fully decelerated yet.

I politely told the tower we will exit the runway when we are ready.

That’s the only compliant I have had with ATC ( filed complaint ) in my career and I really appreciate the great working relationship 99% of pilots have with controllers. I do anything I can to help ATC and don’t even get upset with the occasional unexpected short final go around , at least they tried to get the plane out holding short.

The union safety people and company had a meeting after reviewing the tapes and the company further emphasized that we are to only clear the runway when it’s safe to do so and never rush or feel you have to exit at a certain exit point even though it’s helpful if you can ( planning purposes only ).

That said, about 3 months ago, while heading south through Washington centre airspace, my FO checked in , politely, and asked if there were “ any shortcuts available” and the controller said….” If you ask me that again, I will give you a much longer route”. The guy said it with pride.

I took over the radios and said, how would the FAA feel about what you just said given we only asked once, politely, and we don’t have a lot of fuel for a “ much longer route”. I told him I won’t accept any longer route.

He never said anything.

We had other company flights who were on the same frequency and obviously heard it.

On behalf of myself and any pilot I know, thank you to all the controllers who do an amazing job, help us out and are kind and friendly.

Thank you.

https://simpleflying.com/brasher-warning-history/
 
Last edited:
That said, about 3 months ago, while heading south through Washington centre airspace, my FO checked in , politely, and asked if there were “ any shortcuts available” and the controller said….” If you ask me that again, I will give you a much longer route”. The guy said it with pride.

I took over the radios and said, how would the FAA feel about what you just said given we only asked once, politely, and we don’t have a lot of fuel for a “ much longer route”. I told him I won’t accept any longer route.

He never said anything.
Stories like this irritate me and give us a bad name, but every facility has a few of these guys. Can't avoid them unfortunately. I will say there is a certain carrier who (you all know who I'm talking about) who hasn't even cleaned up the flaps before they're asking for a shortcut. Day after day. Sometimes it gets old. From my standpoint though, I'll generally give you as far as I am legally approved to give you. Some airports (U.S. Core 30s) are generally route restricted most hours of the day so we don't have a lot of options. But barring weather or traffic management route restrictions, I'll give you as far as you want to go. Airlines making money keeps me employed. I have a vested interest in getting you there safely AND efficiently.

FWIW, the magic words with us are "FOR WEATHER." If you ask us anything in the name of weather, it generally takes a higher priority. I've had guys who know how to play the game and when it's clear and a million say "Hey Center, can we get direct XXX for weather?" Of course you can. 😉
 
Stories like this irritate me and give us a bad name, but every facility has a few of these guys. Can't avoid them unfortunately. I will say there is a certain carrier who (you all know who I'm talking about) who hasn't even cleaned up the flaps before they're asking for a shortcut. Day after day. Sometimes it gets old. From my standpoint though, I'll generally give you as far as I am legally approved to give you. Some airports (U.S. Core 30s) are generally route restricted most hours of the day so we don't have a lot of options. But barring weather or traffic management route restrictions, I'll give you as far as you want to go. Airlines making money keeps me employed. I have a vested interest in getting you there safely AND efficiently.

FWIW, the magic words with us are "FOR WEATHER." If you ask us anything in the name of weather, it generally takes a higher priority. I've had guys who know how to play the game and when it's clear and a million say "Hey Center, can we get direct XXX for weather?" Of course you can. 😉


I usually save about 30 minutes air time and 800 - 1000 KGS with short cuts , round trip ( long flights ) depending on the flight plan.
 
Does your airline encourage you to ask for shortcuts or is it your own initiative?

Flight ops manual doesn’t encourage or discourage it, just says any requests for directs should conform to the general shape of the flight plan ( no extreme route changes ). IMHO, they don’t encourage it even though it’s costing them money.

The way we are paid ( by the hour/ minute ) doesn’t encourage it either for 99.9% of pilots ( unless they are under schedule and will not make extra money that flight ). If the flight is longer ( over schedule ) , we make more money.

To be honest, I save the airline around 70,000 KG of fuel a year which is enough for 6 flights one way , or 3 return from Montreal to Mexico. That’s enough fuel to fill up 1600 Honda Civics.

We do not get any rewards because they don’t want to encourage pilots “ cutting corners” for safety.

We do a lot of deicing up here in the winter ( frost many mornings ) and I am one of the few who do single engine taxi when deicing and that right there saves about 300 KG of fuel before take off.

I follow the flight ops manual , I request short cuts when able and advise flight dispatch.

Forgot….saving air time has to save them a lot ( inspections based on air time plus some are leased ).

I don’t do anything rogue, I try to use my head and be operational.
 
Last edited:
Stories like this irritate me and give us a bad name, but every facility has a few of these guys. Can't avoid them unfortunately. I will say there is a certain carrier who (you all know who I'm talking about) who hasn't even cleaned up the flaps before they're asking for a shortcut. Day after day. Sometimes it gets old. From my standpoint though, I'll generally give you as far as I am legally approved to give you. Some airports (U.S. Core 30s) are generally route restricted most hours of the day so we don't have a lot of options. But barring weather or traffic management route restrictions, I'll give you as far as you want to go. Airlines making money keeps me employed. I have a vested interest in getting you there safely AND efficiently.

FWIW, the magic words with us are "FOR WEATHER." If you ask us anything in the name of weather, it generally takes a higher priority. I've had guys who know how to play the game and when it's clear and a million say "Hey Center, can we get direct XXX for weather?" Of course you can. 😉
“Shortcuts” to me, imply lazy or inefficient flight planning.

Our filed routes are optimized for fuel burn, based on a variety of factors, and nearly every time, a “shortcut” yields more direct, but ultimately, less efficient (more time, greater burn) path.

One of the few times that is not true, where a shortcut saves time and fuel is when you’re routed around a closed airspace. A warning area, or MOA, for example. If that airspace opens up, then a shortcut straight through can save a lot of time.

An example - departing ORD, going to LAX. Filed route has us going over Utah, via the DTA VOR, then down. Crazy long route, right?

But the jet stream was there on the direct path, right in our face, with 150+ knots of headwind. If we had asked for a “shortcut” we would have arrived much later, dangerously low on fuel.

That has happened. Same route. 737. New Captain and crew. “Why fly this crazy route when direct is so much faster?” “We could save so much if we just go direct!” They asked for, and were granted a direct. They arrived 30 minutes late with a fuel emergency.

Rookie mistake - assuming that the direct route is the most efficient. Worse, relying on an FMC prediction, as they did, without the wind matrix for the direct route, because there aren’t any waypoints on that direct route, which yields a horribly wrong FMC prediction.

If we have a lateral path deviation of greater than 100NM from filed, we are required, required, not suggested, to have dispatch recalculate the flight plan, including burn.

A quick ACARS or SATCOM with dispatch, and consideration of winds and other factors, can save a lot of heartache.
 
Last edited:
There is a way to do it safely, and efficiently, that’s why our procedures allow it.

I have never, ever, taken short cuts and burned more fuel. Never, not once.

I have also never come close to declaring a fuel emergency, never ( or min fuel ).

As far as coordinating any “ short cuts” or ATC route changes with flight dispatch; we often get last minute ( 30% of the time ) long distance route changes ( means winds are not accurate in the FMS for the new route ) from NY oceanic about 10 minutes from the oceanic entry point ( they close down one of the non radar routes for weather even though the route they give us has as much weather ) and we don’t have any choice or time to have dispatch run it through to see how it affects the time and burn ( ATC often keeps us MUCH lower than the FP original altitude and that increases the burn ).

Once we enter the new route in the FMS ( lost ACARS com with dispatch now ) , I contact dispatch ( no satcom , use HF ) with the new route , altitude , speed ATC assigned us and request a new DFM ( flight plan with updated winds ) to verify.

So what’s my point, often times flights going down to the Caribbean and back don’t have much ( they can say no and land short or turn around, yeah ) of a choice often ( nothing to do with bad or lazy flight planning ) and we get new routes and we don’t have accurate predictions in the FMS until after dispatch runs the new route and we enter the winds but by this time we are already on this new route.

Also, often times flight dispatch planned us taking a longer route around active military airspace but it’s not active when we get closer and take one of those “ short cuts”.

Even in these situations, I have never arrived low on fuel , not even close.

Edit: I have never heard of any pilots getting low on fuel to the point where they had to declare min fuel or a fuel emergency because they took direct routes but I have heard of pilots who had to do it because they weren’t managing the flight/operation properly. I hear one particular airline declare min fuel once in a while because it’s well known they don’t carry much extra fuel.

You can fly the flight plan and still get low on fuel for a variety of reasons if you don’t manage the operation properly ( weather deviations, holding due to bad weather and contaminated runways ). Flight dispatch cannot hold a pilots hand in those situations and it’s up to the pilots to be proactive and make proper decisions before things get out of hand. Even relying on dispatch too much at times ( Captain has sole discretion of fuel use in flight ) can cause problems in flight but keep them in the loop when you have time.

Even if pilots take a super long direct and it ends up burning more fuel, they should realize that they are going to arrive with not enough fuel long before they get to their destination, and do something about it. Any pilot who gets into that situation has other issues to work on and isn’t that competent if cannot manage fuel just because they took a direct route and weren’t monitoring.

What would they do if following the FP and a fuel leak happened.? If you are not monitoring the fuel , regardless if you are on the FP or not , you won’t handle it properly.
 
Last edited:
That has happened. Same route. 737. New Captain and crew. “Why fly this crazy route when direct is so much faster?” “We could save so much if we just go direct!” They asked for, and were granted a direct. They arrived 30 minutes late with a fuel emergency.

we get new routes and we don’t have accurate predictions in the FMS until after dispatch runs the new route and we enter the winds but by this time we are already on this new route.

How difficult is it and how much time does it take to get upper level winds forecasts and/or observations? It seems the 737 crew was remiss in doing so before they asked for a shortcut though an area with much stronger headwinds.
 
Back
Top Bottom