Wonder if any type of icing conditions could increase the airflow against the flight controls enough to overpower the hydraulics? Would seem like a lot though.

On that stick pusher comment, i can't "overpower" the stick pusher on the Amazon Jet. You can however disengage it with the A/P Disconnect button, but if you just fight it, then you won't win.

 

Just throwing this out there, but as the airplane slows to about 135 knots with the A/P trying to hold altitude, the shaker goes off (A/P disconnect) and full power is applied. The airplane is now trimmed to hold 135 knots.

Other Q400 drivers have said this airplane is loaded with excess power and with the aircraft trimmed to hold 135 knots and full power is it possible it could pitch itself up to 31 degrees and actually power itself into a departure stall that was too rapid and deep for the pusher to prevent ?

Just something to think about. Personally I still believe ice played a part in this accident.

 

That's a very good question, but I think most people would agree with me on this ... and I take this response from my experience recovering from unusual attitudes in the sim...

If you were trimmed out for 135kts and applied full power, you're correct, the plane would act like a rocket and want to go pretty much straight up ... but that's where your stick/rudder skills come into play. You would immediately notice that and push forward on the yoke as much as it took to keep the nose down while trimming it out. So, in answer to your question, it could have, yes, but I highly doubt it. Now, I don't know how thick the ice was either, he may not have had a full chance to react before going into a departure stall ... WAYYY too many things to consider at this point ... which leads me to say this ...

I agree with everyone here, please, let the NTSB do their work and figure out what happened on this aircraft. We are all speculating, and there's nothing wrong with friendly and healthy speculation and learning more about aerodynamics, but let's keep it to that and not let the media get to us too much. I know all of our tempers are flaring at the moment and would like nothing more than to beat the living pulp out of some of these guys/gals. Let's just do out best to keep cool heads and discuss friendly speculation and spread our knowledge base to current and future pilots

 

Which runway were they landing on?

I am not sure if this safety bulletin is real as I got it via an email today. Supposedly it was sent out to all SWA pilots?



Safety Alert 2009-1
BUF ILS Hazard



Hazard to ILS to runway 23 in BUF
SWAPA Pilots,

There is a potentially significant hazard concerning the ILS to runway 23 in BUF.

Information has been received indicating it is possible to obtain a significant nose pitch up, in some cases as much as 30 degrees, if the glide slope is allowed to capture before established on centerline. Pilots who are preparing to configure and land have the potential to experience abrupt pitch up, slow airspeed, and approach to stall if conditions present themselves in a certain manner.

This effect is the result of an earthen obstruction close enough to the ILS to affect the integrity of the glide slope signal. This has resulted in the issuance of an advisory given on ATIS which states that "the ILS Glide Slope for runway 23 is unusable beyond 5 degrees right of course."
When attempting to intercept the runway 23 ILS from right traffic, the ILS glide slope indication may read full deflection down. Just prior to intercept it may then move up in such as manner as to enable approach mode to capture in such a way as to result in a nose up pitch and loss of airspeed.

Southwest Airlines has issued a notice reading: "Until further notice, when executing the KBUF ILS/LOC Runway 23, DO NOT select Approach Mode until established on the localizer inbound."
This issue is being addressed on several levels in an attempt to address procedures, facilities, and communication regarding this matter. If you experience any issues related to this, please file an ASAP form and or call SWAPA Safety at SWAPA toll free.

 

This has been discussed in another thread ... but yes, from what I know they were landing 23 that night ... but they were intercepting from the left, NOT the right. That and the fact that I believe the Q400 does not pick up the GS until the LOC is captured

 

The memo is real and I've experienced it firsthand

 

Maybe there was a windshear in a unknown dimension
Seriously, we can make all the assumptions we want, let's wait till the NTSB comes with a possible cause and then we talk.
For those wondering above, yes the Q is overpowered. OEI climb rates in the sim are just great.

 

Thanks, must have missed that thread...

When I flew the B717 it too would not capture the GS until the LOC was captured, a great safety feature in my opinion...

The 737, 757 and 767 will however capture the GS before the LOC, go figure?

 

Yeah, the Saab is the same way ... missed the GS int. in the sim a few times because the LOC wasn't captured, lol ... fun times.

 

I certainly agree with what you'd WANT to do (also with many experiences in the sim and for real), but in the simulator you know what's going to happen. Many years ago, when the Embraer RJ's were new, we had a lot of trim faliures. Once I had a complete pitch trim faliure in a 135 that occured AFTER the airplane was configured for landing at flaps 45 and the VREF speed was around 135 knots (in light freezing rain to boot). Anyone whose flown a lightly loaded 135 knows what full power can do. At that time, some faliures could go UNANNOUNCED either aurally or on the EICAS and this was one of those times. When "set max thrust" along with gear and flaps was completed by my F/O, it took both hands and all the pressure I could muster to keep the airplane from going past a pitch attitude that would have been WELL past 30 degrees. Since no alert of any kind occured and I couldn't take my hands of the controls, I had the F/O reduce thrust and our gentle turn also unloaded the wing. Nonetheless, we blew thru the missed approach altitude by almost 1000 feet before we got everything back on an even keel. ATC understood when we reported a flight control faliure and subsequent emergency landing.

Point is, that without the timely power reduction, the stick forces required to prevent an excessive nose up attitude and inevitable stall may be beyond what one (or even two) pilots could produce depending on the aircraft and the excess power available. Any residual ice on the wing (thankfully, I don't think we had any) would only add a unpredicatble wildcard to the ultimate results of any incipent or full stall or excessively unusual attitude.

Again, just thinking out loud....................