Saab, while I normally value your opinion, this is totally uncalled for, actually what respect for your opinion I had gained on here just went out the window with that statement. Its offensive, disgusting, and tantamount to spitting on the grave of Capt. Renslow just to flaimbait an agenda against a school you dont like is just...I dont even have a word for it, it makes me sick to my stomach...It saddens me that just a few weeks ago, you were asking people not to make crazy assumptions till the report is out, yet Capt Renslow went through God knows how many training events at more than one airline, on two or three different airframes, and you want to lay the blame of this on the shoulders of the men and women at GIA...when the final report and reasons for this crash are not even known.....im just speechless. I guess sooner or later a man always shows his true colors....its just sad that you must be drooling all over yourself with happiness because fate and coincidence allowed you to use a tragedy to push an agenda

 

Wow, how many people are told this in 121 training events....where is the disconnect...SAAB pay attention, if and only if it is shown that not lowering the nose caused this accident here lies the problem, not that Capt Renslow worked for GIA. Like you said AOA is taught to all of us in private, which has nothing to do with GIA.....in the 121 training where it is taught to hold positive pitch while adding power, (which for the record is not what we were trained here, unless your extremely close to the ground) and I'll bet that gets taught at many places, is what needs to be looked at. The real problem is 121 training most places is based on MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATION, and pilots react the way they were trained (based on company and maufacturer procedure), when under complete surprise and duress (ie emergency). I still believe that no pilot would purposely hold the nose at 31 degrees up in this situation, something else was going on we dont yet know about.

 

It occurs to me that the previous flame post was intended to suck me into another heated "agenda based" conversation and I have decided to stop it here, I will not speak anymore with people who's only intent is to flame their agenda on the backs of the Colgan flight 3407 crew or the good men and women at 3M. I will not respond any further to garbage or flamebaiting.

 

So there is no support for the crew thinking the shaker was a sign of tail stall? I know straight from the NASA icing training that buffet in the stick requires a pull back to break the tail stall. The video contrasts this with airframe buffet and uncommanded roll, indicative of a wing stall.

It seems a lot of comment is given on them messing up the basics, but maybe, just maybe they really did confuse the shaker for a tail stall?

I will admit I'm a CFI in non-known ice planes, so I'm just relying on what I review. But, it hurts to see the pilots' Monday-morning quarter backed in such a way, when maybe they were attempting to do what they thought was proper.

With respect and honor for the crew,
Block30

 

or maybe I am sick to my stomach because 50 people are dead because the airplane got too slow and I know if my family was on that airplane you can bet your *** I would want to know where this pilot learned how to fly an airplane..........

 

Why does it always revert to this crap? I think by the time you go to Gulfstream you already have been taught the basics eh? Even though I didn't go to Gulfstream I have flown with Gulfstream pilots and pilots with 10k more hours and its 50-50 who's a better stick usually. It's individual ability by this point in our flying careers. If you take 2 guys/gals, 1 who has flown 3K CFIing and a Gulfstream guy/gal who might not have 1k before hitting the regionals but they been in a Jet/T-prop cockpit the same time who is to say who would handle an emergency in the proper manner while the other wouldn't. Just cause you've CFI'd longer doesn't make you a better stick under stress......Makes me sick how some people disrespect the deceased by ignorant statements.

 

I don't wanna disrespect the crew or lives lost any farther by turning this thread into a debate over piloting abilities coming from where "initial" training was received......God Bless the crew and pax of 3407

 

doesn't the 400 have a stick pusher?

 

yes, it was activated then overcome by a I believe a 25lb force..........

 

No a shaker is activated when you approach the wing's critical angle of attack. In a tailplane stall you are no where near the wing's critical angle of attack.