Colgan FAA Inspector speaks out
 

Sorry if you have seen this already, but a pretty key piece of info I think.

The Associated Press: FAA inspector warned of safety problems at Colgan

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal safety inspector assigned to the airline involved in an air crash that killed 50 people in upstate New York in February warned of safety problems at the airline a year before the accident.
An attorney for Federal Aviation Administration inspector Christopher Monteleon said he reported problems with the flight testing program at Colgan Air of Manassas, Va., for its newly acquired Bombardier Dash 8-Q400s in January 2008. That's the same type of plane that crashed Feb. 12 near Buffalo Niagara International Airport.
Among the problems Monteleon reported was that the Colgan test pilot exceeded the permissible speed limit for the Dash 8 and had difficulty properly landing the plane.
Test pilots typically are an airline's most skillful pilots and are expected to train other pilots on how to fly new aircraft.
After Colgan, a regional air carrier, complained to the FAA about Monteleon, his FAA supervisor reassigned him to desk work and ordered him to have no further contact with the airline, his attorney, Debra Katz, said.
When Monteleon continued to press for action on safety concerns at Colgan and what he alleged was a cozy relationship between the agency and the airline, he was transferred or reassigned three more times, Katz said.
In March, Monteleon had a confrontation with an FAA attorney and was placed on administrative leave by the agency, Katz said. Monteleon told The New York Times, which first reported on his complaints Wednesday, that agency officials accused him of menacing the attorney. Katz said in a draft letter to FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt that it was Monteleon, 64, a former pilot and 40-year veteran of the aviation industry, who felt threatened.
Monteleon has filed a complaint with the federal Office of Special Counsel, which investigates whistleblower complaints, Katz said. He has also been interviewed by the Transportation Department's Office of Inspector General, the agency's internal watchdog, Katz said. Brian A. Dettelbach, a spokesman for the inspector general, declined to comment.
FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown declined to discuss personnel actions taken involving Monteleon. She said his complaints about safety violations at Colgan were investigated by a special FAA team, which found some record-keeping and other problems but no violations of safety regulations.
"The bottom line was they didn't find any major regulatory issues," Brown said.
A spokesman for Colgan didn't return a phone call from The Associated Press late Wednesday.
Monteleon has been barred from entering any Transportation Department building or property and has been unable to retrieve documents in his office computer at the FAA that support his allegations, Katz said.
Monteleon first raised safety concerns about record-keeping and other problems at Colgan in 2004 when he was the principal inspector assigned to the airline, Katz' letter said. He was later reassigned to a runway safety office, where he also complained about the way the agency was recording safety incidents. He subsequently was demoted and reassigned to Colgan to keep tabs on their new aircraft program, the letter said. It was after that that Monteleon accompanied Colgan pilots testing the Dash 8.
"This is years of raising concerns about Colgan, from the training program to a failure to document maintenance problems," Katz said. "I think this a classic case of shoot the messenger."
Aviation safety consultant Jack Casey said that if Monteleon's complaints about the testing of the Dash 8 are correct — especially if a pilot significantly exceeded the aircraft manufacturer's specified speed for the plane — they are very serious.
"It's not unusual that you have a few little teething problems (when testing a new plane), but what he's describing goes way beyond that," Casey said.
The National Transportation Safety Board held a three-day hearing last month into safety issues raised by crash of Continental Express Flight 3407, including pilot training and fatigue. Testimony at the hearing showed Colgan, which operated the flight for Continental, didn't provide pilots hands-on training on a key cockpit safety system.
Testimony also indicated the flight's captain and co-pilot made a series of critical errors as they neared the Buffalo airport. The Dash 8 experienced an aerodynamic stall that sent it plunging into a house below. All 49 people aboard and one man in the house were killed.
The board hasn't reached a conclusion on the cause of the crash.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Try to remember that Monteleon is a BAD APPLE himself.

He couldn't even pass the Colgan Q400 PC. He was fired for landing at the wrong airport when he worked for CC Air and he was fired for flight safety issues at his corporate job.

He has no credibility as far as I'm concerned.

And the speed, the VMO changes dependant on altitude, therefore the guys were flying around at 240 at 8,000 and they'd hit a bump and beep- overspeed warning. FAR from a safety issue.

Agree, I dont see how overspeeding an airplane briefly is a big deal whatsoever. If an FO sets off the overspeed clacker, it just means he has to buy the captain a beer. If the captain sets off the overspeed clacker, it just means the FO has to buy him a beer. Setting off the overspeed clacker appears to be a great deal!

Overspeeding the Q400 is not just a problem at Colgan and it that airplane I dont think it's the pilot's problem at all. Talk to any Horizon guy that fly that plane (Line pilot, management or Check Airman) and they will tell you how many time it happens.

Just to let you know Vmo never changes, it's sort of like Vne on a smaller aircraft. it's Mmo that changes with altitude and variations in temp. Just thought I let you know.:)

Hilarious! I thought that was our thing. I didn't know it was an industry standard!:D

I think the key to the definition of Vmo is that it may not be DELIBERATELY exceeded in any flight regime.

The barber pole on the 1900 indicates Vmo. It changes its position based on altitude and temp, and I believe it's correct name is "Vmo pointer". Our books even list Vmo as changing with altitude. This means a change in the indicated airspeed Vmo occurs at.

Limitations EMB 145:

VMO: Maximum operating (KIAS)
-up to 8,000 MSL 250
-between 8,000 and 10,000 increases linearly from 250 kts at 8,000 ft to 320 kts at 10,000 ft.
-above 10,000 ft. 320

MMO:
-Sea Level .50
-10,000 to 37,000 .78

While it's still too early to know, I wonder if the Air France guys had the same attitude flying in the ITCZ in turbulence? I doubt it, but gee, guess it would have been OK, huh?

Nice to know that you seem to think it's OK to do it. I'm guessing that if you hit turbulence at the same time, you would make your own determination about whether or not to write it up?

Thanks. Remind me to not fly your bird after you. Or let you fly mine. I love surprises too, but not the ones that can bite me or others in the ass unwittingly.

And we wonder why the media rags on us.........

It's usually unexpected turbulence that sends the indicated airspeed a few knots above Vmo, and then only for a second or two. I've had cases where I was 20 below the pole, hit a patch of rough air, and was instantly sent above the pole. It called for an immediate power reduction, obviously. It's never to be deliberately exceeded, but it can happen, unexpectedly. Really, the only way to avoid it would be to fly 50 knots under the pole, all the time. That's not too efficient, in my opinion.

This reminds me of a guy I flew with...On a turbulent 5 mile final into ORD, he called out (very commandingly-like) "YOU ARE TWO KNOTS SLOW."

What do you say to that ridiculousness? Just to add to the fun, our speeds at that time were Vref+5. Two days after this, our speeds were changed to subtract the extra five knots. That would have left me 3 knots fast.

Point is, don't be a fool and argue over an occasional one or two knot gain/loss...none of us are that good.

Hi, my name is joke. I guess since I am using APC below 10,000, then this forum is sterile, just the facts, and humor is a violation. I apologize for personally offending you with obvious sarcasm. You sound like you would be really great to fly with Mr. Belding. And since you said 'remind me', I will remind you.

Do not fly a bird after me. Do not let me fly your bird (ok? lol). And dont forget, You love surprises!

I have never seen or heard of a pilot who would deliberately overspeed an airplane. I don't think that is what Convairator was suggesting, whatsoever. Just a light hearted joke. The joke about the beers must be an industry thing, because that is what my captains told me, back when I was a green FO, as I would trend towards an overspeed, but not exceed Vmo. That is what I now tell my green FOs, as well, as their airspeed blasts towards the pole, before the overspeed: "If you hit the pole, you owe me a beer." I think the joke just lost some of it's funniness; for me, anyways...Thanks there ATCsaid....

Sweet deal indeed.

Dude do you really fly a 580?:confused:

In many older Lears, you can find a button under the dash (hidden) that disables the overspeed horn. Seriously stupid to do that in a Lear, but operators did it anyway and at least some pilots used it.

In the Q400, the Vmo speeds are as follows:

0 - 8000ft: 245 KIAS
10,000ft: 282 KIAS
18,000ft: 286 KIAS
20,000ft: 275 KIAS
25,000ft: 248 KIAS

Keep in mind that the Q400's high and low "Airspeed cues" were just barely certifiable by the FAA. It constantly is moving up and down, espically below 10,000ft.

Can you even read a knot or two on your instruments? My airspeed is displayed digitally and it fluctuates 1 or 2 kts (some times more!) even with auto throttles engaged, much less if I am ham fisting the throttles:)

USMCFLYR

Colgan has test pilots?

Or, was this a check airman on a proving run or acceptance flight?

I'm confused(It's easy to do):confused::confused::confused:

Check airmen on a proving run.

Funny how Monteleon is the expert of the airplane he failed on. So according to Monteleon, overspeed=bad and landing at the wrong airport=ok

Yeah, we don't have digital readouts like the ERJ's/Q's. Our Airspeed tape is calibrated with 5-knot tickmarks...and when you are getting tossed around, I can't imagine any Pilot in his right mind would be such a dork over two knots LoL. Yeah this guy was (and still is) a piece of work!

And actually come to think of it, I've come to prefer the tickmarks we have over the digital readout I flew with at Trans States -- it makes for a cleaner presentation.

Whew! :D I was worried that my natural tendency for rounding up and down was going to be a problem ;)

USMCFLYR

There is no I in Team America......

Honest to god, last week a captain told me I was 2 knots slow on approach. He said ATC would notice. Once safely on the ground, I pulled out my E6B and showed him just how, unnoticable it was. :) Hehe..

"Point is, don't be a fool and argue over an occasional one or two knot gain/loss...none of us are that good. "

-0 or +5 Knots airspeed , +or- 5 degrees heading, +or- 50' altitude.

If you're going to be a C-130 pilot, you might start thinking that way.

Jokes are jokes. I have a sicker sense of humor than you can ever imagine. You probably wouldn't like flying with me; I'd let you make decisions and have fun doing it. I'd also stick the leg off a Barbie doll on your yoke so that you knew it was your leg. I don't believe the cockpit is the place for a tie with the door closed, but fuzzy dice are optional.

The point about overspeed is the cavalier attitude that is developing, just like the one about carrying open items without writing them up to "keep the operation going." One overspeed may not hurt you, but cumulative ones lead to fun things like keel beams breaking...or spars snapping. It's like a pinprick...one won't kill you, but enough of them and you bleed to death.

For the Colgan check airman to not think it was important enough to write up and overspeed shows a lack of understanding of potential outcomes. To not do it with a Fed looking over his shoulder is beyond stupid.

Whether this Fed was a head case or what, that's for others to prove. If he had documented cases of problems, then Randy Babbitt, the new FAA honcho, needs to jump on Colgan's throat and not let up until they can their Flight Ops and management people who let this happen.

And he should can his own people who turned a blind eye as well.