Co-pilot's red-eye flight preceded disaster

      WASHINGTON — If you think your commute is a bad one, think, for a moment, about the late Rebecca Lynn Shaw.

   Earning less than $25,000 a year at Colgan Air, the young co-pilot of the doomed Continental Connection Flight 3407 chose to live with her parents in Seattle — and commute to Newark, N.J.

   She did just that — on a red-eye flight, no less — the night before Flight 3407 plunged into a house in Clarence on Feb. 12, killing 50.

   You will not be surprised to hear that her attention span was not stellar on that fateful night. In fact, she seemed not to have noticed as the plane slowed to a stall over eastern Erie County.

   All of which raises a question or two.

   The next time you fly, how would you feel about hearing that the co-pilot had just flown in on the red-eye from Seattle the night before?

   And — my God — should this be legal?

   — Jerry Zremski

Comments

[Dan]

I doubt it should be legal, but it's never going to change. I'm sure hundreds of pilots at different airlines are doing the same thing...and have been for years. The low pay, the commute, fatigue, etc... it all plays a role in this accident. I still am way more concerned with their lack of training on the stall safety features, poor response and the lack of awareness to the airspeed plummeting. I believe the chit-chatting and her nervous chatter about the icing really ruined their concentration and awareness.

I'd be surprised if Colgan survives the beating they are taking. Maybe they will disolve and come back as a different name---much like Valujet was absorbed by Air Tran. I don't feel confident at how Colgan is run and would not fly them. I'm sure some of the other small regionals are similar and maybe these hearing will scare them straight.

[Walt Brewer]

Until a brief mention yesterday, not much had been said about autopilot actions in the Flight 3407 crash.
There is a different scenario, which involves the very specific sequence as the stall warning stick shaker activates. The autopilot was still on at that point. but disengaged immediately. This might create a course of action that pulled the nose up and caused the stall without action by the pilot.
Airplanes have manual trim setting mechanisms. So while under manual instead of autopilot control the airplane will fly level w/o the pilot having to put a nose up or down force on the control control. If somehow that manual trim setting was in nose up position, and not recognized, the autopilot would have overcome that input and flown the airplane at the right attitude and airspeed for the flight up to the stick shaker activation.
At that point because of the manual out of trim setting, it would have started the unwanted nose up rotation that caused the stall. To do so it would have to overcome the proper nose down rotation the stick shaker apparently generates. It is also remotely possible possible this out of trim condition could have been caused by ice, particularly on the horizontal tail.
The principal point is, if my explanation is correct, it was not a pilot action that caused the stall.
The detail sequence is available, including motions of the control column and manual trim setting, but difficult to ready on the website.
Of course I can't imagine the experienced people at NFSB have not thought of this. And indeed it requires the manual trim to have been set incorrectly sometime somehow during the normal part of the flight.
I hope evidence will appear that NTSB has considered this possibility and will report results.

[Dan]

That's a good theory and I've heard about it on other sites. However...I've read that evidence shows the pilot used 25lbs of pull back force on the yoke. I cannot remember where I read it but if true, that would debunk your theory. It will be interesting to hear (a year from now?) what the actual cause is. I think for these hearings they are not trying to implicate the pilot or FO (from what i heard). They are mainly trying to gather info and ask questions.

[Anthony M. Werdein]

The salary mentioned was ~16k, at a 40 hour 52 week job it's $7.00+ a hour, pretty poor!!!!!
It is my belief that the single contributing factor to the crash is quite simply that the plane is not made for and should not be flown in winter weather!
If the plane did not lose speed due to ice build up the chain of events that led up to the tragedy would not of occured. Everything the pilot did or did not was due was due to a airplane fault that got them there.
Why the manufacture hasn't been grilled over the extremely poor performance and past crashes this model has suffered is beyond me! The pilot and co-pilot who can't speak for themself appear to be the intended scapegoats, which is sad.
The only thing I can say about the Dash Q400 is that they are quieter than a regional jet, but I sure try like hell not to fly in them.

I wish some reporter would ask the inquiry about the past performance and winter inabability!!!!!!

[MHT]

I wish some reporter would ask the inquiry about the past performance and winter inabability!!!!!!

-------------------------------

Having flown the Dash-8 -albeit over 12 years- into some of the harshest weather known on this planet, I can comfortably say it is one of the best airplanes to be in.

I presently fly the Airbus 320, but have flown among others the Boeing 727, Canadair RJ, and the Beech King Air 200. The Dash-8 handles the extreme winter conditions best of all.

FACTS:

* The airplane was in level flight as 2,300 ft (above sea level).

* The Flaps were lowered to 5 degrees - which increases drag.

* The Landing Gear was lowered - which increases drag.

* The Conditon Levers (or prop levers) were increased to full fine pitch. Think of this being the equivalent of downshifting in an car. As in a car, it brakes/slows the airplane down.

* Flaps are then lowered to 15 degrees - which increases the drag even more.

When drag is increased, pilots compensate by adding power (that's why you always hear the engines roar up after the landing gear in lowered). In the present case, the pilot didn't increase the power until the activation of the stall warning (stick shaker).

The question is why wasn't the power increased when drag was added? That's the million dollar question. Although the ice/weather may have been a distraction for the crew, it was not the cause for the airplane losing its airspeed.

Although the NTSB is making a big deal regarding the idle chit-chat below 10,000ft, I don't believe it played a big role in the big picture, because they were talking about the weather. FAA rules prohibits one from speaking below 10,000ft unless it's pertinent to the operation. Talking about the weather is pertinent (mind you the added story telling may have crossed the line a bit).

Something tells me that the crew was beyond being fatigued, and never noticed the decay in airspeed. Once the stall warning sounded, that's where instinct (experience) and training take over.

The fact is that they did everything opposite to what was supposed to have been done (except for adding full power - that was correct). It would seem that they lost their situational awareness, caused by their level of fatigue.

P.S. It's easy to say after the fact they should have slept prior to their flight. However, when one only makes $16K a year, it's hard to find a place in the Newark area, let alone pay for a hotel room. The problem is that Colgan is not the only operator that doesn't pay. Please see this youtube link and you see that this problem is rampant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RayMaswju1A

[AnonX]

Walt,

What you are suggesting is a runaway trim situation in addition to the other problems this flight had. Or that the plane pitched up because of a mistrim or altered aerodynamics as result of ice accumulation after the auto-pilot disengaged. Incidently, I think it's a requirement on all transport category aircraft that they have a "trim-in-motion" aural warning system installed so the crew is aware of what the autopilot is doing or to guard against an uncommanded trim situation.

To clarify, the stick-shaker and stick-pusher are two different mechanisms. Stick-shakers alert the crew to an impending stall, stick-pushers attempt to recover the airplane from a stalled condition.

Second, if you look at the recreation you can see that the airspeed indicator tape readout on the left side of the Primary Flight Display gets down into the red barberpoll area. This is below safe flight speed and happens without the captain advancing the power levers. This is the unexplainable part and I'm assuming the aircraft doesn't have an auto-throttle system. Even if you concede the aircraft slowed more rapidly than normal due to ice, something I haven't heard mentioned, neither crewmember reacts to the airspeed decay either verbally or by taking some action.

Third, on most aircraft, if you manually activate the electric stab trim (which helps control pitch) - the autopilot automatically disengages. If you tried to use the manual trim wheel instead of manual electric trim, the autopilot would simply retrim to the stabilizer to it's previous position and you would be fighting the trim clutch, something you would have to be consciously aware of.

Last, modern digital Flight Data Recorders measures a large number of channels. These most likely include on this aircraft, stabilizer position, trim inputs, control column inputs and force, etc. So the NTSB investigators would see all these motions when they analyzed the FDR in the laboratory initially.

[AnonX]

MHT,

Watch the NTSB recreation again. The Capt. commands flaps 15, but they only go to 10! He also never gets the power levers to "Max Power" during the attempted recovery, they look like they get up to 80-90%, of full travel. Last, the FO retracts the flaps to 0 (UP) in the middle of all the gyrations without being commanded to do so. That can't be part of the recovery procedure in the Dash 8? I agree with your comment regarding the Dash 8 in winter weather. I used to fly a Swearingen Metroliner II in the Northeast during the winter, never had a problem, didn’t hear of anyone else having any either. The talk of banning turboprops from flying in winter is a lot of, well you know.

BTW, I made more money flying cancelled bank checks around in the middle of the night, single pilot in a light twin in 1980 than this FO was making. Shocking!

[Just my thoughts..]

My personal opinion is that Renslow and Shaw were not the brighest bulbs around. They didn't have the intelligence to make sudden "LIFE AND DEATH" decisions. Forget about fatigue forget about the pay. Compare these two to Capt. Sully Sullenberger...and oh, what a difference you get!!

[Charlie]

The person who graduates last in her class from medical school is still a doctor. We all work with people with various degrees of competency and with different personalities. The facts are that these were two well trained and qualified pilots who would probably be flying for the next 10 years had this series of unfortunate events not occurred. The public has a very small glimpse into the workings of the airlines and are making a lot of emotional decisions based on very limited information.

Let's not judge the professionalism of all pilots and airline professionals based on the second guessed actions of two pilots.

[OPMike]

There are times when government action is not needed, wanted or necessary. This, however, is not one of those times.

The federal government should bring the commuter airline industry to a forced landing and should keep it grounded until this abomination is corrected.

Hamburger flippers at McDonald's are better trained and more highly paid than some of these "professional" pilots. A toll collector at the Grand Island bridge (a person who makes change for a living) earns twice as much as some of these pilots. Adding insult to injury, an airline executive called the pilots "unprofessional". A $16,000 a year "professional" - they cannot be serious.

Obama, Pelosi and Reid need stop worrying about harsh interrogation methods used on killers and show some true American leadership and get this mess cleaned up.

[BobbyCat]

Somebody should do a story about how many other disasters were caused by deregulation.

Since Ronald Reagan fired the flight controllers, we've allowed many industries to ignore regulations.

Some examples: 9/11. Why weren't the cockpit doors armored and locked? Deregulation, rather, no regulations.

Global financial meltdown hasn't played-out yet but there's no question that this disaster was caused by the repeal of Glass-Stiegel and a lack of regulation.

We've let the free market regulate our safety, our economy and general well being. And how has that worked out? How many more disasters will happen? Incredibly, many on the right are still arguing to let the free market go unregulated. I guess the idea is that the airline with the most crashes will do less business.

It's time to restore some sanity and common sense regulations.

[Walt Brewer]

Thanks for the several clarifications. I found the website projects of recorded events difficult to read, so hope the FTSB will do a thorough job of reviewing the out of trim possibility. Do think I saw a change in trim happening a few seconds before the stick shaker activation.
My comment about ice associated with out of trim was not just general airplane drag or lift. It was relative to causing the out of trim condition by, say, altering horizontal tail airflow. Unlike to cause nose up to be sure because the tail probably was carrying a down aerodynamic load.

[Neil]

BobbyCat....The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was authored by Ted Kennedy and signed by Jimmy Carter.

[OPMike]

Old BobbyCat is at it once again, living in his wonderland of false urban legends, shooting from the lip and blaming Republicans for all the ills of the world.

Here are some facts that he blissfully chooses to ignore:

The legislation that repealed the Glass-Steagall Act was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

As Neil just said, The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was authored by Ted Kennedy and signed by Jimmy Carter.

BobbyCat should stop reading left wing trash like the Guardian and get his facts correct from more objective sources.

The team of Obama, Pelosi and Reid can use this opportunity and do something good for the American flying public. Will they take the bull by the horns or will they just try to feed us some more Democrat bull about being the party of the ordinary working Joe and Jane?

We shall see real soon.

[HapKlein]

Poorly trained air pilots just joined the ranks of dangers we face.

We have tired truck drivers hurtling at us at 80 MPH, Train Engineers texting at the same speed, bus drivers who have had a poor nights sleep and even an an occasional cop with a quick finger and poor aim. Just add teen drivers with Dreams of Daytona and older drivers with tunnel vision and a heavy foot who join the impatient and rude crank and it makes one wonder we survive.

This accident will not change a society that profit is king and government is an inhibitor of progress. Its the world we live in and the culture we deserve.

[Tom Hanks]

Pilots should be well trained Firstly then they should be allowed to Fly Planes and one thing should also be there that the experienced pilots should fly the plane whenever possible.

----------------

Tom

full time part time jobs

[Michael]

OK people (in the media), enough is enough. Yes, this was a terrible tragedy. Over fifty wonderful people died on that tragic night.

You give Buffalo (media) an inch and they take a foot. It's time to let this story go for the sake of the families. No need to smear the flight crew (are you hearing this Jerry Zremski?)Let the investigation continue by the proper authorities. There's no need to smear the flight crew. The correct actions will result in better trained pilots. Enough said.

The Buffalo media, as usual, has worn this story thin. The Buffalo media will latch onto any national story for as long as they can. It's pathetic. Remember the Lackawanna 5? Tragic and alarming, yes, but it was in the news for at least 6 months.

Point made.

[Jim]

One poster commented that “… Renslow and Shaw were not the brighest bulbs around.” While I cannot comment about Renslow, Rebecca Shaw was a personal friend of mine, and a fellow flight instructor at the flight academy in Arizona we train future pilots (company policy prohibits me from giving the name). I can tell you without a doubt that she was extremely intelligent, and I find it difficult to believe the apparent actions which transpired in the cockpit that evening. She clearly was not on top of her game. When she was an instructor, I have seen her ground students for engaging in less risky behavior than she or Renslow did. Others have commented about pay. The really sad thing is that, as an instructor for the flight academy at which she taught, she was earning 3 times more than Colgan pays. That’s why I will probably never quit teaching – I make too much to go fly for an airline.

[jimbo7e7]

Much has been written about the fact that the low pay these pilots earn was a contributing factor to this accident – by preventing them from maintaining a type of lifestyle that would include the necessary rest in order to perform the job at peak efficiency. In the case of Rebecca Shaw ($16K), she could not afford even rudimentary housing in the Newark NJ (her base) area – thus was living with her family in Washington State and commuting. If you are interested in the root cause of this low pay, look in the mirror. Don’t think so? Can you tell me that the last time you searched for airfare on the internet; you didn’t click on the “lowest fares” button? I didn’t think so. 25 years ago, a person could fly round trip from Ft. Lauderdale, FL to Phoenix, AZ for $198.00. Today, you can make the same trip for the same fare. Yet the price of everything else has risen. How much did you pay for gasoline 25 years ago? How about food? Your house? Again I say, if you are looking for a contributing factor to this accident, look in the mirror.