On February 12, 2009, Colgan Air Flight 3407 experienced a stall warning during its final approach into Buffalo International Airport. The two pilots responded by pitching up the airplane without applying maximum engine power. This mishandling of stall warning induced the airplane to stall. The airplane crashed into a residential area, killing 49 persons on board and 1 on the ground. The airplane that crashed in this accident was a Bombardier Aerospace Q400. The Q400 is a twin-engine airliner designed and manufactured by Bombardier Aerospace in Canada. The operator of the crashed aircraft was Colgan Air. In 2009, Colgan Air was a small carrier operating regional flights for the major carriers. The Flight 3407 was a code-shared flight operated
…show more content…
During the final approach phase, the two pilots were chatting in the cockpit, unaware of the change in airspeed. They violated the Federal Aviation Administration's sterile cockpit rule that prohibits all unnecessary conversations in critical phases of flights, such as take-off, approach and landing. After the stall warning was triggered, the pilots responded incorrectly and induced the airplane to stall. In aerodynamics, stall is the loss of lift of a wing that usually occurs at low airspeed. The correct procedure to handle a stall warning is pitching down the aircraft and increasing airspeed. This procedure is an essential part of the pilots' training on non-normal procedures. Nevertheless, NTSB found that Colgan Air did not provide sufficient training on preventing stalls. Although the major cause of the crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407 was human mistake, other investigators found that the stall warnings and protections of Q400 was insufficient. The Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) found that the Q400 lacked aural warnings of low airspeed. Moreover, the airplane's lack of auto throttle and flight envelop protection made it difficult for pilots to notice and prevent stalls. According to ALPA, the low level of automation and the lack of aural stall warning in Q400 was intended to keep the airplane economic and the cockpit
During the final approach phase, the two pilots were chatting in the cockpit, unaware of the change in airspeed. They violated the Federal Aviation Administration's sterile cockpit rule that prohibits all unnecessary conversations in critical phases of flights, such as take-off, approach and landing. After the stall warning was triggered, the pilots responded incorrectly and induced the airplane to stall. In aerodynamics, stall is the loss of lift of a wing that usually occurs at low airspeed. The correct procedure to handle a stall warning is pitching down the aircraft and increasing airspeed. This procedure is an essential part of the pilots' training on non-normal procedures. Nevertheless, NTSB found that Colgan Air did not provide sufficient training on preventing stalls. Although the major cause of the crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407 was human mistake, other investigators found that the stall warnings and protections of Q400 was insufficient. The Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) found that the Q400 lacked aural warnings of low airspeed. Moreover, the airplane's lack of auto throttle and flight envelop protection made it difficult for pilots to notice and prevent stalls. According to ALPA, the low level of automation and the lack of aural stall warning in Q400 was intended to keep the airplane economic and the cockpit