 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
B737 captain reported being deiced three times at the gate before the snow and ice was finally removed from the top of the fuselage. The tug driver informed the captain that the job was not completed two times. The deice crew apparently believed that snow and ice did not need to be removed from the fuselage.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1415706 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201701 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | EWR.Airport |
| State Reference | NJ |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Dawn |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 128 Flight Crew Type 18000 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence |
Narrative:
It had snowed overnight and was snowing at push time with visibility at five miles or greater. This equated to light snow on the deice chart. The aircraft had been deiced overnight but with snow continuing to fall we needed to be deiced again at push to establish a holdover time for taxi out and the aircraft fuselage was covered with snow anyway. We established contact with iceman and asked for one step deicing. Current temperature and weather gave us 20 minutes holdover time which the first officer and I agreed should be sufficient for departure. The aircraft was deiced and iceman said the aircraft was free of contaminants. The push crew got on the headset and told us the fuselage was still covered in snow. We again contacted iceman and told him the push crew still saw snow and we needed it removed. He deiced the aircraft again and once again stated the aircraft was free of contaminants. The tug driver again got on the headset and said there was still snow on the fuselage of the aircraft. I asked him to get the supervisor (who was the iceman) and discuss the problem. They had what appeared to be (to us) a heated conversation. After this the tug driver/wingman got in the deice truck and deiced the aircraft again. We referenced the ground deice manual on the way to verify the fuselage needed to be deiced prior to departure. As a side note; I did notice another company aircraft taxi out with snow on the fuselage. I feel that everyone needs to be in agreement that the aircraft is clean before we leave the gate. The tug driver should be commended for bringing this to our attention. He could be the one that breaks the error chain that leads to an incident. Had we ignored him this time; he may not speak up next time.appears to be improper training on deice procedures. Perhaps more training for ground and flight crews would be appropriate. Instead of just publishing the winter ops manual and distributing it.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737 Captain reported being deiced three times at the gate before the snow and ice was finally removed from the top of the fuselage. The tug driver informed the Captain that the job was not completed two times. The deice crew apparently believed that snow and ice did not need to be removed from the fuselage.
Narrative: It had snowed overnight and was snowing at push time with visibility at five miles or greater. This equated to light snow on the Deice Chart. The aircraft had been deiced overnight but with snow continuing to fall we needed to be deiced again at push to establish a holdover time for taxi out and the aircraft fuselage was covered with snow anyway. We established contact with Iceman and asked for one step deicing. Current temperature and weather gave us 20 minutes holdover time which the FO and I agreed should be sufficient for departure. The aircraft was deiced and Iceman said the aircraft was free of contaminants. The Push Crew got on the headset and told us the fuselage was still covered in snow. We again contacted Iceman and told him the Push Crew still saw snow and we needed it removed. He deiced the aircraft again and once again stated the aircraft was free of contaminants. The Tug Driver again got on the headset and said there was still snow on the fuselage of the aircraft. I asked him to get the Supervisor (who was the Iceman) and discuss the problem. They had what appeared to be (to us) a heated conversation. After this the Tug Driver/Wingman got in the deice truck and deiced the aircraft again. We referenced the ground deice manual on the way to verify the fuselage needed to be deiced prior to departure. As a side note; I did notice another Company aircraft taxi out with snow on the fuselage. I feel that everyone needs to be in agreement that the aircraft is clean before we leave the gate. The Tug Driver should be commended for bringing this to our attention. He could be the one that breaks the error chain that leads to an incident. Had we ignored him this time; he may not speak up next time.Appears to be improper training on deice procedures. Perhaps more training for Ground and Flight Crews would be appropriate. Instead of just publishing the winter ops manual and distributing it.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.