Narrative:

S80 wing ice checks. S80 revision X that came out just last week once again recommends that a crew member checks for wing ice from the cabin windows. I have mentioned this before as I do not think this is a very good idea let alone one that is published, encouraged and recommended as a procedure in one of our manuals. As I've stated before, back in 1992, march to be exact, a fokker 28 stalled immediately after takeoff. The NTSB aircraft accident report listed many reasons for the crash. On page 75 of the report it concluded that ice cannot be detected even with a different color strip on the wing. In addition, at night flight crews may not be able to detect contamination from cabin windows. There is no such thing as a little ice. Now granted this was an aircraft with a non-slanted wing and the S80 and the other aircraft in our fleet have leading edge slats, but do we want to do this? Wind tunnel studies show that it only takes a minute amount of contamination to drastically degrade the lift on a wing. Revision X advocates checking the wing in a couple of different places with no mention of the risks in so doing. Besides all this, how to check the tail of the aircraft? How can you check the wings without checking the tail for ice? Is this prudent? Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the air carrier has recently provided a flight manual revision that directs crews to do an over wing check for contamination just before departure. Holdover times have been issued and a guide with visibility is provided to infer water content, and its effect on holdover time. Reporter is concerned that no tail inspection occurs.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD80 CAPT IS CONCERNED ABOUT ICING CHKS ON THE UPPER SURFACE OF THE WINGS AS REQUIRED IN A RECENT FLT MANUAL REVISION.

Narrative: S80 WING ICE CHKS. S80 REVISION X THAT CAME OUT JUST LAST WK ONCE AGAIN RECOMMENDS THAT A CREW MEMBER CHKS FOR WING ICE FROM THE CABIN WINDOWS. I HAVE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE AS I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD IDEA LET ALONE ONE THAT IS PUBLISHED, ENCOURAGED AND RECOMMENDED AS A PROC IN ONE OF OUR MANUALS. AS I'VE STATED BEFORE, BACK IN 1992, MARCH TO BE EXACT, A FOKKER 28 STALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER TKOF. THE NTSB ACFT ACCIDENT RPT LISTED MANY REASONS FOR THE CRASH. ON PAGE 75 OF THE RPT IT CONCLUDED THAT ICE CANNOT BE DETECTED EVEN WITH A DIFFERENT COLOR STRIP ON THE WING. IN ADDITION, AT NIGHT FLT CREWS MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DETECT CONTAMINATION FROM CABIN WINDOWS. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LITTLE ICE. NOW GRANTED THIS WAS AN ACFT WITH A NON-SLANTED WING AND THE S80 AND THE OTHER ACFT IN OUR FLEET HAVE LEADING EDGE SLATS, BUT DO WE WANT TO DO THIS? WIND TUNNEL STUDIES SHOW THAT IT ONLY TAKES A MINUTE AMOUNT OF CONTAMINATION TO DRASTICALLY DEGRADE THE LIFT ON A WING. REVISION X ADVOCATES CHKING THE WING IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PLACES WITH NO MENTION OF THE RISKS IN SO DOING. BESIDES ALL THIS, HOW TO CHK THE TAIL OF THE ACFT? HOW CAN YOU CHK THE WINGS WITHOUT CHKING THE TAIL FOR ICE? IS THIS PRUDENT? CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE ACR HAS RECENTLY PROVIDED A FLT MANUAL REVISION THAT DIRECTS CREWS TO DO AN OVER WING CHK FOR CONTAMINATION JUST BEFORE DEP. HOLDOVER TIMES HAVE BEEN ISSUED AND A GUIDE WITH VISIBILITY IS PROVIDED TO INFER WATER CONTENT, AND ITS EFFECT ON HOLDOVER TIME. RPTR IS CONCERNED THAT NO TAIL INSPECTION OCCURS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.