Narrative:

Upon taxi -RA noted with temperature -2C. It was starting to freeze on impact with the aircraft surfaces. We requested to be de-iced. Upon reaching the de-ice pad we were instructed to go to spot X. I requested type 1 and 4 to be used. I watched the de-ice process from my window. I noticed that the de-ice truck was only spraying certain spots on the aircraft wing and not sweeping the wing to ensure that the entire surface would be free of the ice. I told the de-ice truck that they needed to get the entire wing. At the same time I noted that the propellers were not being fully de-iced. The de-ice truck would spray a fine mist over the propeller area but not actually onto the propeller blades. The de-ice crew did a visual inspection of the aircraft and started to apply the type 4 fluid. I told the de-ice truck that we needed the propellers to be de-iced. They stated that they do not apply type 4 to the propellers. I told them that I needed type 1 applied to the propellers and that it needed to be applied so that the entire propeller is free of ice. They stated that they would have to start the entire process again. I stated that they needed to de-ice the propellers that I could still see ice on that surface. They said that the inspection was complete. I called our dispatch to explain the delay and to request that the de-icing service supervisor could come out to the aircraft. My concern was that our previous aircraft that we had to do this flight was de-iced by the same crew and that they had applied type 1 directly into the AC gen intake. I did not want any further damage done to this aircraft but wanted the aircraft de-iced properly. Dispatch connected me to a manager who stated that we were up on the camera and that they could see the trucks moving around the aircraft but could not see anything coming from the nozzles. I told the manager that I needed this aircraft to be de-iced again and that they needed to apply the fluid so that it removes all of the frozen precipitation from the aircraft. The trucks did start to reapply type 1 and 4 with a more liberal application. The aircraft was de-iced and propellers were de-iced. We left the pad without any further incident. Inadequate training on how to de-ice a propeller in the winter. The de-ice service does not seem to understand that the propeller needs to be de-iced and that there are techniques that can be used to prevent direct contact into the engine intake. They also seem to want to spray certain spots along the wing instead of sweeping the wing to ensure properly de-iced. When they de-ice in spots there are areas left with ice. The crews (de-ice) also need to be aware of the areas on the nacelle that cannot take a direct application of de-ice fluid. This will prevent AC gen failures after the de-ice process is completed.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated that the airline uses a contract service for the de-icing. The previous aircraft was improperly de-iced; and fluid was directed into the AC gen intake; disabling the gen. When de-icing the next aircraft; the fluid was sparsely applied to the wings; missing a considerable amount of contamination. When the propellers were sprayed; a fine mist was applied; and again the surfaces were not free of ice. It was only after refusing to move the aircraft and contacting the company that the aircraft was properly de-iced; spraying the entire wing surface and then directing the spray onto the propellers; allowing the spray to turn the propellers and clean the entire surface of each propeller. The reporter stated that the airline is now monitoring the procedure via camera to ensure proper de-icing. Reporter has since had an aircraft de-iced at the same location with no problem.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SAAB 340 WAS IMPROPERLY DE-ICED. THE WINGS WERE ONLY PARTIALLY SPRAYED; AND THE PROPS ONLY RECEIVED A FINE MIST OF DE-ICE FLUID.

Narrative: UPON TAXI -RA NOTED WITH TEMP -2C. IT WAS STARTING TO FREEZE ON IMPACT WITH THE ACFT SURFACES. WE REQUESTED TO BE DE-ICED. UPON REACHING THE DE-ICE PAD WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO GO TO SPOT X. I REQUESTED TYPE 1 AND 4 TO BE USED. I WATCHED THE DE-ICE PROCESS FROM MY WINDOW. I NOTICED THAT THE DE-ICE TRUCK WAS ONLY SPRAYING CERTAIN SPOTS ON THE ACFT WING AND NOT SWEEPING THE WING TO ENSURE THAT THE ENTIRE SURFACE WOULD BE FREE OF THE ICE. I TOLD THE DE-ICE TRUCK THAT THEY NEEDED TO GET THE ENTIRE WING. AT THE SAME TIME I NOTED THAT THE PROPELLERS WERE NOT BEING FULLY DE-ICED. THE DE-ICE TRUCK WOULD SPRAY A FINE MIST OVER THE PROP AREA BUT NOT ACTUALLY ONTO THE PROP BLADES. THE DE-ICE CREW DID A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE ACFT AND STARTED TO APPLY THE TYPE 4 FLUID. I TOLD THE DE-ICE TRUCK THAT WE NEEDED THE PROPELLERS TO BE DE-ICED. THEY STATED THAT THEY DO NOT APPLY TYPE 4 TO THE PROPELLERS. I TOLD THEM THAT I NEEDED TYPE 1 APPLIED TO THE PROPELLERS AND THAT IT NEEDED TO BE APPLIED SO THAT THE ENTIRE PROPELLER IS FREE OF ICE. THEY STATED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO START THE ENTIRE PROCESS AGAIN. I STATED THAT THEY NEEDED TO DE-ICE THE PROPELLERS THAT I COULD STILL SEE ICE ON THAT SURFACE. THEY SAID THAT THE INSPECTION WAS COMPLETE. I CALLED OUR DISPATCH TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY AND TO REQUEST THAT THE DE-ICING SERVICE SUPERVISOR COULD COME OUT TO THE ACFT. MY CONCERN WAS THAT OUR PREVIOUS AIRCRAFT THAT WE HAD TO DO THIS FLT WAS DE-ICED BY THE SAME CREW AND THAT THEY HAD APPLIED TYPE 1 DIRECTLY INTO THE AC GEN INTAKE. I DID NOT WANT ANY FURTHER DAMAGE DONE TO THIS ACFT BUT WANTED THE ACFT DE-ICED PROPERLY. DISPATCH CONNECTED ME TO A MANAGER WHO STATED THAT WE WERE UP ON THE CAMERA AND THAT THEY COULD SEE THE TRUCKS MOVING AROUND THE ACFT BUT COULD NOT SEE ANYTHING COMING FROM THE NOZZLES. I TOLD THE MANAGER THAT I NEEDED THIS ACFT TO BE DE-ICED AGAIN AND THAT THEY NEEDED TO APPLY THE FLUID SO THAT IT REMOVES ALL OF THE FROZEN PRECIP FROM THE ACFT. THE TRUCKS DID START TO REAPPLY TYPE 1 AND 4 WITH A MORE LIBERAL APPLICATION. THE ACFT WAS DE-ICED AND PROPELLERS WERE DE-ICED. WE LEFT THE PAD WITHOUT ANY FURTHER INCIDENT. INADEQUATE TRAINING ON HOW TO DE-ICE A PROPELLER IN THE WINTER. THE DE-ICE SERVICE DOES NOT SEEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROPELLER NEEDS TO BE DE-ICED AND THAT THERE ARE TECHNIQUES THAT CAN BE USED TO PREVENT DIRECT CONTACT INTO THE ENGINE INTAKE. THEY ALSO SEEM TO WANT TO SPRAY CERTAIN SPOTS ALONG THE WING INSTEAD OF SWEEPING THE WING TO ENSURE PROPERLY DE-ICED. WHEN THEY DE-ICE IN SPOTS THERE ARE AREAS LEFT WITH ICE. THE CREWS (DE-ICE) ALSO NEED TO BE AWARE OF THE AREAS ON THE NACELLE THAT CANNOT TAKE A DIRECT APPLICATION OF DE-ICE FLUID. THIS WILL PREVENT AC GEN FAILURES AFTER THE DE-ICE PROCESS IS COMPLETED.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE REPORTER STATED THAT THE AIRLINE USES A CONTRACT SERVICE FOR THE DE-ICING. THE PREVIOUS ACFT WAS IMPROPERLY DE-ICED; AND FLUID WAS DIRECTED INTO THE AC GEN INTAKE; DISABLING THE GEN. WHEN DE-ICING THE NEXT ACFT; THE FLUID WAS SPARSELY APPLIED TO THE WINGS; MISSING A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF CONTAMINATION. WHEN THE PROPS WERE SPRAYED; A FINE MIST WAS APPLIED; AND AGAIN THE SURFACES WERE NOT FREE OF ICE. IT WAS ONLY AFTER REFUSING TO MOVE THE ACFT AND CONTACTING THE COMPANY THAT THE ACFT WAS PROPERLY DE-ICED; SPRAYING THE ENTIRE WING SURFACE AND THEN DIRECTING THE SPRAY ONTO THE PROPS; ALLOWING THE SPRAY TO TURN THE PROPS AND CLEAN THE ENTIRE SURFACE OF EACH PROPELLER. THE REPORTER STATED THAT THE AIRLINE IS NOW MONITORING THE PROCEDURE VIA CAMERA TO ENSURE PROPER DE-ICING. REPORTER HAS SINCE HAD AN ACFT DE-ICED AT THE SAME LOCATION WITH NO PROBLEM.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.