De-icing truck boom strikes a Challenger 300 tail, Chicago, 2010

Final reportDe-icing

The short version

N515FX taxied to a run-up pad at Chicago Executive to be de-iced before a positioning flight to Midway. On the second pass over the tail, the de-icing truck's boom hit the empennage and caused substantial damage. The NTSB found that the truck operator did not follow company procedures or keep the boom clear of the tail, and that no supervisor was watching the operation.

What happened

  1. The weather observation at the field gives 2 miles visibility in light snow, overcast at 1,600 ft, wind 320° at 11 kt and a temperature of minus 3°C. The NTSB classed the conditions as marginal VMC.

  2. Before departure, the crew taxi to the run-up pad near runway 34 and taxiway Kilo for de-icing. The Signature ground crew start on the wings and tail.2

  3. During the second pass over the tail, the truck hits the aircraft. A Chicago Executive maintenance technician sees the boom hit the right horizontal stabilizer and the nose of the aircraft move forward, then down.2

  4. De-icing stops straight after. The pilot gets out to inspect the aircraft with Signature staff. The crew notify the operator and send photos. A tug tows the aircraft away.2

All times are local (central standard time). The strike time is approximate.

The NTSB report says the boom struck the empennage. The two accounts in the docket place the contact slightly differently. The technician saw the boom elbow hit the horizontal stabilizer, not the operator's cab. The pilot's report says the bucket touched the lower right part of the elevator.2

The report does not describe the damage beyond "substantial" and the empennage. It gives no account of how the crew and the truck operator talked to each other during the spray.1

Why it happened

  1. The NTSB gives the probable cause as the de-icing vehicle operator not following company procedures and not keeping the boom clear of the empennage during de-icing.1

  2. The FBO's de-icing and anti-icing training guidebook, under Equipment Operation, tells the driver to "always know where the boom and bucket are located."

  3. Supervisors were on duty at the airport, but none was overseeing the de-icing.

  4. The FBO's guidebook did not require a supervisor to oversee de-icing.

  5. The NTSB findings list the ground crew's use of equipment and the oversight of the operation by the organisation.

The report makes no safety recommendations.1

What a crew can take from it

  1. The de-icing truck works where you cannot see. From the flight deck you have no view of the tail, and the truck operator is judging distance in snow and spray. Before the spray starts, agree with the ground crew how they will reach you and how you will reach them if something looks wrong.

  2. Treat any jolt during de-icing as a strike. Here a witness saw the nose move forward and then down. If you feel the aircraft move or hear a bang, stop the de-icing on the agreed channel and get out to look before anything else happens.

  3. Look at the whole tail yourself. Get someone with a ladder or a lift to look at the top and bottom surfaces, and do not accept a quick look from the ground. Whether a damaged flight control is fit to fly is for maintenance to decide.

  4. Do not count on someone else supervising the de-icing. The report found that no supervisor was overseeing the de-icing and that the FBO's guidebook did not require one. At a quiet FBO the crew may be the only people watching. When the truck can be seen from the cockpit or the cabin windows, have one pilot watch where it is relative to the tail.

Study it on the course

Sources

  1. National Transportation Safety Board. Aviation Investigation Final Report CEN10LA142, Bombardier BD-100-1A10 N515FX, Wheeling, Illinois, 24 February 2010. First published 21 October 2010.
  2. NTSB, docket CEN10LA142 (pilot/operator report Form 6120.1 and witness statements).
  3. AIN, Preliminary Report: Challenger Damaged During De-icing, 8 July 2010.
  4. AIN, De-icing Accident Blamed on Vehicle Operator, 24 February 2011.

Last updated 22 October 2026

For study only. Always use the approved AFM, QRH and operator procedures.