Tynda is a small, high field in the Amur region with concrete runway 06/24 and an elevation around 610 meters MSL. Approaches into Tynda are typically non-precision and the surrounding terrain rises quickly in close. That combination matters when you fly old turboprops into remote Russian fields in winter.

The An-24 is a rugged, high wing turboprop built for austere fields. That ruggedness makes it valuable in remote service but it does not give immunity to classic approach threats. Many of the An-24 accidents recorded over its operational history are teachable moments for any crew still flying them: approach control loss in icing, stalls during go-arounds, and altimeter misinterpretation have all figured in serious events. Study the accident list and you will see recurring themes that apply to winter operations.

Operational risk picture for a winter approach into Tynda

  • Terrain and non-precision approach geometry. Non-precision procedures and NDB fixes reduce vertical guidance. When the technique requires step descents to low minima, any altimeter or profile error eats your margin fast. If your approach chart uses QFE references or station-based altimetry it changes how you interpret the crossing heights. Confirm the reference pressure setting and the chart datum before you descend below transition.

  • Cold weather, icing, and decreased margins. Airframe and engine icing raise stall speed and reduce climb performance. In turboprops that lack modern ice-protection automation, even light rime accumulating during a long inbound can be enough to erode go-around performance. In practice, that means a stabilized approach at a higher airspeed than the clean book Vref for an An-24 may be prudent when conditions are at or below icing temps or when visible moisture is present.

  • Go-around aerodynamics on a loaded turboprop. A go-around from a low, slow, flaps-extended configuration is a high-work, high-risk maneuver. If the crew attempts a go-around while slow, with flaps and gear down, the power needed to arrest the descent and accelerate can outstrip what the old engines produce, particularly at higher field elevation and with degraded propeller performance from icing. Several historical An-24 approach accidents involved loss of control during an attempted missed approach. Respect stabilized approach criteria and set conservative go-around margins.

  • Altimeter setting and vertical situational awareness. Wrong pressure setting, or confusing QNH and QFE references, directly produces altitude errors. On non-precision approaches in terrain, an altimeter mis-setting can put you hundreds of meters lower than the crew believes before any visual cues or warnings appear. Make altimeter verification a formal item on the approach flow and crosscheck instrument readings against ATC or the published approach step altitudes. Use the radio altimeter and GPWS if available; they are primary last-line defenses against CFIT.

Systemic context to keep in mind

  • Aging aircraft and logistics. The An-24 fleet is old, but it was designed for remote work. In a constrained maintenance environment spare part access, quality of repairs, and the availability of modern avionics can vary widely. That reality changes how you plan an approach and your contingency thinking. If your aircraft lacks reliable autopilot, modern GPWS, or has inconsistent de-ice performance, build that into your stabilized approach and go-around plan.

What crews should do now, in plain pilot terms

1) Stabilized approach is not negotiable. If you are not stabilized by the final-approach fix, go around early. On cold approaches into fields like Tynda, add 5 to 10 knots to your normal approach speed to preserve margins against icing and gusts.

2) Make altimeter discipline part of the flow. Confirm the unit of pressure, the reference (QNH vs QFE), and crosscheck with ATC and the chart. If you have to select between an uncertain field QFE and a reliable regional QNH, pick the option that preserves terrain clearance and clarity for both pilots. Put a physical placard or flow item to verify the setting before descent below the step altitude.

3) Treat go-arounds as a two-step procedure: power first, then pitch. Many turboprop stalls on missed approaches happen because crews try to pitch up for positive rate with insufficient power or while still contaminated with ice. If you must configure immediately, consider clean-up to the extent safe and achievable while simultaneously applying power aggressively and monitoring airspeed. If performance is marginal, fly a climbing circuit to gain speed rather than a tight climbing turn.

4) Icing checks, early and often. Use continuous visual checks of prop and windshield icing, use pitot/static heat, and run the de-ice boots at the first hint of contamination per the checklist. If the aircraft loses expected acceleration or you see ice accretion, be ready to divert to an alternate with better weather or ground de-icing capability.

5) Crew resource management and altitude crosschecks. In high workload approaches, assign altitude and radio duties clearly. Make the pilot monitoring call mandatory when crossing step altitudes. Any uncertainty is a go-around. Treat GPWS and radar altimeter alerts as immediate cues to climb and reestablish safe flight parameters.

Operator and regulator actions that reduce risk

  • Equip turbos with functional radio altimeters and modern GPWS wherever feasible. Those systems are the last line of defense against CFIT on non-precision approaches in broken weather and in hilly terrain.

  • Standardize altimeter reporting and approach datum on published plates. If approaches use QFE, publish it plainly and train crews on the differences and the consequences of mixing QNH and QFE references. Charts and ATIS should remove ambiguity.

  • Adjust training to emphasize missed approach aerodynamics with degraded performance. Simulate go-arounds with icing contamination, high field elevation, and single-engine degraded-power scenarios. Make the missed approach maneuver practiced and verbalized until it is automatic. Historical An-24 incidents show the same human and aerodynamic failure modes repeat when crews are not trained to those specific envelopes.

Closing note for crews flying winter regional routes

You can operate safely into remote fields in winter with a disciplined, conservative mindset. Respect the airplane for what it is: a rugged workhorse with finite performance margins. On approach, protect airspeed, verify altimetry, and make no apology for early go-arounds. If your operator cannot supply reliable de-icing, clear documentation of altimeter references, or basic terrain warning equipment, treat that as an operational red flag and raise it through your chain of command. Safety in winter approaches is about predictable procedures and preserving margins long before they are needed.