Narrative:

Company X deicing trucks in airport ZZZ are applying so much type iv fluid to the fuselage that the APU ingests an unacceptable amount immediately upon rotation and generates 'smoke' and fumes through the packs. I hate to use the word smoke since there is no fire; and we continued the flight; but this needs the attention of the safety department.because someone who doesn't fly the line thinks dousing egregious amounts of type 4 on the fuselage is 'safer;' we get enough vaporized type 4 coming through the ducts to make you cough and consider donning the oxygen masks for an immediate emergency air return. It is freaking out the passengers and concerning enough for the captain to make a PA and accept a call from the flight attendant after retracting the gear.we know it's coming; so it's no surprise; but choking on molasses fumes (not just an odor; but vaporized fluid that looks like 'smoke' but smells like molasses. It stops before we get the flaps up; and is obviously just type 4 and not a fire; but this is not a situation we should be putting ourselves in. We have made the decision to 'continue' when we accept type 4 on the fuselage. We don't have a choice but to continue when it hits us at rotation! If the FAA is demanding we type 4 the fuselage so much; please make them ride a jumpseat after such a liberal type 4 application forward of the APU inlet. A 1 minute delay on the bleeds; 3 minute delay on the packs; and 60% N1 for a 20s isn't enough to prevent type 4 from flowing into the APU after rotation. It's a judgment call whether to make an emergency air return; since the 'smoke' is anticipated; disputes so quickly; and the source and reason is so obvious. If we are going to accept the way company X puts type 4 on CRJ200s; we need to be doing unpressurized takeoffs with the APU shut down.I intend for this to sound alarming; because I think it is alarming! I fear submitting this; because I fear you will question the decision to continue after the packs are finished vaporizing 5 gallons of type 4. ...But I don't think it is any more unsafe than the company X/FAA's demand that we use type 4 on the fuselage in the first place. I fear the decision to continue the flight after 'smoke' could be seen as willful violation; but the event is over before we get to a safe altitude. The outcome is a direct result of following procedures; but I think the company X deicing program managers are putting us in a position with no reasonable choices. 200's can't be anti-iced the same way company X does an erj. We are being put in a situation I am uncomfortable with; but the problem appears to be systemic. If 'water vapor' from the packs in the summer time is enough to freak out the passengers; this is a thousand times worse and warning them of a molasses smell isn't good enough (though it has been appropriate for contract deicing I've seen in the past).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CRJ-200 pilot reports that an overabundance of deicing fluid applied to his model aircraft results in the fluid being ingested by the APU and passed into the aircraft interior as 'smoke' and fumes like vapor on takeoff. He suggests alternate methods of deicing as well as alternate methods of configuring the aircraft for takeoff to alleviate the problem.

Narrative: Company X deicing trucks in Airport ZZZ are applying so much type IV fluid to the fuselage that the APU ingests an unacceptable amount immediately upon rotation and generates 'smoke' and fumes through the packs. I hate to use the word smoke since there is no fire; and we continued the flight; but this needs the attention of the safety department.Because someone who doesn't fly the line thinks dousing egregious amounts of type 4 on the fuselage is 'safer;' we get enough vaporized type 4 coming through the ducts to make you cough and consider donning the oxygen masks for an immediate emergency air return. It is freaking out the passengers and concerning enough for the captain to make a PA and accept a call from the flight attendant after retracting the gear.We know it's coming; so it's no surprise; but choking on molasses fumes (not just an odor; but vaporized fluid that looks like 'smoke' but smells like molasses. It stops before we get the flaps up; and is obviously just type 4 and not a fire; but this is not a situation we should be putting ourselves in. We have made the decision to 'continue' when we accept type 4 on the fuselage. We don't have a choice but to continue when it hits us at rotation! If the FAA is demanding we type 4 the fuselage so much; please make them ride a jumpseat after such a liberal type 4 application forward of the APU inlet. A 1 minute delay on the bleeds; 3 minute delay on the packs; and 60% N1 for a 20s isn't enough to prevent type 4 from flowing into the APU after rotation. It's a judgment call whether to make an emergency air return; since the 'smoke' is anticipated; disputes so quickly; and the source and reason is so obvious. If we are going to accept the way Company X puts type 4 on CRJ200s; we need to be doing unpressurized takeoffs with the APU shut down.I intend for this to sound alarming; because I think it is alarming! I fear submitting this; because I fear you will question the decision to continue after the packs are finished vaporizing 5 gallons of type 4. ...BUT I don't think it is any more unsafe than the Company X/FAA's demand that we use type 4 on the fuselage in the first place. I fear the decision to continue the flight after 'smoke' could be seen as willful violation; but the event is over before we get to a safe altitude. The outcome is a direct result of following procedures; but I think the Company X deicing program managers are putting us in a position with no reasonable choices. 200's can't be anti-iced the same way Company X does an ERJ. We are being put in a situation I am uncomfortable with; but the problem appears to be systemic. If 'water vapor' from the packs in the summer time is enough to freak out the passengers; this is a thousand times worse and warning them of a molasses smell isn't good enough (though it has been appropriate for contract deicing I've seen in the past).

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.