Aviation News, Headlines & Alerts
 
Category: <span>Public Statement</span>

Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB STATEMENT ON ERRONEOUS CONFIRMATION OF CREW NAMES


NTSB STATEMENT ON ERRONEOUS CONFIRMATION OF CREW NAMES
July 12, 2013
WASHINGTON – The National Transportation Safety Board apologizes for inaccurate and offensive names that were mistakenly confirmed as those of the pilots of Asiana flight 214, which crashed at San Francisco International Airport on July 6.

Earlier today, in response to an inquiry from a media outlet, a summer intern acted outside the scope of his authority when he erroneously confirmed the names of the flight crew on the aircraft.

The NTSB does not release or confirm the names of crewmembers or people involved in transportation accidents to the media. We work hard to ensure that only appropriate factual information regarding an investigation is released and deeply regret today’s incident.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Raw video

When you see this amateur video of the Asiana Airlines crash, you really wonder how there were any survivors at all. Of the 307 people—291 passengers and 16 crew—aboard Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-200ER Flight 214, two passengers were killed and 181 injured.
Click to open video page

Asiana Press Releases for Incident Involving Asiana Flight

OZ 214 – July 7, 2013 06:30 (Kor. Time) 2013-07-07 10:02
The following information has been confirmed.

Asiana Airlines flight OZ214 (Aircraft Registration HL7742) departed Incheon International Airport on July 6, 2013 at 16:35 (Korea time) bound for San Francisco. Only July 7, 2013 at 11:28 (Local time) an accident occurred as OZ214 was making a landing on San Francisco International Airport’s runway 28.

There were a total of 291 passengers (19 business class, 272 travel class) and 16 cabin crew aboard. The majority of the passengers were comprised of 77 Korean citizens, 141 Chinese citizens, 61 US citizens, 1 Japanese citizen, etc. for a total of 291 people.

Asiana Airlines is currently investigating the specific cause of the incident as well as any injuries that may have been sustained to passengers as a result. Asiana Airlines will continue to cooperate fully with the investigation of all associated government agencies and to facilitate this cooperation has established an emergency response center at its headquarters.

At this point no additional information has been confirmed. New developments will be announced as more information becomes available.

#2
Official Asiana Statement from OZ214 Incident Press Conference 2013-07-07 16:31
We at Asiana Airlines would like express our utmost sympathy and regret for the distress experienced by the passengers of OZ flight 214 and their families as a result of this accident. We apologize most deeply.

Asiana Airlines flight OZ214 departed Incheon International Airport on July 6, 2013 at 16:35 (Korea time) bound for San Francisco. On July 6, 2013 at 11:27 (Local time) an accident occurred as OZ214 landed on San Francisco International Airport’s runway 28.

A total of 291 passengers were aboard the aircraft. (77 Koreans, 141 Chinese, 64 Americans, 3 Indians, 3 Canadians, 1 French, 1 Japanese and 1 Vietnamese)

Asiana Airlines has established emergency response centers to ascertain the cause of this crash and to look after injured passengers and contact their families. Asiana continues to actively cooperate with all Korean and US governmental institutions in the ongoing investigation.

# 3
Statement from July 8th Press Conference on OZ214 Incident 2013-07-08 15:42
Asiana would like to provide a brief update regarding the status of OZ214.

The special charter flight dispatched by Asiana Airlines yesterday at 13:33 (Korea Time) carrying twelve support staff, eight government inspectors and members of the Korean media has arrived on location in San Francisco. Its passengers have begun supporting the victims and their familes and assisting in the investigation.

Asiana Airlines is providing airfare and lodging for families of the passengers. In the event that the number of family members seeking support increases, Asiana is also preparing to operate additional charter flights.

Two Korean family members departed for the United States yesterday. Another four are expected to depart today followed by an additional four on Wednesday. Asiana Airlines is also supporting twelve Chinese family members and six Chinese government officials, who will depart from Shanghai for the United States (via Incheon) today.

48 injured persons are being treated at local hospitals in the San Francisco area. Each hospital is staffed with dedicated personnel and transportation to provide the utmost support for the victims and their families.

Asiana Airlines deeply regrets this accident and is dedicating great efforts to support and ensure a swift and thorough investigation.

* A cautionary note: The official investigation of the cause of the crash will take a year or more. No matter what news releases or speculations come about before the official investigation is just speculation. We do not know, for example, if some part or software in the plane malfunctioned, leading the pilots to respond as they did.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB says FAA should modify air traffic control procedures

July 1, 2013
WASHINGTON – Following the investigation of five incidents in which commercial jetliners came within hazardous proximity of other aircraft while arriving or departing at major U.S. airports, the National Transportation Safety Board today has recommended that the Federal Aviation Administration modify the rules for air traffic controllers to ensure the safe separation of airplanes during go-around maneuvers.

A go-around – an aborted landing attempt by an airplane on final approach – can be initiated at the direction of ATC or by the flight crew upon a determination that circumstances are unfavorable for a safe landing.

The safety hazard identified in the five incidents all occurred when an airplane that was on approach to the airport aborted the landing attempt and initiated a go-around maneuver, which put the go-around airplane on a flightpath that intersected with that of another airplane that was either departing or arriving on another runway of the same airport.

Although current FAA procedures have specific requirements for ensuring the separation between two airplanes that are departing from different runways but that have intersecting flightpaths, they do not prohibit controllers from clearing an airplane to land at a time when it would create a potential collision hazard with another aircraft if the pilots of the landing airplane perform a go-around.

In such situations, a flight crew performing a go-around may be put into the position of having to execute evasive maneuvers at low altitude and high closing speeds with little time to avoid a mid-air collision. The NTSB has determined that existing FAA separation standards and operating procedures are inadequate and need to be revised to ensure the safe separation between aircraft near the airport environment.

The NTSB has recommended that the FAA modify air traffic control procedures so that an airplane that executes a go-around instead of landing as expected, will not be put on a potential collision course with another airplane either in the process of landing or departing.

The incidents upon which this safety recommendation is based are listed below.

• Las Vegas McCarran International Airport
On July 30, 2012, at 1:44 p.m., a Spirit Airlines A-319 was executing a go-around as a Dotcom Cessna Citation 510 was on short final for landing on another runway. The two planes came within about 1,300 feet laterally and 100 feet vertically of each other.

• New York John F. Kennedy International Airport
On July 30, 2012, at 4:04 p.m., an American Airlines B-737 was executing a go-around as a Pinnacle Airlines CRJ 200 regional jet was departing from another runway. The two planes came within about 1,800 feet laterally and 300 feet vertically of each other.

• Charlotte-Douglas International Airport
On July 14, 2012, at 11:44 a.m., an ExpressJet Embraer 145 regional jet was executing a go-around as an Air Wisconsin Canadair RJ was departing from another runway. The two planes came within about 1,000 feet laterally and 400 feet vertically of each other.

• Las Vegas McCarran International Airport
On April 26, 2012, at 11:25 a.m., a JetBlue Airways A-320 was executing a go-around as a Learjet 60 business jet was departing from another runway. The two planes came within about 1,800 feet laterally and 100 feet vertically of each other.

• Las Vegas McCarran International Airport
On January 27, 2006, at 5:44 p.m., a near mid-air collision occurred when a United Airlines A-320 was executing a go-around as an American Airlines B-757 jet was departing from another runway. The two planes came within about 1,400 feet laterally and 300 feet vertically of each other.

The complete safety recommendation letter to the FAA, which includes additional information about the incidents referenced above, is available at http://go.usa.gov/busC.
###


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Least safe commercial jets

An Airline Ratings study points out these planes as the least safe commercial jets to fly: LET 410, Ilyushin 72, Antonov AN-12, Twin Otter, CASA. This might be one of those cases where certain facts can’t be separated. How can statistics separate the effect of the planes being flown in third world countries with the least safe airports? How can one separate the fact of the Twin Otter’s heavy usage in Nepal, home of some of the worlds most dangerous airports?

The same study indicates Boeing’s 777, 717, 787 and 767/757, the Airbus A380 and A340, the Embraer 135/145, and CRJ 700/1000 as the safest planes.

While 137 airlines were deemed safest, only these carriers score top marks for both safety and service: Air New Zealand, Asiana Airlines, Cathay Pacific, Emirates, Etihad, EVA Air, Korean Air, Qantas, Royal Jordanian, Singapore Airlines and Virgin Atlantic.

British Airways, Flybe, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa and Aer Lingus were considered safe but had lesser marks for service. The full spectrum of the rated airlines is located here: http://www.airlineratings.com/ratings.php


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

TWA Flight 800 report Questioned

James Kallstrom, who headed up the investigation into the 1996 crash for the FBI says the original report is legitimate.

But six retired investigators from TWA, the National Transportation Safety Board, and the Air Line Pilots Association say the final report of the 1996 accident, “TWA Flight 800” was falsified. They say the accident was either a terrorist attack or a failed military operation. The cadre of retired investigators are calling for a new investigation by the feds. Others argue that there’s no question the explosion was an accident. 230 people died after Flight 800 took off from JFK.

Originally there were several theories put forward: a missile theory ,a bomb-on-the-plane theory, a meteor strike theory. All of these theories were discarded when an exploding fuel tank was concluded to be the cause.

The retirees have appealed to families to ask for the case to be reinvestigated. Many family members are disturbed by the idea of renewal of the case which they believe is simply hype to push a new documentary “TWA Flight 800.”


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

International Progress on Environmental Standards


Earlier this year, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) advanced two important goals to make air travel cleaner and quieter worldwide. As a member of CAEP, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) played a crucial role.

“Air transportation continues to grow within and amongst nations,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. “These new environmental standards and procedures recognize that we can work together internationally to achieve positive advancements in making aviation as environmentally efficient as possible.”

Relating to aircraft noise, CAEP has recommended a new international standard for newly designed aircraft that would reduce noise by 7 decibels relative to the current noise standard. The new requirement would become effective in 2017 for large aircraft and in 2020 for smaller models.

To address global warming greenhouse gases produced in air travel, CAEP has agreed to new international certification procedures for aircraft relating to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. At previous CAEP meetings, the committee had agreed on how to measure CO2. These new certification procedures now open the door for CAEP discussions on how stringent the standard should be set and whether the standard should only be applied to newly designed aircraft or some application to in-production aircraft. These discussions are expected to be completed by 2015.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB Issues 9 New Safety Recommendations

NTSB Issues Nine New Safety Recommendations as a Result of Its Investigation of the 8/26/2011 Crash of a Eurocopter AS350 B2 Near Mosby, Missouri

May 6, 2013 The National Transportation Safety Board Issues the Following Recommendations to the Following Organizations:

  • Prohibit flight crewmembers in 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 and 91 subpart K operations from using a portable electronic device for nonoperational use while at their duty station on the flight deck while the aircraft is being operated. (A-13-007)
  • Require all 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121, 135, and 91 subpart K operators to incorporate into their initial and recurrent pilot training programs information on the detrimental effects that distraction due to the nonoperational use of portable electronic devices can have on performance of safety-critical ground and flight operations. (A-13-008)
  • Require all 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121, 135, and 91 subpart K operators to review their respective general operations manuals to ensure that procedures are in place that prohibit the nonoperational use of portable electronic devices by operational personnel while in flight and during safety-critical preparatory and planning activities on the ground in advance of flight. (A-13-009)
  • Inform pilots of helicopters with low inertia rotor systems about the circumstances of this accident, particularly emphasizing the findings of the simulator flight evaluations, and advise them of the importance of simultaneously applying aft cyclic and down collective to achieve a successful autorotation entry at cruise airspeeds. (A-13-010)
  • Revise the Helicopter Flying Handbook to include a discussion of the entry phase of autorotations that explains the factors affecting rotor rpm decay and informs pilots that immediate and simultaneous control inputs may be required to enter an autorotation. (A-13-011)
  • Require the installation of a crash-resistant flight recorder system on all newly manufactured turbine-powered, nonexperimental, nonrestricted-category aircraft that are not equipped with a flight data recorder and a cockpit voice recorder and are operating under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 91, 121, or 135. The crash-resistant flight recorder system should record cockpit audio and images with a view of the cockpit environment to include as much of the outside view as possible, and parametric data per aircraft and system installation, all as specified in Technical Standard Order C197, “Information Collection and Monitoring Systems.” (A-13-012)
  • Require all existing turbine-powered, nonexperimental, nonrestricted-category aircraft that are not equipped with a flight data recorder or cockpit voice recorder and are operating under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 91, 121, or 135 to be retrofitted with a crash-resistant flight recorder system. The crash-resistant flight recorder system should record cockpit audio and images with a view of the cockpit environment to include as much of the outside view as possible, and parametric data per aircraft and system installation, all as specified in Technical Standard Order C197, “Information Collection and Monitoring Systems.” (A-13-013)

    To Air Methods Corporation:

  • Expand your policy on portable electronic devices to prohibit their nonoperational use during safety-critical ground activities, such as flight planning and preflight inspection, as well as in flight. (A-13-014)
  • Revise company procedures so that pilots are no longer solely responsible for nonroutine operational decisions but are required to consult with the Air Methods Operational Control Center for approval to accept or continue a mission when confronted with elevated risk situations, such as fuel-related issues and unplanned deviations. (A-13-015)

Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB TO ASSIST AFGHAN AUTHORITIES WITH INVESTIGATION INTO BAGRAM CARGO PLANE CRASH


The National Transportation Safety Board will lead a team to assist the Afghanistan Ministry of Transportation and Commercial Aviation in the investigation of a cargo plane crash at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.

NTSB Senior Air Safety Investigator Tim LeBaron will be the U.S. accredited representative. He will lead a team of three additional investigators from the NTSB as well as representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration and The Boeing Company.

The private cargo plane, a Boeing 747-400 operated by National Air Cargo, crashed just after takeoff from the U.S.-operated air base at 11:20 a.m. local time Monday. All seven crewmembers onboard were killed and the airplane destroyed. The seven crew members were all American citizens. The accident site is within the perimeter of Bagram Air Base.

The international cargo flight was destined for Dubai World Central – Al Maktoum International Airport, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

The Afghanistan Ministry of Transportation and Commercial Aviation is leading the investigation and will be the sole source of information regarding the investigation. According to the International Civil Aviation Organization, they can be reached at (873) 68 2341450 / 49 or by fax at (873) 68 1280784.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB INVESTIGATIVE HEARING ON BOEING 787 BATTERY FIRE

April 23, 2013 Press Release
The National Transportation Safety Board today will begin the first of two days of investigative hearings into the Jan. 7 battery fire aboard a Boeing 787 in Boston.

The all-day hearings will end with a separate press availability by NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman.

Event 1: Investigative Hearing

Date/Time: Tues., April 23, 9 a.m. – 5:30 p.m. ET.; Wed., April 24, 9 a.m. – 5 p.m. ET

Location: Board Room, NTSB Board Room and Conference Center
429 L’Enfant Plaza, SW
Washington, DC 20594

Participants: NTSB Board Members, witnesses, NTSB staff technical panel, party members

Media Logistics: http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130419.html

Network pool coverage will be by NBC

Live Webcast: A link to the webcast will be available at: www.capitolconnection.net/capcon/ntsb/ntsb.htm

Event 2: Press Availability

Participant: NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman

Date/Time: Tues., April 23, 5:45 p.m. ET.; Wed., April 24, 5:15 p.m. ET

Location: Room A/B, NTSB Board Room and Conference Center
429 L’Enfant Plaza, SW
Washington, DC 20594

Media-only phone teleconference: 800-776-0420 or international 913-312-0945
Participant passcode: XXXXXX
Call 5-10 minutes before start of press conference and give your media affiliation, name and email.

Meeting Agenda


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Anniversary of Bhoja Air Crash

The anniversary of a plane crash is always a sad day;

It is a day few people recall if they didn’t lose someone;

It is a day remembered by children as the moment they found themselves orphaned–and mothers and fathers who found themselves without a child; and husbands and wives who found themselves widowed.

It is a day with consequences that reverberate through the lives of those affected like ripples in a pond–except that ripples in a pond eventually come to rest, and the victims of a crash will be victims forever.

We remember the day Bhoja Air crashed. It was en route from Karachi to Islamabad, with 121 passengers and 6 crew.

The owner of Bhoja Air remembers too, and the FIA is not likely to let him forget:

FIA Sindh Director Muazzam Jah Ansari said Bhoja Air owner Farooq Bhoja was taken into custody for questioning during the Bhoja Air plane crash and was released on Sunday after initial investigation.

Farooq Bhoja was not arrested. His office was raided and the FIA seized official documents.

Press Release Below:


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

FATAL MISSOURI HELICOPTER ACCIDENT WAS CAUSED BY FUEL EXHAUSTION,

In George’s Point of View


I usually say Maintenance, Maintenance Maintenance, but in this case, I think I’ll say Training, Training, Training. The pilots I meet who were trained in the military tell me they are drilled to the point that reactions are instinct. If only this pilot had chosen not to fly, fueled the helicopter ahead of time, done things a little differently.

April 9, 2013
WASHINGTON — A pilot’s decision to depart on a mission despite a critically low fuel level as well as his inability to perform a crucial flight maneuver following the engine flameout from fuel exhaustion was the probable cause of an emergency medical services helicopter accident that killed four in Missouri, the National Transportation Safety Board said today.

“This accident, like so many others we’ve investigated, comes down to one of the most crucial and time-honored aspects of safe flight: good decision making,” said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman.

On August 26, 2011, at about 6:41 pm CDT, a Eurocopter AS350 B2 helicopter operated by Air Methods on an EMS mission crashed following a loss of engine power as a result of fuel exhaustion a mile from an airport in Mosby, Missouri. The pilot, flight nurse, flight paramedic and patient were killed, and the helicopter was substantially damaged.

At about 5:20 pm, the EMS operator, located in St. Joseph, Mo., accepted a mission to transport a patient from a hospital in Bethany, Mo., to a hospital 62 miles away in Liberty, Mo. The helicopter departed its base less than 10 minutes later to pick up the patient at the first hospital. Shortly after departing, the pilot reported back to the company that he had two hours’ worth of fuel onboard.

After reaching the first hospital, the pilot called the company’s communication center and indicated that he actually had only about half the amount of fuel (Jet-A) that he had reported earlier, and that he would need to obtain fuel in order to complete the next flight leg to the destination hospital.

Even though the helicopter had only about 30 minutes of fuel remaining and the closest fueling station along the route of flight was at an airport about 30 minutes away, the pilot elected to continue the mission. He departed the first hospital with crew members and a patient in an attempt to reach the airport to refuel.

The helicopter ran out of fuel and the engine lost power within sight of the airport. The helicopter crashed after the pilot failed to make the flight control inputs necessary to enter an autorotation, an emergency flight maneuver that must be performed within about two seconds of the loss of engine power in order to execute a safe emergency landing. The investigation found that the autorotation training the pilot received was not representative of an actual engine failure at cruise speed, which likely contributed to his failure to successfully execute the maneuver.

Further, a review of helicopter training resources suggested that the accident pilot may not have been aware of the specific control inputs needed to successfully enter an autorotation at cruise speed. The NTSB concluded that because of a lack of specific guidance in Federal Aviation Administration training materials, many other helicopter pilots may also be unaware of the specific actions required within seconds of losing engine power and recommended that FAA revise its training materials to convey this information.

An examination of cell phone records showed that the pilot had made and received multiple personal calls and text messages throughout the afternoon while the helicopter was being inspected and prepared for flight, during the flight to the first hospital, while he was on the helipad at the hospital making mission-critical decisions about continuing or delaying the flight due to the fuel situation, and during the accident flight.

While there was no evidence that the pilot was using his cell phone when the flameout occurred, the NTSB said that the texting and calls, including those that occurred before and between flights, were a source of distraction that likely contributed to errors and poor decision-making.

“This investigation highlighted what is a growing concern across transportation – distraction and the myth of multi-tasking,” said Hersman. “When operating heavy machinery, whether it’s a personal vehicle or an emergency medical services helicopter, the focus must be on the task at hand: safe transportation.”

The NTSB cited four factors as contributing to the accident: distracted attention due to texting, fatigue, the operator’s lack of policy requiring that a flight operations specialist be notified of abnormal fuel situations, and the lack of realistic training for entering an autorotation at cruise airspeed.

The NTSB made a nine safety recommendations to the FAA and Air Methods Corporation and reiterated three previously issued recommendations to the FAA.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

FAA and Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Reach Agreement on Airport Safety Violations

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) have reached a settlement agreement about aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) violations from December 2010 to June 2012 at four New York area airports owned and operated by the PANYNJ — John F. Kennedy, Teterboro, LaGuardia, and Newark Liberty International.

“We expect all airports to comply with our safety regulations and to correct any deficiencies immediately,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “These violations were egregious, and they will not be tolerated.”

Under the agreement, the PANYNJ agrees to pay a $3.5 million fine within 30 days. If there is a violation of the settlement agreement, the FAA will impose an additional fine of $1.5 million and will assess an additional $27,500 daily for each violation. In addition to the fine, the PANYNJ has agreed to take the following actions, with FAA approval, to address the underlying problems that led to systemic noncompliance with ARFF requirements at the four airports:

  • The Port Authority will create a dedicated ARFF force to carry out airport-related ARFF functions with no collateral police officer duties.
  • The staff will report directly to the Department of Aviation and be operational no later than March 31, 2014.
  • The Port Authority will hire an ARFF fire chief and facility captains as soon as possible, but no later than March 31, 2014.
  • The Port Authority will submit a curriculum for training to the FAA on or before December 31, 2013, which includes at least 75 hours of initial ARFF training and 40 hours of annual recurrent firefighting training in addition to Part 139 training, pertaining to an airport’s operational and safety standards and providing for such things as firefighting and rescue.
  • The ARFF personnel will work a 12-hour shift.
  • The Port Authority will amend the airport certification manuals for the four airports to include: an organizational chart; a process to maintain ARFF training records; and a description of ARFF operations, including shift assignments, personnel training records management, and Department of Aviation oversight.
  • The Port Authority will conduct monthly internal audits of ARFF training and shift assignments and annual external audits to ensure that all ARFF personnel assigned to a shift are trained.

“We expect the Port Authority to have trained safety personnel to ensure the safety of the travelling public and airport personnel, just like we have at all airports in the United States,” said FAA Administrator Michael P. Huerta.

The FAA became aware of ARFF violations as a result of an annual airport certification safety inspection of JFK in December 2011. The FAA also discovered similar violations at Teterboro, which prompted a full review of training at LaGuardia, Newark Liberty International, and Stewart International Airports. The review of ARFF training revealed violations at LaGuardia and Newark, with no violations at Stewart.

The FAA believes the settlement agreement provides the best long-term solution to ensure ARFF compliance, given the systemic nature of the PANYNJ airport problems.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

FAA Delays Closure of 149 Air Traffic towers until June 15

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced today that it will delay the closures of all 149 federal contract air traffic control towers until June 15. Last month, the FAA announced it would eliminate funding for these towers as part of the agency’s required $637 million budget cuts under sequestration.

This additional time will allow the agency to attempt to resolve multiple legal challenges to the closure decisions. As part of the tower closure implementation process, the agency continues to consult with airports and operators and review appropriate risk mitigations. Extending the transition deadline will give the FAA and airports more time to execute the changes to the National Airspace System.
“This has been a complex process and we need to get this right,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “Safety is our top priority. We will use this additional time to make sure communities and pilots understand the changes at their local airports.”

As of today, approximately 50 airport authorities and other stakeholders have indicated they may join the FAA’s non-Federal Contract Tower program and fund the tower operations themselves. This additional time will allow the FAA to help facilitate that transition.

“We will continue our outreach to the user community to answer any questions and address their concerns about these tower closures,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta.

On March 22, the FAA announced that it would stop federal funding for 149 contract towers across the country. A phased, four-week closure process was scheduled to begin this Sunday, April 7. That phased closure process will no longer occur. Instead, the FAA will stop funding all 149 towers on June 15 and will close the facilities unless the airports decide to continue operations as a nonfederal contract tower.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Flying Tigers Inspection Fraud Scheme

Joel Stout at Flying Tigers, Inc forged the signature of a certified mechanic claiming to have performed inspections he had not done.

Stout pleaded guilty to seven counts of conspiracy and mail fraud.

His sentencing will be June 24.

See CRIMINAL NO. 12-394 below:

NTSB Reports on Dreamliner Battery Fire in Boston

briefing
Briefing March 7, 2013

We no longer have to conjecture about the Japan Airlines 787 battery fire in Boston because the National Transportation Safety Board has released an interim factual report with nearly 500 pages of related documentation.

A live webcast forum is scheduled for April in Washington to investigate the design, technology and certification lithium-ion batteries.

Attached is the report which contains the details of what happened, and examination findings to date.

Interim Report on Battery


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

IATA Says Last year was the safest in aviation history

In a speech at the AVSEC World in New York, the director of IATA, International Air Transport Association, Tony Tyler, said “The industry’s 2012 record safety performance was the best in history. Each day approximately 100,000 flights arrive safely at their destination.3 billion passengers flew in 2012. There were six crashes and 75 accidents, with the lowest accident rate on record in the west.”

The rate is not the same all over the world, however.

In S. Africa, a plane is ten times more likely to crash than in Latin America.

The speech is located here: http://ht.ly/io0S4


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Final Report on Sikorsky Incident

When a Bristow S-76 Helicopter with eight passengers and two crew fishtailed as it was flying from from Humberside Airport to a gas platform in the North Sea, the helicopter made a precautionary landing. The crew smelled smoke in the cockpit at the time.

The investigation concluded that an electrical short had occurred in a wiring loom.

The incident occurred on Sept 26, 2012.

The report is below:


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Safety recommendations

AVIATION
NTSB releases safety recommendations to Hawker Beechcraft Corporation addressing fatigue cracks of nose landing gear end caps on Beechcraft 1900D airplanes

February 14, 2013
The National Transportation Safety Board makes the following recommendations to Hawker Beechcraft Corporation:

Determine the fatigue life (life limit) of the Beechcraft 1900D nose landing gear (NLG) end cap with the longitudinal grain direction both aligned and not aligned with the longitudinal axis of the NLG. (A-13-004)

Develop and implement a replacement program for all Beechcraft 1900D nose landing gear end caps based on the fatigue life determined in Safety Recommendation A-13-004. (A-13-005)

Revise the Beechcraft 1900D nose landing gear end cap repetitive inspection procedure and time interval to ensure that fatigue cracks are detected prior to failure and issue updated guidance to operators regarding the inspections. (A-13-006)


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Boeing Responds to the NTSB 787 Battery Update


And This is what Boeing Has to Say

SEATTLE, Feb. 7, 2013 / — Boeing (NYSE: BA) welcomes the progress reported by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in the 787 investigation, including that the NTSB has identified the origin of the event as having been within the battery. The findings discussed today demonstrated a narrowing of the focus of the investigation to short circuiting observed in the battery, while providing the public with a better understanding of the nature of the investigation.

The company remains committed to working with the NTSB, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and our customers to maintain the high level of safety the traveling public expects and that the air transport system has delivered. We continue to provide support to the investigative groups as they work to further understand these events and as we work to prevent such incidents in the future. The safety of passengers and crew members who fly aboard Boeing airplanes is our highest priority.

The 787 was certified following a rigorous Boeing test program and an extensive certification program conducted by the FAA. We provided testing and analysis in support of the requirements of the FAA special conditions associated with the use of lithium ion batteries. We are working collaboratively to address questions about our testing and compliance with certification standards, and we will not hesitate to make changes that lead to improved testing processes and products.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB IDENTIFIES ORIGIN OF JAL BOEING 787 BATTERY FIRE


NTSB IDENTIFIES ORIGIN OF JAL BOEING 787 BATTERY FIRE; DESIGN, CERTIFICATION AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES COME UNDER SCRUTINY
February 7, 2013
WASHINGTON – At a news conference today, NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman identified the origin of the Jan. 7 battery fire that occurred on a Japan Airlines 787 parked at Boston Logan Airport, and said that a focus of the investigation will be on the design and certification requirements of the battery system.

“U.S. airlines carry about two million people through the skies safely every day, which has been achieved in large part through design redundancy and layers of defense,” said Hersman. “Our task now is to see if enough – and appropriate – layers of defense and adequate checks were built into the design, certification and manufacturing of this battery.”

After an exhaustive examination of the JAL lithium-ion battery, which was comprised of eight individual cells, investigators determined that the majority of evidence from the flight data recorder and both thermal and mechanical damage pointed to an initiating event in a single cell. That cell showed multiple signs of short circuiting, leading to a thermal runaway condition, which then cascaded to other cells. Charred battery components indicated that the temperature inside the battery case exceeded 500 degrees Fahrenheit.

As investigators work to find the cause of the initiating short circuit, they ruled out both mechanical impact damage to the battery and external short circuiting. It was determined that signs of deformation and electrical arcing on the battery case occurred as a result of the battery malfunction and were not related to its cause.

Chairman Hersman said that potential causes of the initiating short circuit currently being evaluated include battery charging, the design and construction of the battery, and the possibility of defects introduced during the manufacturing process.

During the 787 certification process, Boeing studied possible failures that could occur within the battery. Those assessments included the likelihood of particular types of failures occurring, as well as the effects they could have on the battery. In tests to validate these assessments, Boeing found no evidence of cell-to-cell propagation or fire, both of which occurred in the JAL event.

The NTSB learned that as part of the risk assessment Boeing conducted during the certification process, it determined that the likelihood of a smoke emission event from a 787 battery would occur less than once in every 10 million flight hours. Noting that there have been two critical battery events on the 787 fleet with fewer than 100,000 flight hours, Hersman said that “the failure rate was higher than predicted as part of the certification process and the possibility that a short circuit in a single cell could propagate to adjacent cells and result in smoke and fire must be reconsidered.”

As the investigation continues, which will include testing on some of the batteries that had been replaced after being in service in the 787 fleet, the NTSB will continue to share its findings in real time with the FAA, Boeing, the Japan Transport Safety Board, and the French investigative agency, the Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses.

“The decision to return the fleet to flight will be made by the FAA, which underscores the importance of cooperation and coordination between our agencies,” Hersman said.

She also announced that the NTSB would release an interim report of factual findings within 30 days.

Additional information, including a video of the today’s media briefing, the PowerPoint presentation, the FAA’s Special Conditions for the B-787 battery system, and related documents, can be accessed at http://go.usa.gov/4K4J.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

NTSB Sends Investigators to Paraguay

February 4, 2013
WASHINGTON – The National Transportation Safety Board is sending investigators to assist in the investigation of a Robinson R44 II helicopter that crashed about 80 miles north of Asuncion, Paraguay. Initial reports indicate that the pilot and two passengers were fatally injured.
The investigation is being led by the Paraguay Civil Aviation Authority (CIPAA). The NTSB has designated senior investigator Paul Cox as the U. S. accredited representative to the CIPAA’s investigation and he will be accompanied by representatives from NTSB, the FAA, Robinson Helicopters, and Lycoming Engines. The U.S. team is expected to arrive Wednesday morning. Further information regarding the investigation will be released by the CIPAA.

Redwings Airlines Suspension Pending


Red Wings Airlines is grounded. Almost.

Beginning Feb 4, Red Wings will be suspended due to the results of an inspection that turned up pilot training and flight preparation breaches.

The Red Wings fleet is made up of Tu-204 jets.

WE WONDER if the airline is under safety suspension why they are waiting until Feb 4 to ground the airline. If it is truly unsafe, why is it not immediately grounded? Why wait?

Rosaviatsia has said it had found various violations, and claims the airline’s financial problems prevent adequate fleet maintenance.

The airline is owned by Alexander Lebedev who is affiliated with the Novaya Gazeta; his son owns Britain’s The Independent and Evening Standard.

Lebedev said the suspension is unfounded, that his airline was unfairly targeted, a political move, and a campaign against Tu-204 planes.

On January 31, Rosaviatsia officials questioned if Tupolev Tu-204 airliners should have been grounded after Tu-204 reverser failure at Moscow Vnukovo International Airport resulted in an accident that killed 5 Red Wings crew and injured 3.

On December 29, 2013, a Red Wings Tu-204 crashed on landing after overrunning runway 19 when engine thrust reverser shells to fail to deploy at Moscow Vnukovo International Airport. 8 crew aboard, 5 fatalities, 3 injuries.

On December 20, 2012, a Red Wings Tupolev Tu-204-100V skidded off the runway during landing at Tolmachevo Airport . No fatalities.

On May 24, 2009, a Red Wings Tupolev Tu-204 developed fuel system problems and diverted to Krasnodar. No fatalities.

On August 2, 2008, a Red Wings Tupolev Tu-204 made an emergency landing in Minsk after an engine failure. No fatalities.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

Seventh update on JAL Boeing 787 battery fire investigation


WASHINGTON – The National Transportation Safety Board today released the seventh update on its investigation into the Jan. 7 fire aboard a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 at Logan International Airport in Boston.

The auxiliary power unit battery, manufactured by GS Yuasa, was the original battery delivered with the airplane on December 20, 2012. It is comprised of eight individual cells. All eight cells came from the same manufacturing lot in July 2012. The battery was assembled in September 2012 and installed on the aircraft on October 15, 2012. It was first charged on October 19, 2012.

Examination and testing of an exemplar battery got underway earlier this week at the Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center laboratories in West Bethesda, MD. The tests consisted of electrical measurements, mass measurements, and infrared thermal imaging of each cell, with no anomalies noted. The cells are currently undergoing CT scanning to examine their internal condition. In addition, on Thursday, a battery expert from the Department of Energy joined the investigative team to lend his expertise to the ongoing testing and validation work.

In Seattle, NTSB investigators and Boeing engineers examine the type of lithium ion battery used on the Boeing 787 to start the auxillary power unit and to provide backup power for flight critical systems.
NTSB investigators were made aware of reports of prior battery replacements on aircraft in the 787 fleet, early in the investigation. As reported Tuesday, Boeing, a party to the investigation, is providing pertinent fleet information which investigators will review to determine if there is any relevance to the JAL investigation.
An investigative group continued to interpret data from the two digital flight data recorders on the aircraft, and is examining recorded signals to determine if they might yield additional information about the performance of the battery and the operation of the charging system.

Next week, the NTSB battery testing team will initiate a non-invasive “soft short“ test of all cells of the exemplar battery. This test will reveal the presence of any high resistance, small or “soft” shorts within a cell. Also, an NTSB investigator will travel to France with the battery contactor from the JAL event battery, for examination at the manufacturer. The battery contactor connects a wiring bundle from the airplane to the battery.

Investigators are continuing their work in Washington and Japan and the team in Seattle continues to observe the FAA-led review of the certification process for the 787 battery system. The flow of information from these observations helps to inform NTSB investigative activity in the US and around the world.


Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type null in /home/airflight/www/www/wp-content/themes/fluida/includes/loop.php on line 270

IMPROPER MAINTENANCE LED TO Vegas AIR TOUR HELICOPTER CRASH

What is it that I’ve always said? Maintenance, Maintenance, Maintenance.

Looks like the NTSB Findings agree with me! See their report below about a helicopter crash in December 7, 2011, that occurred in my home away from home, Las Vegas Nevada.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
On December 7 at 4:30 Pacific Standard Time, a Eurocopter AS350-B2, operated by Sundance Helicopters as flight Landmark 57, crashed in mountainous terrain approximately 14 miles east of Las Vegas. The flight, a sightseeing tour, departed Las Vegas McCarran International Airport (LAS) en-route to the Hoover Dam area was operating under visual flight rules. The helicopter impacted in a narrow ravine in mountainous terrain between the cities of Henderson and Lake Mead. The pilot and four passengers were fatally injured.

The National Transportation Safety Board determined today (Jan. 29, 2013) that the probable cause of the Dec. 7, 2011, air tour helicopter crash near Las Vegas, Nev., was inadequate maintenance, including degraded material, improper installation, and inadequate inspections.

“This investigation is a potent reminder that what happens in the maintenance hangar is just as important for safety as what happens in the air,” said NTSB Chairman Deborah A. P. Hersman.

At about 4:30 p.m. Pacific standard time, a Sundance Helicopters Eurocopter AS350, operating as a “Twilight City Tour” sightseeing trip, crashed in mountainous terrain about 14 miles east of Las Vegas, Nev. The helicopter originated from Las Vegas McCarran International Airport at about 4:21 p.m. with a planned route to the Hoover Dam area and then return to the airport. The accident occurred after a critical flight control unit separated from another, rendering the helicopter uncontrollable. After the part separated, the helicopter climbed about 600 feet, turned about 90 degrees to the left, descended about 800 feet, began a left turn, and then descended at a rate of at least 2,500 feet per minute to impact. The pilot and four passengers were killed and the helicopter was destroyed.

The NTSB found that the crash was the result of Sundance Helicopters’ improper reuse of a degraded self-locking nut in the servo control input rod and the improper or non-use of a split pin to secure the degraded nut, in addition to an inadequate post-maintenance inspection.

Contributing to the improper (or lack of) split pin installation was the mechanic’s fatigue and lack of clearly delineated steps to follow on a “work card” or “checklist” The inspector’s fatigue and lack of a work card or checklist clearly laying out the inspection steps to follow contributed to an inadequate post-maintenance inspection. As a result of this investigation the NTSB made, reiterated and reclassified recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration.
“One of the critical lines of defense to help prevent tragedies like this crash is improved maintenance documentation through clear work cards, or checklists,” Hersman said. “Checklists are not rocket science, but they can have astronomical benefits.”

Content not attributed to or linked to original, is the property of AirFlightDisaster.com; all rights reserved.

Site Credits