George Hatcher's Air Flight Disaster

Aviation News, Headlines & Alerts
 
George Hatcher's Air Flight Disaster

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

AFA-CWA Files Interference Charges Against Delta Airlines Management

Washington, DC – The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA-CWA) today filed formal interference charges with the National Mediation Board (NMB) against Delta Air Lines management alleging unlawful conduct during the recent flight attendant representation election.

Delta management compromised the secrecy of the ballot by urging flight attendants to vote on company-controlled work computers that could track whether they clicked on the NMB’s internet voting site. In addition, hundreds of Delta/Northwest flight attendants have reported coercive and unfair methods used by management to influence the results of the recent union election. Feedback includes reports of the company’s anti-AFA literature, excessive supervisor surveillance and meddling, and repeated supervisor phone calls to flight attendant homes telling them to vote.

“Delta and Northwest flight attendants deserve the opportunity to freely participate in an election without being intimidated by management and heavy-handed efforts to keep them from gaining a voice,” said Patricia Friend, AFA-CWA International President. “Delta management launched the largest anti-union campaign in history and spared no expense in attempting to destroy the collective bargaining rights that Northwest flight attendants have worked to maintain for over 60 years. We now call on the NMB to conduct an exhaustive investigation of these charges and hold Delta executives accountable for their actions.”

If the NMB finds sufficient evidence that election interference occurred, it can order a new election that will allow flight attendants to decide representation in a free and fair manner. On November 3, the NMB counted 9,216 votes in favor of union representation for Delta flight attendants and 9,544 votes against.

For over 60 years, the Association of Flight Attendants has been serving as the voice for flight attendants in the workplace, in the aviation industry, in the media and on Capitol Hill. More than 42,000 flight attendants at 21 airlines come together to form AFA-CWA, the world’s largest flight attendant union. AFA is part of the 700,000-member strong Communications Workers of America (CWA), AFL-CIO. Visit us at www.afanet.org.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Porter Airlines Emergency Landing

What: Porter Airlines
Where: Ottawa Airport
When: Dec 6 2010 8:40 am
Who: 28 aboard
Why: The pilot informed the airport that he was having problems with his landing gear, and did a flyby to confirm the issue. But the plane landed safely with the gear down.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

AeroMexico Boeing Engine Problems; Diverts to Azores


Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Jorge Garcia

What: Aeromexico Boeing 777-200 en route from Mexico City (Mexico) to Madrid,SP
Where: Santa Maria
When: Dec 4th 2010
Why: Initially, the flight diverted to the Azores Islands due to a Spanish strike, but later said there were problems with the right engine. After the plane landed, passengers were provided hotel accommodations. Another plane brought spare parts to Santa Maria, and the flight continued the next day after repairs were completed.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

South East Airlines Tupolev Crashes in Moscow


Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Kirill Naumenko – Moscow City Spotters

What: Dagestan Airlines/South East Airlines Tupolev Tu-154 en route from Vnukovo to Makhachkala Russia
Where: Domodedovo airport
When: Saturday December 4, 2010
Who: 168 aboard including 8 crew (also reported as 155)
Why: Shortly after South East Airlines Flight 372 took off from Moscow, two of the Tupolev’s three engines failed (14:28). At 14:41, the pilot requested an emergency landing, initially at Vnukovo then at Domodedovo airport. The third engine failed as the plane was attempting to land in snow and freezing rain. The plane overshot the runway, and is reported to have struck buildings although missing a fence. Passengers say the plane broke apart when the plane hit a hill. The plane’s nose smashed and the fuselage broke into three sections. No fire or explosion occurred.

The pilot Zakarzhi Zakarzhaev has flown 17 thousand hours and is considered the most professionally trained commander of Dagestan, likely one reason there are survivors.

Passengers did not evacuate via emergency chute or ladder. They had to jump from the cabin to the ground to evacuate the wounded.

Engine failure has been conjectured to be attributed to flawed aviation fuel (filters clogged with debris or ice) or lack of maintenance. The 18-year old tri-jet is powered by Soloviev D-30KU engines.

Two were killed on impact, 83 injured were taken to 5 hospitals. 19 of these were very severe injuries—the number of fatalities has increased to 12 and may rise higher.

The mother of a constitutional court judge, Gadisa Gadzhyeva, died in the accident; the brother of Dagestan President Magomedsalam Magomedov has been hospitalized. Seven of the victims taken to the central regional hospital. Three victims were delivered to the Clinical Hospital N83 Federal Medical-Biological Agency of Russia and one to CITO Pirogov Health Ministry of Russia. 25 victims were directed to the medical institutions of the Department of Health in Moscow. There were two children, one of them taken to the Morozov Children’s Hospital, the second is in children’s emergency surgery Roshal. Others are in Institute of Emergency Care Sklifosovsky, and in various Municipal Hospitals (64th, 7th, 13th, etc…)

Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika took on a special control of the investigation. Photos were forbidden, and a criminal case was opened. An interview of Federal Service for Supervision of Transport of Russia supervisors indicated that they will be looking into the administration of Dagestan Airlines.

In November 2009, a Dagestan engine failed; and in August 2008 an engine caught fire. Dagestan Airlines has adopted the brand name ‘South East Airlines.’ Dagestan Airlines is an airline based in Makhachkala, in Russia’s North Caucasus region. The airline’s scheduled, charter and cargo services operate domestic and international routes from its hub at Uytash Airport.

The Moscow hotline is Moscow: 363-61-01; Emergency psychological assistance for victims families is (495) 626-37-07.

The investigation shows that at an altitude of 9000 meters engines #1 and #3 failed. Analysis of the flight data recorder confirms the initial fluctuations in fuel supply to all three engines at an altitude of about 9000 meters, wjem engines 1 (left) and 3 (right) failed, Engine #2 was unstable as well recovered and ran until landing. First touchdown occurred at a vertical acceleration of 3.5G and vertical accelerations over 5.0G.The fuel pumps system is being dismantled, fuel samples were taken from the left engine and left fuel tank and are being analysed.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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 Initiates Changes to 787 Power Panel, Updates to Software

EVERETT, Wash., Nov. 24, 2010 /PRNewswire/ — Boeing (NYSE: BA) is developing minor design changes to power distribution panels on the 787 and updates to the systems software that manages and protects power distribution on the airplane. These changes come as the result of what has been learned from the investigation of an onboard electrical fire on a test airplane, ZA002, earlier this month in Laredo, Texas.

“We have successfully simulated key aspects of the onboard event in our laboratory and are moving forward with developing design fixes,” said Scott Fancher, vice president and general manager of the 787 program. “Boeing is developing a plan to enable a return to 787 flight test activities and will present it to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as soon as it is complete.”

Engineers have determined that the fault began as either a short circuit or an electrical arc in the P100 power distribution panel, most likely caused by the presence of foreign debris. The design changes will improve the protection within the panel. Software changes also will be implemented to further improve fault protection.

The P100 panel is one of five major power distribution panels on the 787. It receives power from the left engine and distributes it to an array of systems.

The 787 team is now assessing the time required to complete the design changes and software updates that are being developed. A revised 787 program schedule is expected to be finalized in the next few weeks.

“Our team is focused on developing these changes and moving forward with the flight test program,” said Fancher. “The team in Laredo is also well along in preparing to return ZA002 to Seattle.”

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements in this report may be “forward-looking” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “believes,” “estimates,” “targets,” “anticipates,” and similar expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions about future events that may not prove to be accurate. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in these forward-looking statements. As a result, these statements speak to events only as of the date they are made and we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by federal securities laws. Specific factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements we make regarding our guidance relating to future financial and operating performance, the effect of economic conditions in the United States and globally, and general industry conditions as they may impact us or our customers, as well as the other important factors disclosed previously and from time to time in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Fort Lauderdale: Jet Blue Bird Strike


Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Mario Aurich – AirTeamImages

What: Jetblue Airbus A320-200 from Hartford to Fort Lauderdale
Where: Fort Lauderdale
When: Dec 2nd 2010 6:10 pm
Why: The flight was landing in Fort Lauderdale when there was a bird strike which damaged the flaps. A replacement plane was provided for the return flight.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

UA Lands in Casper

What: United Airlines/Skywest Canadair CRJ-200 en route from Denver to Casper
Where: Casper/Natrona County Airport
When: 10:30 am
Who: 43 passengers
Why: On approach, the plane developed a mechanical problem with its wing flap. The plane landed safely, and was sent to maintenance for work on the wing flaps.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

CASA Media Releases Direction for new A380 inspections

Wednesday 2 December 2010

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has issued a direction to Qantas to conduct a further inspection of the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines on its A380 aircraft.

This direction requires Qantas to inspect an oil filler tube that feeds oil to the engine’s high pressure/intermediate pressure bearing structure.

The oil filler tube inspection must be carried out within two flight cycles.

Under the direction, Qantas is required to conduct the inspections in accordance with detailed technical information contained in a service bulletin issued by the manufacturer Rolls-Royce this week.

Inspections will be undertaken using specialist equipment known as a borescope, which is inserted into the oil tube and provides a view of the condition of the wall of the tube.

Qantas engineers will be looking for any sign of the wall of the tube being out of tolerance and reduced in thickness, which could cause the tube to crack and leak oil.

Evidence of a problem with the oil tube has been found during the investigation into the Qantas A380 engine failure near Singapore on 4 November 2010.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has identified the condition of the tube as a safety issue and issued a safety recommendation to Rolls-Royce.

CASA continues to liaise closely with Qantas, the European Aviation Safety Agency, Rolls-Royce, Airbus and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. In monitoring developments CASA will take any further action that may be necessary in the interests of safety.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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 OPEN DOCKET ON INVESTIGATION INTO THE CRASH OF A PILATUS AIRCRAFT IN MONTANA

NTSB Advisory
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
December 2, 2010

As part of its continuing investigation into a plane crash in Montana, the National Transportation Safety Board will open the public accident docket on Friday, December 3, 2010.

On March 22, 2009, at 1430 mountain daylight time, a Pilatus PC-12/45, N128CM, crashed near the approach end of runway 33 at Bert Mooney Airport (BTM), Butte, Montana. The airplane was owned and operated by Eagle Cap Leasing of Enterprise, Oregon, as a personal flight under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. All 14 people on board the airplane were killed in the accident. There were no ground injuries. The flight departed Oroville Municipal Airport, Oroville, California, at 1110 Pacific Daylight Time (1210 mountain daylight time) on an instrument flight rules flight plan and was destined for Gallatin Field, Bozeman, Montana. The airplane was diverting to Butte at the time of the accident. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident.

The information being released is factual in nature and does not provide analysis. The docket includes: investigative group factual reports, interview summaries, crew statements, air traffic control transcripts, controller statements, the meteorology report, and other documents.

Additional material will continue to be added to the docket as it becomes available. Analysis of the accident, along with conclusions and a determination of probable cause, will come at a later date when the final report on the investigation is completed.

The docket material will be made available at 10:00 am ET on December 3 on the NTSB website at http://www.ntsb.gov/dockets/foia_fri-dockets.htm#Aviation2010 in the FOIA electronic reading room. Details are listed by date.

This will be a document release only. No interviews will be conducted.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Delta Air Lines CEO to Chair Air Transport Association Board

WASHINGTON, Dec. 2, 2010 — The Air Transport Association of America (ATA), the industry trade organization representing the leading U.S. airlines, announced today that Delta Air Lines CEO Richard H. Anderson has been elected chairman of the ATA Board of Directors. Southwest Airlines Chairman of the Board, President and CEO Gary C. Kelly was named vice chairman.

Anderson, who succeeds United’s Glenn F. Tilton and Kelly both will serve a two-year term.

“Richard Anderson is a strong leader and a proven chief executive, with the necessary credentials to further propel the mission of ATA as it faces the challenges and priorities in this next Congress,” said ATA President and CEO James C. May. “Richard Anderson, Gary Kelly and incoming ATA President and CEO Nick Calio will complement each other as the association’s board representatives with the administration and the new Congress.”

“I look forward to working cooperatively with the administration, Congress and regulatory agencies to advance initiatives that support continued improvements in the financial health of the U.S. aviation industry and maintain our focus on safety,” said Anderson. “Airlines are a vital industry in the U.S. and provide 11 million jobs annually. Our association’s focus is to move tax and regulatory oversight in a direction that fosters growth and makes us an even stronger economic engine for America.”

“I look forward to serving as ATA Board vice chairman,” Kelly said. “I am committed to our continued work to help ensure the long-term stability and viability of the aviation industry.”

Richard Anderson became Delta Air Lines CEO in September 2007 and was the architect of the airline’s merger with Northwest Airlines, which closed in October 2008. Prior to joining Delta, Anderson was executive vice president at UnitedHealth Group and served as president of UnitedHealth’s Commercial Markets Group. He also served as CEO of Northwest Airlines from 2001 to 2004.
Kelly began his career at Southwest Airlines as controller in 1986, moving up to chief financial officer and vice president of finance, then executive vice president and CFO, before being promoted to CEO and vice chairman in July 2004. Gary assumed the role of chairman in May 2008 and president in July 2008. Prior to joining Southwest Airlines in 1986, Gary was a CPA for Arthur Young & Company in Dallas and controller for Systems Center, Inc.

ATA recently named Nicholas E. Calio president and CEO, effective Jan. 1, 2011. Calio currently leads Global Government Affairs for Citigroup, both in the United States and in the more than 100 countries in which the company does business. Prior to joining Citigroup in 2003, Calio was the assistant to the president for legislative affairs and service as chief liaison to the U.S. Congress for President George W. Bush, the same position he held under President George H.W. Bush.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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 Alert for Operators: 14 CFR, parts 91, 133, and 137 and Helicopter hot fueling/loading

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
SAFO
Safety Alert for Operators
SAFO 10020

Flight Standards Service Washington, DC

A SAFO contains important safety information and may include recommended action. SAFO content should be especially valuable to air carriers in meeting their statutory duty to provide service with the highest possible degree of safety in the public interest. Besides the specific action recommended in a SAFO, an alternative action may be as effective in addressing the safety issue named in the SAFO.
Subject: 14 CFR, parts 91, 133, and 137 and hot fueling/loading

Purpose: This SAFO highlights current guidance and best-practices for Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 91, 133, and 137 operators that conduct fueling or chemical loading with the engines running (hot fueling/loading).

Background: On May 30, 2009, a Bell 47G-2 helicopter operating under part 137 was being refueled with the engine running (hot fueling) when the ground crew spilled fuel onto the engine while trying to untangle a kink in the hose. The helicopter quickly caught fire and the pilot sustained serious injuries as a result. Additionally, on September 9, 2008, a Bell 206-B helicopter, operating under part 137, sustained substantial damage while conducting hot fueling and chemical loading simultaneously. After fueling was complete, but with the chemical hose still attached, the ground crew mistakenly gave an “all clear” hand signal to the pilot. As the pilot ascended, the chemical hose caused the helicopter to pitch nose down and roll to the right, contacting the ground.

Recommended Action: Hot fueling/loading can be extremely hazardous and is not recommended except when absolutely necessary due to the nature of the operation. Operators who conduct hot fueling/loading should develop standard operating procedures (SOP) for flight and ground crew personnel. The operator’s procedures should address the following guidelines:

  • The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommends that hot fueling be conducted only by aircraft utilizing JET A or JET A-1 fuel types. If strict operating procedures are not followed, hot fueling of aircraft utilizing AvGas can be extremely hazardous due to its low flash point. Aircraft being fueled while an engine is operating should have all potential ignition sources located above the fuel inlet port(s) and above fuel vent or tank openings. Sources of ignition include, but are not limited to: engines, exhausts, auxiliary power units (APU), and combustion-type cabin heater exhausts. In accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) section 91.9, hot fueling is not permitted if the Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual contains an associated operating limitation.
  • An appropriately certificated and rated pilot should be at the flight controls during the entire hot fueling/loading process with controls appropriately adjusted to prevent aircraft movement. The pilot should unbuckle all restraints, and be prepared to immediately shut-down the engine and egress the aircraft, if necessary. The pilot should not conduct any extraneous duties during hot fueling/loading. Other personnel should not be on-board the aircraft during hot fueling/loading.
  • Only designated personnel, with proper training in hot fueling/loading operations, should operate fueling or chemical loading equipment. The operator’s written procedures should include: precautions for safe handling of the fuel or chemical, emergency shutoff procedures, fire extinguisher use, hand signal use, and precautions regarding moving propeller and rotor blades.
  • At least two ground personnel should be present during hot fueling/loading. One person conducts the fueling/loading, while the other stands by prepared to activate the fuel/chemical emergency shutoff and handle fire extinguishers if necessary. The aircraft should remain well clear of the fuel source, and at no time should the aircraft wing or helicopter blades extend over the fueling source
  • Before fueling, the aircraft must be bonded to the fuel source to equalize static electricity between the fuel source and the aircraft. Grounding of the aircraft and/or fuel truck is no longer recommended because it does not prevent sparks at the fuel source, and the grounding cable may not be sufficient to discharge the electrical current.
  • All doors, windows, and access points allowing entry to the interior of the aircraft that are adjacent to, or in the immediate vicinity of, the fuel inlet ports should be closed and should remain closed during fueling operations.
  • Fuel should be dispensed into an open port only from approved deadman-type nozzles, with a flow rate not to exceed 10 gallons per minute (38 liters per minute). Close port pressure fueling ports are preferable because the potential for spillage is reduced.
  • A fire extinguisher of an appropriate type and size for the fueling operation must be within easy reach of ground personnel at all times during hot fueling operations. Operators who conduct hot fueling should also equip the aircraft with a fire extinguisher in the cockpit, if possible.
  • When fueling/loading is complete, the pilot must ensure that the seatbelt and shoulder harness are properly re-secured as necessary prior to any aircraft movement.
  • Operators should include this SAFO in initial and recurrent training programs for pilots and ground personnel.

References:

    ? Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) – Helicopter Rapid Refueling
    ? AC 00-34A, Aircraft Ground Handling and Servicing
    ? National Fire Prevention Association (NFPA) 407 Standard for Aircraft Fuel Servicing
    ? Include review of this SAFO in initial and recurrent training, and flight reviews.
To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Australian Lawsuit against Rolls Royce Possible

Australian Transport Safety Bureau has issued a safety alert.

The Qantas A380 Rolls Royce engine failure was due to a (fatigue) cracked tube. The Australian Trade Practices Act allows Qantas to pursue a legal solution against rolls Royce, especially as it appears they were aware of engine problems (fatigue cracking in the thin side of an unevenly bored oil tube) but did not inform Qantas. If there were flawed oil tubes on the earliest “A-version” Trent 900s, have some of these survived in lagter models? Qantas no longer uses A version engines.

George’s Point of View

Good for Qantas, if they are going to sue.

Now the passengers should sue Quantas for the close miss to a possible tragedy and for the mental stress.

The Australian Report:
Manufacturing problem potential factor in QF32 engine failure
Date: 02 December 2010

The ATSB has issued a safety recommendation about potential engine problems in some Airbus A380 aircraft.

The safety recommendation identifies a potential manufacturing defect with an oil tube connection to the high-pressure (HP)/intermediate-pressure (IP) bearing structure of the Trent 900 engine installed in some A380 aircraft.

The problem relates to the potential for misaligned oil pipe counter-boring, which could lead to fatigue cracking, oil leakage and potential engine failure from an oil fire within the HP/IP bearing buffer space.

In response to the recommendation Rolls Royce, affected airlines and safety regulators are taking action to ensure the continued safe operation of A380 aircraft. The action involves the close inspection of affected engines and the removal from service of any engine which displays the suspected counter-boring problem.

The ATSB will hold a media briefing tomorrow (Friday 3 December 2010) at 10.30am to accompany the release of its preliminary factual investigation report into the QF32 occurrence. ATSB Chief Commissioner Mr Martin Dolan will present the known facts gathered from the investigation and highlight the key safety issues that have resulted from the investigation to date.

Summary
On 4 November 2010, at 0157 Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), an Airbus A380 aircraft, registered VH-OQA (OQA), being operated as Qantas flight 32, departed from runway 20 centre (20C) at Changi Airport, Singapore for Sydney, New South Wales. On board the aircraft were five flight crew, 24 cabin crew and 440 passengers (a total of 469 persons on board).

It was reported that shortly after departing Singapore the No. 2 engine failed. The aircraft was returned to Singapore for a safe landing after reducing its fuel load. The investigation is continuing.

A report has not yet been released for this investigation.

Preliminary report to be released 10.30am Friday, 3 December 2010

On 4 November 2010, at 0157 Universal Coordinated Time (UTC), an
Airbus A380 aircraft, registered VH-OQA (OQA), being operated as
Qantas flight 32, departed from runway 20 centre (20C) at Changi
Airport, Singapore for Sydney, New South Wales. On board the
aircraft were five flight crew, 24 cabin crew and 440 passengers (a
total of 469 persons on board).

It was reported that shortly after departing Singapore the No. 2
engine failed. The aircraft was returned to Singapore for a safe
landing after reducing its fuel load. The investigation is
continuing.

A report has not yet been released for this investigation.

Preliminary report to be released 10.30am Friday, 3 December
2010

Recommendation

Safety Recommendation AO-2010-089-SR-012

On 4 November 2010, at 0157 Universal Coordinated
Time (UTC), an Airbus A380 aircraft, registered VH-OQA (OQA), being
operated as Qantas flight 32, departed from runway 20 centre (20C)
at Changi Airport, Singapore for Sydney, New South Wales. On board
the aircraft were five flight crew, 24 cabin crew and 440
passengers (a total of 469 persons on board).

Following a normal takeoff, the crew retracted the
landing gear and flaps. The crew reported that, while maintaining
250 kts in the climb and passing 7,000 ft above mean sea level,
they heard two almost coincident ‘loud bangs’, followed shortly
after by indications of a failure of the No 2 engine.

The crew advised Singapore Air Traffic Control of the
situation and were provided with radar vectors to a holding
pattern. The crew undertook a series of actions before returning
the aircraft to land at Singapore. There were no reported injuries
to the crew or passengers on the aircraft. There were reports of
minor injuries to two persons on Batam Island, Indonesia.

A subsequent examination of the aircraft indicated
that the No 2 engine had sustained an uncontained failure of the
Intermediate Pressure (IP) turbine disc. Sections of the liberated
disc had penetrated the left wing and the left wing-to-fuselage
fairing, resulting in structural and systems damage to the
aircraft. The No 2 engine was removed from the aircraft and
disassembled in an authorised engine workshop for examination,
under the supervision of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. In
addition, a large section of liberated IP turbine disc was also
recovered from Batam Island for examination. Those examinations are
ongoing.

As a result of this occurrence, a number of safety
actions were immediately undertaken by Qantas, the Australian Civil
Aviation Safety Authority, Airbus, Rolls-Royce plc, and the
European Aviation Safety Agency.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has prepared a
Preliminary Factual Report on the investigation of the occurrence.
That report will be publically released on 3 December 2010.

Recent developments

Recent examination of components removed from the
failed engine at the Rolls-Royce plc facility in Derby, United
Kingdom, have identified the presence of fatigue cracking within a
stub pipe that feeds oil into the High Pressure (HP) / Intermediate
Pressure (IP) bearing structure. While the analysis of the engine
failure is ongoing, it has been identified that the leakage of oil
into the HP/IP bearing structure buffer space (and a subsequent oil
fire within that area) was central to the engine failure and IP
turbine disc liberation event.

Further examination of the cracked area has
identified the axial misalignment of an area of counter?boring
within the inner diameter of the stub pipe; the misalignment having
produced a localised thinning of the pipe wall on one side. The
area of fatigue cracking was associated with the area of pipe wall
thinning

Critical Safety Issue

Misaligned stub pipe counter-boring is understood to be related
to the manufacturing process. This condition could lead to an
elevated risk of fatigue crack initiation and growth, oil leakage
and potential catastrophic engine failure from a resulting oil
fire.

As a result of the identified critical safety issue, the
Australian Transport Safety Bureau issues the following safety
recommendation:

Safety Recommendation AO-2010-089-AR-012

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau recommends
that Rolls-Royce plc address the safety issue and take actions
necessary to ensure the safety of flight operations in transport
aircraft equipped with Rolls-Royce plc Trent 900 series
engines.

Date: 04 Nov 2010 Investigation Status: Active
Time: 0201 UTC Investigation Type: Occurrence Investigation
Location: overhead Batam Island, Indonesia Occurrence Type: Powerplant / Propulsion
State: International Occurrence Class: Mechanical
Occurrence Category: Serious Incident
Report Status: Pending Highest Injury Level: None

Aircraft Details

Aircraft Manufacturer: Airbus
Aircraft Model: A380
Aircraft Registration: VH-OQA
Serial Number: 0014
Type of Operation: Air Transport High Capacity
Damage to Aircraft: Serious
Departure Point: Singapore
Destination: Sydney, NSW
To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Where There’s Smoke, There’s Fire. Where There’s Fire, Will There Be Passengers?

George’s Point of View

The biggest consequence in this Trent 900 engine brouhaha may be the Rolls Royce reputation.

While the company’s engineering skills have not suddenly degraded overnight, confidence in Rolls Royce certainly has. If, as the Australian Transport Safety Bureau says, the internal fire in the notorious (Qantas owned) Trent 900 engine is the result of an internal engine oil leak at 1,000°C at high pressure, the endangerment of 440 passengers and 26 crew may have been preventible, given that there seems to have been fore-knowlege (by Rolls Royce) of a 1st generation manufacturing defect in a pipe coupling. As the 3rd generation versions of the engine no longer sport the same problem, the issue was recognized prior to the explosion, and dealt with.

The failure to communicate a potential problem to Qantas before the engine fire, and for that matter, to owners of all affected 1st and 2nd generation products (Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa), goes beyond a communications failure and inches toward negligence. And the practical concern now is that irregardless of whether the specific factor was a manufacturing defect or fatigue, how swift and responsible will Rolls Royce be in corrective action, aggressive inspection schedules and reconfiguring a maintenance paradigm that gets A380s back on track?

Time will tell. Also, only time will tell if this engine explosion will be contained within the auspices of Rolls Royce; Qantas, Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa. In fact, Rolls Royce is not alone in its sub-culture of secrecy and non-reportage and disclosure. Will the teetering public confidence in aviation safety will be irrevocably compromised in the days to come?

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

SINGAPORE PARTNERS WITH ICAO ON AVIATION SECURITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT SEMINAR

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

To promote sharing of aviation security knowledge and expertise globally, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) have inked a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish the ICAO-Singapore Aviation Security Leadership and Management Seminar (LAMS). Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary-General, ICAO, and Mr. Yap Ong Heng, Director-General, CAAS, signed the MOU today.

This high-level Seminar will be developed with ICAO and run by the Singapore Aviation Academy (SAA), the training arm of CAAS. It aims to equip senior management of the civil aviation authorities and industry with the knowledge and expertise on aviation security to enable them to effectively carry out their responsibilities as decision-makers. The Seminar also aims to enhance States’ and industry players’ understanding of ICAO aviation security objectives and priorities, international aviation security developments and international best practices.

The Seminar is targeted at the senior management of governmental aviation organizations, airport authorities, airlines, other relevant aviation industry organizations, and international aviation organizations. The Seminar will be conducted at SAA, and facilitated by aviation security instructors from ICAO and Singapore. The Seminar is scheduled to have its inaugural run in the third quarter of 2011.

Mr. Benjamin, who is in Singapore under the CAAS Distinguished Visitors Programme (DVP), emphasised the need for such high-level Seminars to enhance global understanding and cooperation in protecting civil aviation from security threats. “Civil aviation threats such as terrorism are global problems that require global solutions. Security measures must therefore be uniform and consistently enforced in all countries to be effective. This can only be achieved with the full cooperation of States, in collaboration with key stakeholders, including industry partners”.

“Singapore is honoured to partner ICAO in establishing the Aviation Security Leadership and Management Seminar. This Seminar is timely in the light of the evolving security threats and the developments in aviation security globally. It will significantly contribute to States enhancing their aviation security preparedness and capabilities”, said Mr. Yap.

About the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
A specialized agency of the United Nations, ICAO was created in 1944 to promote the safe and orderly development of international civil aviation throughout the world. It sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety, security, efficiency and regularity, as well as for aviation environmental protection. The Organization serves as the forum for cooperation in all fields of civil aviation among its 190 Contracting States.

ICAO and Recent Developments in Civil Aviation Security

At the recent 37th Session of the ICAO Assembly held in Montréal in September/October 2010, Member States endorsed a Declaration on Aviation Security and adopted a proactive Comprehensive Aviation Security Strategy. More recently, the Council of ICAO adopted the 12th amendment of Annex 17 (Security) to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, improvements specifically aimed at strengthening air cargo security measures. In September, a diplomatic conference held in Beijing, under the auspices of ICAO, adopted two treaties to further criminalise acts of unlawful interference against civil aviation.

Website: www.icao.int

About the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS)
The mission of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) is to “Grow a safe, vibrant air hub and civil aviation system, making a key contribution to Singapore’s success”. CAAS’ roles are to oversee and promote safety in the aviation industry, develop the air hub and aviation industry, provide air navigation services, develop Singapore as a centre for aviation knowledge and training, and contribute to the development of international aviation.
Website: www.caas.gov.sg

Founded in 1958, the Singapore Aviation Academy (SAA) is the training arm of CAAS. Over the past 50 years, SAA has established itself as a renowned centre of learning in aviation. It continuously introduces new programmes to address the needs of aviation professionals at all stages of their careers.
In 2000, SAA was conferred the prestigious Edward Warner Award by the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) for its eminent contribution as a centre of excellence in international civil aviation training. To date, SAA has trained more than 52,000 participants from 190 countries. SAA has currently four specialised schools – School of Aviation Management, School of Civil Aviation Safety and Security, School of Air Traffic Services and School of Airport Emergency

Services.
Website : www.saa.com.sg

About the CAAS Distinguished Visitors Programme (DVP)
The CAAS Distinguished Visitors Programme (DVP) was established in 2000 to honour outstanding leaders and experts in international civil aviation. The DVP is customised for the invited personality and serves as a unique opportunity for the personality to gain a first-hand understanding of Singapore’s civil aviation landscape, and exchange views with senior transport officials and industry players in Singapore.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

United Continental Holdings to Present at the 2010 Hudson Securities U.S. Airlines Conference

CHICAGO, Dec 01, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) —

United Continental Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: UAL) will be presenting at the 2010 Hudson Securities U.S. Airlines Conference on Wednesday, Dec. 8, 2010, in New York. The presentation will begin at 8:55 a.m. CT / 9:55 a.m. ET.

The live audio webcast and accompanying presentation will be available at ir.unitedcontinentalholdings.com. The company will archive the audio webcast on the web site within 24 hours of the presentation for 14 days.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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 Marks Retirement of Royal Australian Air Force F-111 Flee

AMBERLEY, Queensland, Dec. 2, 2010 — The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] will bid a fond farewell to the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) F-111 strike fighters that the company has supported for more than 14 years when the fleet is retired on Dec. 3.

As prime contractor for F-111 through-life support activities since 1996, Boeing Defence Australia has designed, developed and delivered technologies and modifications to improve the operational effectiveness of the F-111 fleet from its facilities at RAAF Base Amberley. These upgrades included aircraft overhauls conducted under the F-111 Weapons System Business Unit (WSBU) contract.

Awarded to Boeing in 2001, the WSBU contract was the largest contract awarded by the Commonwealth of Australia at the time and covered all major upgrades to the fleet’s airframe, avionics and weapons systems, including:

  • providing airframe maintenance from R1 (basic level) through R5 (deeper level)
  • providing system analysis, design, modification and testing
  • designing and integrating software and hardware to support the AGM-142 missile, the longest range air-to-ground missile available within the Australian Defence Force
  • modifying radar warnings.

Additional programs and facilities that Boeing has operated in support of the fleet include a fuel tank repair program, a coldproof load test facility, an F-111 ground test team, and a wing recovery program.

"Over the years, hundreds of Boeing employees have played a vital role in maintaining the operational effectiveness of the F-111 fleet and some, like me, have an even longer history with the platform after working on them during our time in the RAAF," said Ian Gabriel, F-111 program manager, Boeing Defence Australia. "On behalf of all Boeing personnel who supported the aircraft, it has been a privilege to have played a part in the rich military history of the F-111."

"Throughout Boeing’s long association with the F-111, we’ve forged strong relationships with the RAAF, our supplier partners and the local Ipswich community," said John Duddy, vice president and managing director, Boeing Defence Australia. "This could not have been achieved without the consistency and commitment of the Boeing personnel who have worked on the platform, and I thank them all. As the F-111 retires and we enter a new generation of Australian air defense through the F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, Boeing looks forward to continuing to work with the RAAF to help protect Australia and its people."

Boeing Defence Australia, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Boeing Company and a business unit of Boeing Defense, Space & Security, is a leading Australian aerospace enterprise. With a world-class team of more than 1,500 employees at 14 locations throughout Australia and two international sites, Boeing Defence Australia supports some of the largest and most complex defense projects in Australia.

A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world’s largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world’s largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $34 billion business with 68,000 employees worldwide.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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 Raises Safety Rating for Mexico

December 1, 2010

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today announced that Mexico complies with international safety standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), based on the results of a November FAA review of Mexico’s civil aviation authority.

Under the leadership of Secretary Juan Molinar and Director General Hector Gonzalez Weeks, Mexico has made significant progress and is now upgraded from the Category 2 safety rating the country received in July to Category 1. At Mexico’s request, the FAA will continue to provide technical assistance to support and maintain the changes the civil aviation authority has made.

A Category 1 rating means the country’s civil aviation authority complies with ICAO standards. A Category 2 rating means a country either lacks laws or regulations necessary to oversee air carriers in accordance with minimum international standards, or that its civil aviation authority – equivalent to the FAA for aviation safety matters – is deficient in one or more areas, such as technical expertise, trained personnel, recordkeeping or inspection procedures.

With the International Aviation Safety Assessment (IASA) Category 2 rating, Mexican air carriers could not establish new service to the United States, but were allowed to maintain existing service. Now with the Category 1 rating, Mexican air carriers can again add flights and service to the United States.

As part of the FAA’s IASA program, the agency assesses the civil aviation authorities of all countries with air carriers that operate or have applied to fly to the United States and makes that information available to the public. The assessments determine whether or not foreign civil aviation authorities are meeting ICAO safety standards, not FAA regulations.

Countries with air carriers that fly to the United States must adhere to the safety standards of ICAO, the United Nations’ technical agency for aviation that establishes international standards and recommended practices for aircraft operations and maintenance. IASA information is at www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/iasa/.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Frontier Flight Survives Turbulence, 5 Minor Injuries


Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Bruce Leibowitz

What: Frontier Airlines/Chautauqua Airlines Embraer ERJ-135 en route from Saint Louis to Milwaukee
Where: Milwaukee
When: Nov 30th 2010, arriving in Milwaukee at 10:02 a.m.
Who: 26 passengers, 3 crew, 6 injuries
Why: While en route, the plane encountered turbulence which injured five passengers and a flight attendant. Rescue services were waiting when the plane landed. The Embraer aircraft incident is out of service for repairs.

Frontier officials commented that passengers should keep their seat belts fastened.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Pilot in Training Crash in AZ


Pictured: A TransPac Aviation Academy Piper PA-28-181 Archer III
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Je89 W.

What: TransPac Aviation Academy Piper PA-28-181 training flight from Deer Valley Airport
Where: Wittmann, Arizona
When: Dec 1, 2010
Who: student pilot
Why: A student pilot from Transpac Aviation academy was airlifted to John C Lincoln hospital with minor injuries after landing so hard in the desert that the wheels disengaged. The cause of the incident is unknown but under investigation.

In January, 24 year old Chinese TransPac student pilot Amy Zhai was killed in a 2002 single-engine Piper Archer crash near Deer Valley Airport.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Delta Diverts for Stroke Victim


Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer David Roura – Iberian Spotters

What: Delta Airlines Airbus A330-300 en route from Paris Charles de Gaulle France to Atlanta,GA
Where: Stephenville
When: Nov 30
Who: 1 passenger
Why: Due to a passenger apparently having a stroke, the flight diverted to Stephenville Canada where a passenger was rushed to Sir Thomas Roddick Hospital. ATC suggested Saint Johns, but the weather was not permitting. The medical emergency delayed the arrival in Georgia by four hours. The ill passenger arrived at the hospital in critical condition

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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 MEET ON 2008 U.S. FOREST SERVICE CONTRACT FIREFIGHTING HELICOPTER CRASH IN WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA

National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594

December 1, 2010

The National Transportation Safety Board will hold a public Board meeting on Tuesday, December 7, at 9:30 a.m., in its Board Room and Conference Center, 429 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W., Washington, D.C.

There is one item on the agenda. The Board will consider a final report on the following accident:

* On August 5, 2008, a Sikorsky S-61N helicopter (N612AZ), impacted trees and terrain during the initial climb after takeoff, located at an elevation of about 6,000 feet in mountainous terrain near Weaverville, California. Impact forces and a post- crash fire destroyed the helicopter, which was being operated by the U.S. Forest Service as a public flight to transport firefighters and was contracted with Carson Helicopters, Inc. As a result of this accident, nine occupants were fatally injured and four were seriously injured.

A live and archived webcast of the proceedings will be available on the Board’s website at www.ntsb.gov. Technical support details are available under “Board Meetings.” To report any problems, please call 703-993-3100 and ask for Webcast Technical Support.

A summary of the Board’s final report, which will include findings, probable cause and safety recommendations, will appear on the website shortly after the conclusion of the meeting. The entire report will appear on the website several weeks later.

NEW TEMPORARY DIRECTIONS (due to ongoing construction) to the NTSB Board Room: Front door located on Lower 10th Street, directly below L’Enfant Plaza. From Metro, exit L’Enfant Plaza station at 7th and D Streets escalator, turn left, cross 7th Street, walk a half block, take stairs on left and walk into the entrance marked La Promenade, walk through shopping mall, turn right at florist shop, see the CVS store (on the left) and take escalator (on the right) down one level. The Board room will be to your left.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Flybe Struck By Lightning

What: Flybe de Havilland Dash 8-400 en route from Jersey to Guernsey
Where: Guernsey
When: Nov 28th 2010
Who: 66 passengers
Why: On approach to Guernsey, the plane’s nosecone was struck by lightning. The plane made a safe landing and no one was injured. The nose cone received some visible damage. Subsequent to the strike, the plane was grounded for inspection.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Continental Receives Top Honors in Business Travel News’ Annual Airline Survey

CHICAGO, Nov. 30, 2010 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ —

Continental Airlines received top honors in Business Travel News’ (BTN) Annual Airline Survey for the third consecutive year. The recognition marks the sixth time Continental finished first in the 13 years BTN has measured corporate travel buyer perceptions of airline performance in delivering service and maintaining preferred relationships.

“We are honored to once again receive this recognition, which reflects the hard work of my co-workers over the past year,” said worldwide sales senior vice president Dave Hilfman. “We’re going to look top to bottom in our approach to the market to ensure the new airline continues to do those things that are appreciated and recognized by our key corporate buyers.”

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

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

Standard & Poor´s revised Deutsche Lufthansa Rating Outlook to stable

The rating agency Standard & Poor´s today affirmed the credit ratings of Deutsche Lufthansa at BBB- long-term and A-3 short-term and revised the outlook to stable from negative. The outlook revision reflects an improvement in Lufthansa´s financial profile that has been supported by an upswing in airline industry conditions, a strong recovery at Lufthansa Cargo, a stable performance from other non-airline businesses and good cost control. A sustained revival in industry conditions, combined with a further strengthening of Lufthansa´s financial profile could lead to rating upside.

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
Content not attributed to or linked to original, is the property of AirFlightDisaster.com; all rights reserved.

Site Credits