Agency

Public, government, national and international agencies

  • | | | | | | |

    Automated Cockpit Props up Undertrained Pilots

    The Asiana investigation continues.

    Back in July, the pilot who was insecure about making a visual approach in a 777 crashed at San Francisco International Airport on a visual approach in Asiana Flight 214’s Boeing 777. Specifically, he told NTSB investigators “it was very difficult to perform a visual approach with a heavy airplane.” The glideslope was not working at the San Francisco airport, and that was an instrument the (*undertrained) pilot was relying on. The plane came in so low the tail struck the seawall and broke off. The video below shows the plane rotate 360 degrees and catch fire by the runway.

    New Asiana Crash Video

    Video with news commentary

    Before impact, the relief pilot in the jump seat repeated several times “sink rate” trying to warn the pilots at the controls that the jet was too quickly losing altitude. One of the pilots said “It’s low.” Then there was a stick shaker alert (which occurs when the plane is about to stall from flying too slowly. I once had a pilot do a presentation that included the disturbing grinding of the stick shaker alarm as it violently vibrated the control yoke. It’s an alarming direction to the pilots to increase thrust.)

    When the stick shaker went off, the instructor called for a go around. It went off four seconds before impact. It was too late.

    Both the instructor and the captain were relying on the auto throttle, and both were unaware it was off.

    In George’s Point of View

    I do not know how anyone can watch the surveillance video of the Asiana crash and not marvel that of the three hundred and seven people aboard the plane, there were only three deaths.

    I’m not discounting the wounds of the injured, nor those three deaths, nor the tragedy of one of the teen victims being run over by an airport crash tender. (That’s a whole tragedy by itself—who knows if she might have survived but for being so obscured by foam that she was not visible to crash responders—through the firemen who carried her out surely must have known she was there.)

    A dozen critically injured, a hundred-sixty-nine injured, but only three deaths.

    It’s nothing short of a miracle. Especially on inspecting the condition of the burned out shell of the hull. Especially on reviewing the just-released surveillance video that shows the plane splintering after impacting the firewall, cartwheeling like a crippled gymnast down the runway and dissolving into a cloud of dust and flame. No jet fuel fire here——leaking oil ignited as it poured on to a hot engine.

    The Kazan crash (Tatarstan Airlines Flight 363) from November 17th is fresh in my mind. Everyone aboard–fifty people (forty-four passengers and six crew) all died. The plane just fell from the sky while landing at an impossible 75-degree-nose-down attitude, piloted by a pilot whose license is apparently fake. Everyone in that crash died. (Tatarstan surveillance below.)

    Of course one can see the physics—that everyone on the Tatarstan flight received the full direct impact, versus how the rolling of the Asiana plane dispersed some of the impact energy. Still, there is tremendous force in a crash.

    I know I should be talking about pilot training, because this is yet another crash that appears to be due to pilots becoming too dependent on technology. But I will focus on that another day. Right now, I am overwhelmed after looking at the crash tape.

    Asiana—Cartwheeling Catastrophe
    I am surprised that I have neither heard or seen choruses of amazement that all but three people survived the rolling catastrophe in San Francisco. Some credit should perhaps go to the rescue crew, quick actions of the cabin crew, performance of the emergency slides, and maybe even the aerodynamics of the 777 whose seats are required to withstand 16g of dynamic force.

    Sure, there was error involved in this crash, but when you look at the survival rate, some credit is due to the 5.5 billion Boeing put into research, development and safety of the 777.

  • | |

    DOT Fines American Airlines


    The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) today fined American Airlines $60,000 for violating the Department’s full-fare advertising rule after the airline’s agents told consumers that surcharges levied by the airlines were government-imposed taxes. DOT ordered the carrier to cease and desist from further violations.

    “We expect airlines to be truthful to their customers when they provide information about their fares,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “We will continue to take enforcement action when airlines fail to disclose their fares fully and accurately.”
    Under the Department’s full-fare advertising rule, the first price quoted for air transportation made by an airline or ticket agent must state the entire price to be paid by the consumer, including all mandatory taxes, fees and airline surcharges. Airlines do not have to break out the components of the fare, but if they do, they must accurately show the costs of the services or taxes.
    Following a complaint from a consumer, the Department’s Aviation Enforcement Office investigated how American described to potential passengers the taxes and carrier surcharges that it collected. It found that on a number of occasions in 2012 and 2013, American’s telephone reservation agents mistakenly told consumers that a variety of additional taxes and carrier-imposed surcharges were collectively “taxes.” A significant portion of these charges were not taxes but fees imposed by the airline, such as fuel surcharges. In addition, pop-ups on the airline’s website claimed that these surcharges were taxes and, on at least one occasion, American issued a reservation statement labeling surcharges as taxes. The carrier has corrected its website and provided additional training to its agents.

    Documents

  • | |

    Asiana Flight 214 Investigative Hearing Postponed


    Asiana Flight 214 Investigative Hearing Rescheduled

    The National Transportation Safety Board’s Investigative Hearing into the crash landing of Asiana Airlines Flight 214 originally scheduled for December 10, has been postponed due the government closing because of inclement weather in the Washington DC area.

    The agenda for the previously scheduled two-day hearing has been slightly revised so that the hearing can be completed in one day. It is expected that the hearing will run until 8:00 p.m.

    The hearing will be held at the NTSB’s Board Room and Conference Center at 429 L’Enfant Plaza SW in Washington. Directions to the Board Room are available at www.ntsb.gov/about/conference_center.html.

    The revised agenda can be found below:

  • | |

    Training! Training! Training!

    The NTSB was discussing safety measures in late October, especially pilot training before stalls. The new rule has been a long time coming. Earl Weener, a member of the National Transportation Safety Board, talked about the serious history of pilots wrongly pulling the plane’s nose up till the plane fell to the ground. If training is part of the problem, then at least that is a lack that can be amended.

    Only twenty-six percent of pilots train for high altitude stalls, but according to a NASA study, twenty-eight percent of stalls are high altitude stalls. Seventy-one percent of stalls happen while autopilot is on.

    In early November we heard how the FAA unveiled a rule about pilot training to avoid stalling airliners. It came about because of four crashes: Those crashes were Colgan 3407 in 2009, Air France 447 in June 2009, Pinnacle Airlines 3701 in October 2004 and USAir 427 in September 1994. (Too bad there have to be stall issues before stall training came to the attention of officials.) In the February 2009 crash of Colgan Air, it was determined that the pilots–as in the three other flights–in the midst of a blizzard in Buffalo pulled up on the nose of the plane, causing the crash. A meeting of air safety leaders in late November has jump-started the plans. Though something that has taken so long in the works can hardly said to be jump—started.

    The powers that be sound positive about the new rule.

    The FAA speculates training will save nearly seven million because of prevention—at a program cost of $274 million. Within five years this will mean:

    • Better ground and flight recovery training
    • Better pilot flight monitoring each other
    • Better runway safety protocols
    • Better crosswind training.

    I have been beating a drum for a long time about obvious solutions to obvious problems. Yes, things may fail, but why not implement preventative measures where available? So now rather than my usual battle-cry: Maintenance! Maintenance! Maintenance! Maybe I will be saying Training! Training! Training! I am looking forward to increased safety brought about by this new rule.

  • | |

    FAA Proposes $304,000 Civil Penalty Against Great Lakes Aviation


    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a $304,000 civil penalty against Great Lakes Aviation of Cheyenne, Wyo., for allegedly conducting 19 flights with aircraft that were not in compliance with Federal Aviation Regulations.

    Great Lakes operated the aircraft in conditions in which the carrier could reasonably expect frost, snow or ice to adhere to the planes, the FAA alleges. The FAA maintains that Great Lakes flew Beech 1900 aircraft out of Hays, Kan., in January 2011 with deicing fluid that exceeded the maximum temperature of 180 degrees Fahrenheit. The Great Lakes deicing manual states that fluid heated to more than 180 degrees could damage the aircraft or the deicer.

  • | | |

    FAA Proposes $325,000 Civil Penalty Against Southwest Airlines


    The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a $325,000 civil penalty against Dallas-based Southwest Airlines for allegedly operating an aircraft that had been improperly modified, violating Federal Aviation Regulations.

    On Aug. 29, 2011, maintenance personnel improperly installed a switch that enables flight crews to test the windshield heating system on a Boeing 717 that AirTran Airways Inc. was operating. Southwest is in the process of merging with AirTran.

    Proper installation of the switch would have allowed personnel to isolate the windshield anti-ice system that was causing a warning that the windshield heater was failing. Instead, the center and left windshield warning systems were reversed. The right windshield warning system continued to operate properly. The aircraft was operated on 1,140 passenger flights before the problem was corrected.

  • DOT Fines Brazilian Airline for Violations of Airline Consumer Rules


    The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) today fined the Brazilian airline GOL $250,000 for violating a number of DOT’s rules protecting the rights of air travelers. This is the largest penalty assessed for violations of the rules adopted in April 2011.
    The airline was ordered to cease and desist from further violations of the Department’s airline consumer rules.
    “We adopted these rules to ensure that passengers are treated with respect when they buy a ticket or board a plane,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “We will not tolerate disregard of our rules and will take enforcement action when necessary to protect travelers.”
    The Department’s Aviation Enforcement Office found that GOL’s U.S. website, for a period of time after it was launched in November 2012, failed to include a variety of information and features required by DOT air travel consumer protection rules. The website did not include a contingency plan for handling lengthy tarmac delays or a link from the homepage to a list of fees for baggage and other optional services.
    GOL also violated DOT’s full-fare advertising requirement by failing to include taxes and fees in fares displayed on the website in response to consumer searches. The full fare, including taxes and fees, was available only after the consumer selected a specific itinerary.
    The airline also failed to post its contract of carriage in an easily accessible form on its website. A consumer had to begin the process of searching for an itinerary before being able to gain access to the contract information. This made it hard to easily compare GOL’s contract with those of other airlines, and made obtaining the contract difficult for passengers who wanted to review the information online before booking a flight by telephone or with a ticket agent.
    GOL also failed to include on its website required information on how consumers can file a complaint with the airline.

  • | |

    SPECIAL AIRWORTHINESS INFORMATION BULLETIN: CE-14-04


    SPECIAL AIRWORTHINESS INFORMATION BULLETIN: CE-14-04
    Notice Number: NOTC5068

    SPECIAL AIRWORTHINESS INFORMATION BULLETIN

    SAIB: CE-14-04

    Flight Management Computing Systems; Navigation Database Updates – Data and Procedural Exclusions

    Date: November 22, 2013

    Introduction
    This Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin is written to inform and remind owners and operators about changes contained in manufacturers’ navigation database updates. The cyclical updates may exclude certain navigation data including approach procedures, which makes this information unavailable for selection on the aircraft flight management system or navigation equipment.

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has determined that the airworthiness concern is not an unsafe condition that would warrant airworthiness directive (AD) action under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 39. The FAA continues to monitor these issues with the original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).

    Background
    The FAA occasionally has received inquiries regarding missing data within the aircraft’s flight management system or navigation unit. In many scenarios, a pilot has attempted to select or load a particular approach, but is unable to do so and must determine an alternative in flight. This has often led to confusion and questions about how or why the data appears to be missing.

    From time-to-time, avionics manufacturers may exclude procedures from the aviation database. The causes driving such removals vary, and while some data may be reinstated one cycle later, other data may remain excluded for longer periods of time.
    It is important to note that each avionics manufacturer processes the aeronautical data differently, and procedures excluded on one aircraft or system may not be excluded on another. Avionics manufacturers make data exclusion information available to their customers for consideration before use of affected data in flight operations. Exclusions can frequently be found on the avionics manufacturer’s internet website or may be published in another format as part of the new database cycle.

    Recommendations
    The FAA recommends that pilots do the following:
    1) Become familiar with the most appropriate location where they can find information regarding exclusions from the database that can affect their flight operations.

    2) Exercise diligence in their preflight planning by staying informed about data exclusions pertaining to the type of avionics they utilize.

  • | | | | | | |

    Oslo: October 31, 2013, Near Miss

    We wrote about two Norwegian Air Shuttle planes that suffered a near miss when two planes followed the same instruction from ATC. The Accident Investigation Board Norway (AIBN) report on the event is below.

    Report (Translation)
    Description
    The 31 October 2012, two airliners from English too close together under a simultaneous missed approach (NAX741) and departure (NAX740) at Oslo Airport. There was strong tailwind on final. The AIBN believes that the flight crew on NAX741 had unrealistic expectations of the ability to be stabilized later in 1000 ft above the airport elevation. The decision to initiate the missed approach was taken at a late stage. Expectations of final-controller and tower controller that the speed of the landing would be reduced sufficiently during the approach, was not met. The missed approach for NAX741 came into conflict with the simultaneous departure of NAX740.

    Visibility conditions were such that the tower controller could not maintain visual separation between aircraft. Planes were for each other and both were rising. Tower air traffic controller instructed NAX741 to swing west. A mixture of callsign originated and led to NAX740 initiated clearance given to NAX741. The minimum horizontal distance between the aircraft was about. 0.2 NM (370 m) while the vertical height difference was 500 ft (152 m). AIBN considers that there was real danger of collision in the incident. When the situation first arose, prevented the situation awareness and good reviews from the flight crew and tower controller further escalation of the conflict.

    AIBN considers that established and practiced procedures will help to ensure that situations are recognized and averted before they become critical. Data from the cockpit voice recorder (Cockpit Voice Recorder CVR) was not secured. CVR data is important to understand the sequence of events, and AIBN therefore it is unfortunate that CVR data is not guaranteed. AIBN no new safety recommendation in this report, but refers to a previously issued safety recommendation (SL no 2012/06T) not closed.

    Type of report: Full report
    Location: Oslo Airport Gardermoen ENGM
    Event Date: 31/10/2012
    ICAO Location indicator: ENGM
    Aircraft: Boeing 737-600/700/800 / Boeing 737-600/700/800
    Operator: Norwegian Air Shuttle / Norwegian Air Shuttle
    Reg notice: LN-DYC / LN-NOM
    Flight conditions: IMC
    County: Akershus
    Type of event: Serious incident
    Type of flight: Commercial, scheduled / Commercial, scheduled
    Category Aviation: Tung, aircraft (> 10 000kg) / Tung, aircraft (> 10 000kg)
    Flykategori: Land plane, multi-engine, turbofan / turbojet
    FIR / AOR: ENOS (Oslo ATCC)

  • | | |

    Press Release: Airline Consumer Complaints Down From Previous Year


    WASHINGTON – Airline consumer complaints filed with DOT’s Aviation Consumer Protection Division during the first nine months of this year were down 14.1 percent from the first nine months of 2012, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Air Travel Consumer Report released today.
    From January to September 2013, the Department received 10,439 consumer complaints, down from the total of 12,153 filed during the first nine months of 2012. In September, the Department received 1,008 complaints about airline service from consumers, down 6.8 percent from the 1,081 complaints filed in September 2012 and down 23.5 percent from the 1,318 received in August 2013.

    The consumer report also includes data on tarmac delays, on-time performance, cancellations, chronically delayed flights, and the causes of flight delays filed with the Department’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) by the reporting carriers. In addition, the consumer report contains information on airline bumping, mishandled baggage reports filed by consumers with the carriers, and disability and discrimination complaints received by DOT’s Aviation Consumer Protection Division. The consumer report also includes reports of incidents involving the loss, death, or injury of pets traveling by air, as required to be filed by U.S. carriers.

  • |

    FAA Pilot Training

    In George’s Point of View

    The Federal Aviation Administration’s new pilot training rule has been a long time coming, like the recommendation for simulator training for pilots in using TCAS that dates back to 1993, remedial training from 2005 for pilots with bad track records and training in aerodynamic stall recovery from the Colgan accident, and pilot monitoring. Just read FAA Administrator Michael Huerta’s discussion of the new Pilot training rule.

    I look forward to safer skies from the implementation of this additional training. Hopefully operators in foreign countries will follow the FAA’s suit and ramp up their pilot training. It will be interesting to hear what pilots think of the new pilot training rule.

  • |

    FAA Issues Final Rule on Pilot Training


    As part of its ongoing efforts to enhance safety and put the best qualified and trained pilots in the flight decks of U.S. airplanes, the Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today issued a final rule that will significantly advance the way commercial air carrier pilots are trained.

    In addition, FAA Administrator Michael Huerta is inviting the nation’s commercial aviation safety leaders to Washington, D.C. on November 21, to discuss additional voluntary steps that can be taken to further boost safety during airline operations, including pilot training.

    “Today’s rule is a significant advancement for aviation safety and U.S. pilot training,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “One of my first meetings as Transportation Secretary was with the Colgan Flight 3407 families, and today, I am proud to announce that with their help, the FAA has now added improved pilot training to its many other efforts to strengthen aviation safety.”

    The final rule stems in part from the tragic crash of Colgan Air 3407 in February 2009, and addresses a Congressional mandate in the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 to ensure enhanced pilot training. Today’s rule is one of several rulemakings required by the Act, including the requirements to prevent pilot fatigue that were finalized in December 2011, and the increased qualification requirements for first officers who fly U.S. passenger and cargo planes that were issued in July 2013.

    The final rule requires:

    • ground and flight training that enables pilots to prevent and recover from aircraft stalls and upsets. These new training standards will impact future simulator standards as well;
    • air carriers to use data to track remedial training for pilots with performance deficiencies, such as failing a proficiency check or unsatisfactory performance during flight training;
    • training for more effective pilot monitoring;
    • enhanced runway safety procedures; and
    • expanded crosswind training, including training for wind gusts.

    “This pivotal rule will give our nation’s pilots the most advanced training available,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. “While the rule marks a major step toward addressing the greatest known risk areas in pilot training, I’m also calling on the commercial aviation industry to continue to move forward with voluntary initiatives to make air carrier training programs as robust as possible.”

    The FAA is focusing on pilot training for events that, although rare, are often catastrophic. Focusing on these events will provide the greatest safety benefit to the flying public. The recent rule to boost pilot qualifications for first officers has raised the baseline knowledge and skill set of pilots entering air carrier operations. Many air carriers have also voluntarily begun developing safety management systems (SMS), which will help air carriers identify and mitigate risks unique to their own operating environments.

    The FAA proposed to revise the training rules for pilots in 2009, one month prior to the Colgan Flight 3407 accident. The FAA issued a supplemental proposal on May 20, 2011, to address many of the NTSB’s recommendations resulting from the accident, and incorporate congressional mandates for stick pusher, stall recovery and remedial training. A stick pusher is a safety system that applies downward elevator pressure to prevent an airplane from exceeding a predetermined angle of attack in order to avoid, identify, or assist in the recovery of a stall.

    On Aug. 6, 2012, the FAA issued Advisory Circular (AC) Stall and Stick Pusher Training to provide best practices and guidance for training, testing, and checking for pilots to ensure correct and consistent responses to unexpected stall events and stick pusher activations. A copy of the AC is available at online.

    Air carriers will have five years to comply with the rule’s new pilot training provisions, which will allow time for the necessary software updates to be made in flight simulation technology. The cost of the rule to the aviation industry is estimated to be $274.1 to $353.7 million. The estimated benefit is nearly double the cost at $689.2 million. The final rule is available online.

  • |

    DOT Fines US Airways for Failure to Provide Wheelchair Assistance to Passengers with Disabilities

    WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) today fined US Airways $1.2 million for failing to provide adequate wheelchair assistance to passengers in Philadelphia and Charlotte, N.C. The fine is one of the largest ever assessed by DOT in a disability case.

    “All air travelers deserve to be treated equally and with respect, and this includes persons in wheelchairs and other passengers with disabilities,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “We will continue to make sure that airlines comply with our rules and treat their passengers fairly.”

    Under DOT’s rules implementing the Air Carrier Access Act, airlines are required to provide free, prompt wheelchair assistance upon request to passengers with disabilities. This includes helping passengers to move between gates and make connections to other flights.
    In one of its periodic reviews of airline compliance with DOT rules, the Department’s Aviation Enforcement Office found that US Airways committed a significant number of violations of the requirements for wheelchair assistance during 2011 and 2012 at Philadelphia International Airport and Charlotte Douglas International Airport. As part of its review, the Enforcement Office examined approximately 300 complaints filed by passengers with the airline and DOT relating to incidents at Philadelphia and Charlotte, which covered only a sample of complaints filed over two years against US Airways for the two airports. The airline’s use of a combination of electric carts and wheelchairs to carry passengers between gates required frequent transfers and led to long delays. Some passengers missed connections because of the delays or were left unattended for long periods of time.

    Of the $1.2 million fine, US Airways may use up to $500,000 for improvements in its service to passengers with disabilities that are beyond what DOT rules require. These include hiring managers to ensure the quality of the airline’s disability services in Philadelphia and Charlotte, creating a telephone line to assist these passengers, purchasing tablets and other equipment to monitor assistance requests, providing compensation to passengers with disability-related complaints, and programming the airline’s computers so that boarding passes identify passengers who request special services.

  • | | | | |

    Fokker 27 Investigation

    BEA Fokker 27, registered I-MLVT, 25 October 2013, Roissy Charles de Gaulle Airport, France

    INFORMATION ON 27 OCTOBER 2013

    The BEA has initiated a Safety Investigation following the accident that occurred to the Fokker 27 Mk 500, operated by the Italian airline Miniliner on behalf of the French airline Europe Airpost.

    The cargo aeroplane, with two pilots on board, had taken off at 01h10 (local time) from Roissy Charles de Gaulle Airport bound for Dole, France. A few minutes later, the aeroplane suffered uncontained damage to the left engine. During the accident, a left propeller blade went through the fuselage. At 01h20, the crew made an emergency landing back at Roissy Charles de Gaulle Airport.

    A team of three investigators from the BEA went to Roissy on Friday 25 October to begin the first work on the investigation. The flight recorders, along with the propeller, will be sent to the BEA on Monday 28 October.

    Organisation of the Investigation

    In accordance with the provisions of European Regulation 996/2012, the BEA has associated the following organisations with the Safety Investigation:

    ANSV (Agenzia Nazionale per la Sicurezza del Volo, Italy) representing the State of Operation of the aeroplane,
    AAIB (Air Accidents Investigation Branch, United Kingdom) representing the State of Manufacture of the aeroplane’s engine and
    the Dutch Safety Board (Netherlands) representing the State of Manufacture of the aeroplane.
    The preliminary examination of the propeller blade that separated from the engine and the readout of the flight recorders will be undertaken at the BEA at the beginning of this week, in the presence of the BEA’s foreign counterparts and their technical advisers.

  • | | |

    NTSB Announces Investigative Hearing on Asiana Flight 214


    Agency provides third investigative update on San Francisco crash

    The National Transportation Safety Board is convening a 2-day investigative hearing to discuss the ongoing investigation into the crash of Asiana Airlines Flight 214 and to gather additional factual information. The hearing, which will be held December 10–11, 2013, at the NTSB’s Board Room and Conference Center in Washington, DC, will focus on pilot awareness in highly automated aircraft, emergency response, and cabin safety. Parties participating in the investigative hearing will be announced at a later time.

    Below is an update of the ongoing investigation. This is a factual update only and no interviews are being conducted.

    The investigator-in-charge and investigators from the Operations and Human Performance Group traveled to Korea and met with officials from Asiana Airlines and the KARAIB. While in Korea, investigators conducted numerous interviews with Asiana management and training personnel, observed Asiana procedures in a simulator and an exemplar aircraft, and gathered further documentation on airline training and policies.
    NTSB investigators from the Maintenance Group also traveled to Korea and reviewed the records for the accident airplane, including the maintenance that had been performed on the evacuation slides.
    The Survival Factors Group conducted an examination of the evacuation slide/raft systems at the manufacturer’s facility in New Jersey and is planning future testing of the systems. The group also re-examined the wreckage to gather additional information about the fire propagation and structural damage. Following that examination, the wreckage was sectioned and moved to a secure storage facility.
    Investigators and party members met in Seattle to examine the recorded flight data and compare it to the expected airplane systems operation. The Systems Group is currently developing a test plan for the mode control panel and the Vehicle Performance Group is finalizing the event simulation match.

  • | |

    NTSB ANNOUNCES INVESTIGATIVE HEARING ON ASIANA FLIGHT 214


    WASHINGTON – The National Transportation Safety Board is convening a 2-day investigative hearing to discuss the ongoing investigation into the crash of Asiana Airlines Flight 214 and to gather additional factual information. The hearing, which will be held December 10–11, 2013, at the NTSB’s Board Room and Conference Center in Washington, DC, will focus on pilot awareness in highly automated aircraft, emergency response, and cabin safety. Parties participating in the investigative hearing will be announced at a later time.
    Below is an update of the ongoing investigation. This is a factual update only and no interviews are being conducted.
    • The investigator-in-charge and investigators from the Operations and Human Performance Group traveled to Korea and met with officials from Asiana Airlines and the KARAIB. While in Korea, investigators conducted numerous interviews with Asiana management and training personnel, observed Asiana procedures in a simulator and an exemplar aircraft, and gathered further documentation on airline training and policies.

    • NTSB investigators from the Maintenance Group also traveled to Korea and reviewed the records for the accident airplane, including the maintenance that had been performed on the evacuation slides.

    • The Survival Factors Group conducted an examination of the evacuation slide/raft systems at the manufacturer’s facility in New Jersey and is planning future testing of the systems. The group also re-examined the wreckage to gather additional information about the fire propagation and structural damage. Following that examination, the wreckage was sectioned and moved to a secure storage facility.

    • Investigators and party members met in Seattle to examine the recorded flight data and compare it to the expected airplane systems operation. The Systems Group is currently developing a test plan for the mode control panel and the Vehicle Performance Group is finalizing the event simulation match.

  • | | | |

    Missing Plane Found Crashed, Pilot Death on Impact

    On Oct 23, 2013, a Kestrel Aviation Cessna 182Q Skylane en route from Moruya Airport to Mangalore Airport in Australia was en route when it developed problems. The pilot at left 8.15am on Wednesday and never arrived in Mangalore Australia. Five aircraft searched unsuccessfully for the missing plane on Wednesday. An unconfirmed sighting narrowed the search parameters to Mt. Hotham. Eight helicopters and two planes searched Thursday morning until the wreckage was found at 8.40am on Thursday by a search helicopter that was also employing “radar and mobile data.”

    The ATSB is investigating the fatal plane crash. The only one aboard was the pilot, whose injuries were fatal.

    The impact occurred near Mt Hotham, Victoria.

    An Australian attorney told the press that the pilot, 60-year-old Peter Brereton from Euroa was killed in a light plane crash on his way back from dropping off spare parts for a helicopter used in the fire fighting efforts on the far south coast of NSW.

    A specialized team of 4 ATSB investigators with expertise in mechanical and aeronautical engineering, materials failure and aircraft operations began investigation #AO-2013-186, a four day examination of the wreckage on the 25th, (friday).

  • |

    DOT Press Release: Code Share Disclosure


    The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) today fined two ticket agents for violating the Department’s rules on disclosure of code-share flights. DOT issued a $125,000 fine against Carlson Wagonlit Travel and a $65,000 fine against Frosch International Travel, and both companies were ordered to cease and desist from further violations. The amount of the fines was based on the specific circumstances of the individual cases. Today’s consent orders are part of an ongoing effort by DOT to ensure that ticket agents comply with the code-share disclosure rules.

    “No one wants to arrive to their gate and learn for the first time that the airline they thought was operating their flight actually sold them a ticket for another airline,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “We will continue to make sure that all companies selling air transportation are transparent with consumers and will take enforcement action when they fail to disclose code-sharing arrangements.”
    Under code-sharing, an airline sells seats on flights using its designator code, but the flights are operated by a separate airline.

    In this case, DOT’s Aviation Enforcement Office made telephone calls to a number of agents during January and February of 2013 and inquired about booking certain flights. During these calls, the reservations agents for both companies failed to disclose that the flights were being operated under code-share arrangements. The agents identified only the name of the airline marketing the flight and not the name of airline operating the flight. This violated DOT rules requiring airlines and ticket agents to inform consumers if a flight is operated under a code-share arrangement, as well as disclose the corporate name of the transporting airline and any other name under which the flight is offered to the public.

    DOT takes enforcement action when necessary against companies that sell air transportation based on consumer complaints and the Department’s own internal investigations. DOT has now issued six fines for code-sharing violations this year, totaling $430,000.

    The consent orders are available at www.regulations.gov, docket DOT-OST-2013-0004.

  • |

    NTSB Investigating Engine Failure

    NTSB Investigating Engine Failure Aboard Spirit Airlines Flight 165
    October 17
    The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating Tuesday’s engine failure on a Spirit Airlines Airbus A319, which was flying from Dallas to Atlanta when the event occurred.

    The NTSB has an investigator on the scene at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport inspecting and documenting the engine, an International Aero Engines (IAE) V2500, which has now been removed from the airplane.

    As a result of the initial inspection, it was determined that the engine failure was contained, meaning it did not penetrate the engine casing.

    The engine will be shipped to a separate facility for a detailed examination and disassembly. IAE, the Federal Aviation Administration, and Spirit Airlines are parties to the investigation.

    The NTSB has also secured the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder from Spirit Flight 165. The recorders are being brought back to Washington, DC for readout and analysis.

  • Furlough Fallout

    One-third of the Federal Aviation Administration’s 46,000 employees are on furlough but eight hundred are being recalled this week allowing plane certification, 600 who oversee airline operations, and 25 doctors who oversee drug and alcohol testing.

    However, aviation registration can not be performed, and the lack has stopped aviation deliveries.

    The manpower shortage may lead to maintenance problems and consequential safety issues.

  • | | | |

    Respond now to NTSB ISSUING FINAL RULE IN RESPONSE TO PILOT’S BILL OF RIGHTS

    The National Transportation Safety Board announced today that it has issued a Final Rule to implement several changes to its Rules of Practice applicable to aviation certificate enforcement appeals. This final rule responds to public comments received by the NTSB as a result of an interim final rule (IFR) it issued last October. The NTSB issued the IFR after the enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights legislation and it became effective upon its publication in the Federal Register on October 16, 2012.

    Under the Pilot’s Bill of Rights: (1) the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must disclose its enforcement investigative report (EIR) to the FAA certificate holder in an aviation certificate enforcement case; (2) NTSB administrative law judges must apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence in enforcement cases; and (3) litigants now have the option of appealing the NTSB’s final orders to either a Federal district court or a Federal court of appeals. The IFR implemented these Pilot’s Bill of Rights requirements. Under the IFR, an FAA certificate holder is permitted to submit a motion to dismiss an FAA complaint if the FAA fails to disclose releasable portions of its EIR. The NTSB received 10 comments in response to the IFR. The Final Rule describes these comments in detail, as most of the comments provided substantive feedback and suggestions.

    In considering the IFR comments, the NTSB determined it should include a proposal to extend the EIR availability requirement in the Pilot’s Bill of Rights to emergency enforcement cases. As a result, the NTSB is also publishing a new Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in conjunction with publication of the Final Rule in the Federal Register.


    Both the Final Rule and NPRM are available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-19/pdf/2013-22634.pdf (Final Rule) and http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-19/pdf/2013-22633.pdf (NPRM). The public may submit comments to the NPRM, concerning the proposal to require the FAA to make available the EIR in emergency enforcement cases, via www.regulations.gov, Docket No. NTSB-GC-2011-0001, or via postal mail or facsimile, addressed to the NTSB Office of General Counsel. Comments should be submitted no later than October 21, 2013. The Final Rule is immediately effective.

    See the bill below

    In George’s Point of View

    Time to take note of the final rule. The public can submit their opinion at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. NTSB-GC-2011-0001, or via postal mail or facsimile, addressed to the NTSB Office of General Counsel.

  • |

    IATA Press Release Talks about African Safety


    The International Air Transport Association (IATA) called on public and private stakeholders to work together to address critical priorities to enable aviation to do more to drive economic growth in Africa.

    “Aviation supports 6.7 million jobs and some $68 billion of economic activity in Africa. Those numbers are impressive but I am convinced aviation has an even bigger role to play in providing the connectivity that drives economic growth and development,” said Tony Tyler, IATA’s Director General and CEO.

    Speaking at Aviation Day Africa, Tyler said that, “Africa is poised for rapid development and great changes. Half of the top 20 fastest growing economies over the next five years are expected to be on this continent. Aviation’s part in driving growth and development will become even more prominent.”

    In order for this to occur, however, Africa must address major challenges in safety, infrastructure, and liberalization.

    Safety:
    “Safety is our top priority. And Africa’s performance is well below what we are achieving globally,” said Tyler. In 2012 African airlines had one accident (with a Western-built jet aircraft) for every 270,000 flights. Globally, the industry average was 1 accident for every 5 million flights. However, no IATA member experienced a Western-built jet hull loss accident last year and that includes the 25 member airlines based in Africa. Likewise, none of the 384 airlines on the IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) registry had a hull loss with a Western-built jet—also including those carriers based in Africa. “It is clear that IOSA is making a difference—not just in Africa, but in safety globally,” said Tyler.

    The Abuja Declaration, which was endorsed by the African Union Summit this year, sets out a comprehensive approach to reaching world-class safety levels by 2015. Completion of IOSA by all African carriers is a condition of the Declaration and Tyler urged African governments to make IOSA mandatory for airlines. IATA is sponsoring 10 airlines with in-house training to achieve IOSA registration.

    In addition to IOSA participation, the Abuja Declaration calls for:

    • The establishment of independent and sufficiently funded civil aviation authorities
    • Implementation of effective and transparent safety oversight systems by all African states
    • Implementation of accident prevention measures focused on runway safety and loss of control
    • Implementation of flight data analysis
    • And implementation of safety management systems by all service providers

    “Meeting the Abuja Declaration’s commitments will require a major effort across the continent. We have a lot of ground to cover and we cannot lose momentum. IATA is a committed partner and we must work together as a team of stakeholders to deliver world class safety to Africa,” said Tyler.

    Infrastructure

    “Infrastructure is also a major challenge. Some of the challenges are physical—infrastructure in many parts of Africa needs to improve,” said Tyler. Several infrastructure projects are ongoing in the region—upgrades at Lagos Airport, Performance-Based Navigation investments for Nigerian air traffic management and ambitious airport infrastructure re-development in Ghana.

    Nonetheless, there are some infrastructure challenges including the reliability of fuel supply in Lagos. “We must find a sustainable long-term solution. The vandalized pipeline is no longer in use. And trucking fuel from Apapa terminal through dense traffic is inefficient and costly. The same can be said of building extra capacity to store fuel on site. Without minimizing the challenges involved, providing security on a few kilometers of pipeline is not an impossible task. We are working with the oil industry to find a solution. And we will be seeking the government’s political will to help us make it happen. Ensuring fuel reliability is critical to Lagos’s future as a hub for connectivity across South-West Africa.,” said Tyler.

    Infrastructure costs and charging policy are also hindering African connectivity. “Just as with safety, global standards exist to provide guidance on charges, as developed and recommended by the International Civil Aviation Organization. These include cost-relatedness, non-discrimination and transparency. It is also recommended that charges be developed in consultation with users. And there should be no pre-financing,“ said Tyler.

    “Governments must also recognize that every dollar counts. If we average the entire industry’s profits for 2012, airlines retained about $2.50 for every passenger. And African airlines have been basically hovering around break-even for a decade or more. Without sustainable income, airlines cannot expand to meet rising demand and in fact, they may have to reduce services,” said Tyler.

    Liberalization
    “Africa’s economic development needs aviation connectivity. And for that to further develop, airlines need to be able to access markets. Ironically, connectivity from Africa to other continents is more developed than connectivity within the continent. From Lagos there are daily flights to Atlanta but not to Dakar or Abidjan—and Lagos is one of the better connected cities in Africa. Africa has a visionary framework for growing connectivity across the continent in the now epic story of the Yamoussoukro Declaration which started in 1988. There has been some progress. But it is far from being transformational. It is interesting to see that African governments find it somehow easier to expand bilateral arrangements with long-haul trading partners than within the region,” said Tyler.

  • |

    FAA Orders Inspections of Honeywell Emergency Locator Transmitters


    The FAA is issuing an Airworthiness Directive (AD) identical to the August 26 Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) directive which requires airlines to inspect Honeywell emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) by January 14, 2014 to prevent an electrical short and possible ignition source. The FAA AD has the same deadline for the U.S. fleet and will impact approximately 4,000 airplanes at a total cost of approximately $325,720. The investigation of the July 12, 2013 Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 787 fire at Heathrow Airport continues under the leadership of the United Kingdom Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB).

    In George’s Point of View

    Good for Transport Canada Civil Aviation beating us to the punch. Too bad that the deadline is January 14, 2014. Seems like they could behave with a bit more urgency with a potential fire hazard. Does this mean that–if one of these Honeywell emergency locator transmitters happens to cause a fire between now and January 14, 2014, the TCCA and the FAA are responsible? By setting a date months away, aren’t these agencies downplaying the hazard potential?

  • |

    FAA Innovations

    The job of a controller is to keep planes at a safe distance from each other. The FAA has a new electronic air traffic control monitoring system that tracks controller error.

    The new system has revealed serious errors made by controllers have been underestimated. The new system is augmented by electronic surveillance and controller self-reportage.

    Controllers made 41 high risk errors out of a total 4,394 errors last year. That is two times the errors in 2010 and three times those in 2009.

    We should consider that of 132 million flights handled, 41 serious errors is a small percentage of error. Of course, it is only a good thing that the FAA is working on reducing errors.