Boeing

  • | | |

    United Airlines Flight 2068 Returns to SFO due to Mechanical Problem

    new-united-logoUnited Airlines flight 2068 had to return and make an emergency landing in San Francisco due to a mechanical problem.

    The Seattle-bound flight took off from San Francisco International Airport at about 1:30 p.m. on May 23. Shortly after it took off, a mechanical problem was discovered in the plane.

    The Boeing 757 was then returned to San Francisco where it made an uneventful emergency landing at about 1:57 p.m.. No one was injured in the incident.

    Another plane was arranged to take the passengers to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.

  • | | | | |

    Two Passenger Planes ‘Nearly Collided’ Midair in New Jersey Says NTSB’s Report

    According to a preliminary report released by the NTSB, two passenger planes ‘nearly collided’ mid-air last month near Newark Liberty Airport, New Jersey.

    The incident happened on April 24 when a Boeing 737-800 aircraft, registered to United Airlines was about to land at the airport while an Embraer ERJ145 aircraft belonging to ExpressJet flight was taking off. At about 3pm, the distance between the two planes was recorded to be only 200 feet laterally, and 400 feet vertically.

    The report revealed that “The local controller recognized that the spacing was insufficient and instructed the B737 to go around. He provided traffic advisories to both the B737 and the ERJ145 pilots and instructed the ERJ145 pilot to maintain visual separation from the B737. The ERJ145 pilot responded that he was going to keep the aircraft’s nose down. The B737 overflew the ERJ145 at the intersection of runways 29/4R”.

    There were 47 passengers and 3 crew members aboard the ExpressJet flight while the United flight was flying with 155 passengers and 6 crew members on board.

  • | | | | | | | |

    Clear and Present Danger

    I don’t know if we should blame George Jetson and his hover car commute to work, or Bruce Willis’s talkative flying taxi in The Fifth Element, but the fiction world (or at least the world according to movie directors) predicts a day when flying cars will endure a traffic filled commute identical to gridlock traffic that occurs on rush hour highways. It’s a completely irrational view, given the state of contemporary air traffic control. I don’t see it happening. At least, not until planes or flying cars can defy gravity and manage to hover motionless on demand, the flying car commute to work can’t happen. Not with our current protections. And that’s a good thing. The extra safety measures we have today are essential, because because gravity works. We can only hope our safety measures are adequate, or better than adequate. Just to keep from falling, physics requires that planes have to hurtle through the air at high speed to stay aloft, and require a multitude of safety measures to keep from colliding at all angles. Planes rely on pilots, of course, but also air traffic control, which is supposed to monitor plane trajectory and make certain that planes are miles apart. Commercial planes also have the TCAS (traffic collision avoidance) system which relies on on board transponders that monitor airspace around a plane, in order to avoid airborne collisions.

    I have ranted before about the misnomer of the near miss. If two planes nearly collide, they nearly hit. If they almost miss (i.e. near miss), then it must have actually hit. So I dislike the term, because it doesn’t mean what it sounds like it means. I’d be happy to play around with the semantics, though, if it meant we could avoid the actual situation of planes colliding or nearly colliding. It’s a crucial thing to consider, especially since there were two near air collisions plus a collision a couple of weeks ago.

    One (nearly) happened when a United Airlines San Francisco-Newark flight (155 passengers and six crew), and a Newark-Memphis ExpressJet (47 passengers and three crew) flew within 200 feet laterally and 400 feet vertically. The Expressjet was taking off; and the United pilot was ordered to abort their landing, and circle the airport but instead chose to land the plane.

    The preliminary report for the United flight says that “on Thursday, April 24, 2014, about 1503 eastern daylight time, a near midair collision occurred at Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR), Newark, New Jersey, when an Embraer ERJ145, departing EWR runway 4R for Memphis, Tennessee, passed in close proximity to a Boeing 737-800 arriving from San Francisco, California, intending to land on runway 29. Both aircraft were on regularly scheduled 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 passenger flights and under control of EWR airport traffic control tower (ATCT) at the time of the incident. There was no damage reported to either aircraft, or any injuries to passengers or crew.

    The B737 contacted the EWR tower on the Bridge Visual approach to runway 29. The local controller instructed the pilot to follow a B717 ahead, and cleared the pilot to land on runway 29. When the B717 was on short final, the local controller instructed the ERJ145 pilot to line up and wait on runway 4R. After the B717 crossed runway 4R, the local controller cleared the ERJ145 for takeoff. At that time, the B737 was about three miles from the runway 29 threshold. The ERJ145 did not actually begin its takeoff roll until the B737 was about 1 mile from the runway 29 threshold. The local controller recognized that the spacing was insufficient and instructed the B737 to go around. He provided traffic advisories to both the B737 and the ERJ145 pilots and instructed the ERJ145 pilot to maintain visual separation from the B737. The ERJ145 pilot responded that he was going to keep the aircraft’s nose down. The B737 overflew the ERJ145 at the intersection of runways 29/4R.

    According to recorded Federal Aviation Administration radar data, the closest lateral and vertical proximity was approximately 0.03 miles and 400 feet.”

    The preliminary report for the ExpressJet flight says that “On Thursday, April 24, 2014, about 1503 eastern daylight time, a near midair collision occurred at Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR), Newark, New Jersey, when an Embraer ERJ145, departing EWR runway 4R for Memphis, Tennessee, passed in close proximity to a Boeing 737-800 arriving from San Francisco, California, intending to land on runway 29. Both aircraft were on regularly scheduled 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 passenger flights and under control of EWR airport traffic control tower (ATCT) at the time of the incident. There was no damage reported to either aircraft, or any injuries to passengers or crew.

    The B737 contacted the EWR tower on the Bridge Visual approach to runway 29. The local controller instructed the pilot to follow a B717 ahead, and cleared the pilot to land on runway 29. When the B717 was on short final, the local controller instructed the ERJ145 pilot to line up and wait on runway 4R. After the B717 crossed runway 4R, the local controller cleared the ERJ145 for takeoff. At that time, the B737 was about three miles from the runway 29 threshold. The ERJ145 did not actually begin its takeoff roll until the B737 was about 1 mile from the runway 29 threshold. The local controller recognized that the spacing was insufficient and instructed the B737 to go around. He provided traffic advisories to both the B737 and the ERJ145 pilots and instructed the ERJ145 pilot to maintain visual separation from the B737. The ERJ145 pilot responded that he was going to keep the aircraft’s nose down. The B737 overflew the ERJ145 at the intersection of runways 29/4R.

    According to recorded Federal Aviation Administration radar data, the closest lateral and vertical proximity was approximately 0.03 miles and 400 feet.”

    A second close call occurred outside of Hawaii; but the preliminary reports have not been posted yet. Proximity between United Airlines Kona-Los Angeles Flight 1205 and a westbound US Airways Jet initiated a TCAS alert on the United flight. The Los Angeles-bound United pilot took evasive action and made a steep dive to avoid a collision. TCAS (and the alert pilot) saved the day, after what appears to have been an air traffic control error on the ground in Honolulu.

    All four of the planes were better off than the two planes that collided on April 27, in Port Richmond, resulting in one fatality and two injuries. A Cessna and a Hawker collided in midair over San Pablo Bay north of Brother Island off Richmond, California. The Sea Fury landed at Ione, California, and the Cessna impacted the waters of San Pablo Bay. Two occupants aboard the Sea Fury were uninjured.

    The preliminary report for the Cessna indicates that a couple of days after that near accident, a collision occurred. On April 27, 2014, about 1606 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 210E, N4962U, and a Hawker Sea Fury, N20SF, collided in flight near Port Richmond, California. Sanders Aircraft, Inc., was operating both airplanes under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The private pilot in the Cessna sustained fatal injuries; the commercial pilot and one passenger in the Sea Fury were not injured. The Cessna was destroyed during the accident sequence, and the Sea Fury sustained substantial damage to the empennage. Both cross-country personal flights departed Half Moon Bay, California; the Sea Fury departed about 1530 and the Cessna departed at an unknown time. Both airplanes were en route to Eagle’s Nest Airport, Ione, California. Visual meteorological conditions (VMC) prevailed, and no flight plans had been filed.

    The National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge (IIC) interviewed the Sea Fury pilot. The Sea Fury pilot stated the he and the Cessna pilot had flown their airplanes to Half Moon Bay to display them at an open house for the airport.

    The pilot reported that after departure, he flew over the airport, and rendezvoused with a Beechcraft A36 Bonanza for a photo shoot over the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California. They flew several 360-degree patterns over the bridge, completed their photo work, and he set his course for the return to Ione.

    While en route the Sea Fury pilot broadcast on a common frequency, and the Cessna pilot responded with his position. The Sea Fury pilot made visual contact with the Cessna, which was ahead and to his left. He broadcast to the Cessna pilot that he would pass low and to the left. The Cessna pilot responded that it would be a good picture. The Sea Fury pilot replied that probably not due to the speed differential; the Sea Fury airspeed was about 200 miles per hour. The Sea Fury pilot proceeded on a path that he thought would allow adequate separation; however, as he was passing the Cessna, he felt and heard a thump and he realized that the two airplanes had collided. He pulled up and looked over his shoulder and he observed the Cessna inverted and going down.

    The Sea Fury pilot stated that he concentrated on flying his airplane, and initiated a climb, and conducted a controllability check to determine that he could control the airplane in the current configuration. He wanted to avoid populated areas, so he continued toward his home airport. While en route he contacted company personnel, who decided to fly another company airplane to meet and examine the Sea Fury’s condition. The Sea Fury pilot lowered the landing gear, and did a controllability check to include turns. He lowered the flaps, and repeated the testing. He reduced airspeed to a landing compatible speed of 130 mph, and checked controllability again. Determining that he had adequate control to land, he made a full stop landing at his home airport.

    The Sea Fury is silver in color and the Cessna has blue wingtips with blue paint on the leading edge of both wings, on top of the cowling, and along the sides of the fuselage.

    During the postaccident examination of the Sea Fury it was noted that the top remaining portion of the vertical stabilizer was crushed aft and down with blue paint transfer marks on the aft portion of the remaining metal. The operator reported that the missing vertical stabilizer section was about 12 inches long. The rudder had crush damage. The right elevator separated outboard of the middle hinge and about 3 feet of the elevator was missing. About 3 feet of the outboard section of the right horizontal stabilizer was missing. The outboard fracture surface was jagged and angular, and the upper surface had crushed inboard in an accordion fashion. Blue paint transfer marks and scratches were observed on the upper surface and within the folds of the metal.

    The Cessna descended into San Pablo Bay, and the wreckage was retrieved on April 30. The recovered wreckage consisted of the fuselage and the engine. The left wing was not located. The propeller separated from the crankshaft, and was not located.

    A similar report for the Hawker has also been published.

    Flight has become commonplace, but we can not take it for granted.

  • | | | |

    Crack in Outer Window Prompts SAS Flight to Land in Emergency

    Cracked windowA Scandinavian Airlines flight had to make ab emergency landing after a passenger noticed that the aircraft had a cracked window.

    The incident happened on May 16, when the flight SK-4718 was on its way from Milan, Italy to Oslo, Norway. The pilot then requested emergency protocol for landing in Frankfurt, Germany.

    The plane touched down at 09:03 UTC. All passengers and crew members were safely evacuated. A ferry later transported the Boeing 737-600 aircraft to Oslo for examination.

  • | | |

    Fumes in Cockpit Force KLM’s Flight to Land in Emergency

    KLMA KLM Airline Boeing 737 had to make an emergency landing at Norwich International Airport, Norfolk, United Kingdom, at about 2:37 p.m. on Tuesday, May 13.

    A KLM spokesperson confirmed that the plane en route from Manchester to Amsterdam landed in emergency after fumes were discovered in the cockpit.

    Full emergency protocol was deployed at the airport when the plane carrying 114 passengers touched down. All the passengers and crew members were safely evacuated.

    The aircraft was taken for examination and repair.

  • | | | |

    Hawaii-bound United Airlines Flight Makes Emergency Landing in Los Angeles

    United Ailrines BoeingUnited Airlines flight 1296 en route from Los Angeles to Hawaii had to return and make an emergency landing at Los Angeles International Airport on May 10 due to the smell of smoke in the cabin and cockpit.

    The Boeing 757, with 149 passengers on board was flying over the Pacific Ocean when the odor was noticed in the plane.

    The plane made an uneventful emergency landing at 11:38 am. None of the passengers or crew members were injured.

    Maintenance crews are examining the plane.

    Some passengers said they experienced the scariest moments of their lives when they were told to keep their oxygen masks and life vests on. One of the passengers, Rebecca Elder said that the smoke was coming from both sides of the plane. She further said “We looked around the other passengers, everybody was very calm and really nice and helped each other out.”

  • | | | |

    Tracking Down #MH370 or Physics of an Air Space Game of Marco Polo


    The guessing/math triangulating the path of Inmarsat’s pings was the only thing experts seemed to agree on regarding to pinning down the location of Malaysia Airlines flight 370. Yet at the location, at least, the location according to the data laying out the path according to Inmarsat’s analysis, nothing was found in the recent search of the ocean floor off the coast of Australia. The engineers and mathematicians involved may have done their best but the guess seems to have been faulty or otherwise off somehow. If you will pardon the circular reasoning, if only we knew how it was off, we would know how it was off.

    Investigators have come up with two maps that can be drawn based on the ping data, based on the speed. The variation is due to considerations of the pings which do not indicate the speed or direction the plane was moving, but only the probable distance between plane and satellite. See Inmarsat’s global representation …

    Inmarsatglobe

    However, there is opposition to the Inmarsat calculations which is presented by * Michael Exner (founder of the American Mobile Satellite Corporation) **Duncan Steel(physicist and visiting scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center) and satellite technology consultant ***Tim Farrar which presents other data that should be considered. See the Dopplar shift jpg…

    dopplarshift

    My pragmatic response to these experts is a major simplification: just that the plane did not disappear into a textbook, under textbook conditions. The pings occurred in a real atmosphere, with atmospheric variations that were not and possibly could not have been taken into account. Not only are the speed, direction and height of the aircraft factors that must be taken into account, but also the quality of the atmosphere, density, weather, etc, plus factors that a non-mathmatical, non-scientist like myself would not even know how to bring into the picture. In this search at least, the untested math used is as vulnerable as statistics is to presenting a defective or imprecise representation, or a representation which would only be true under certain conditions.

    For further study on this, * Michael Exner, the Atlantic Official Explanation article, input from physicist **Duncan Steele (who calculates “a uniform ring radius based on the aircraft-satellite range given the elevation angle and the satellite’s altitude, and the latitude of the sub-satellite point, the aircraft being taken to be at the same latitude in this simplified geometry; and satellite consultant***Tim Farrar.

  • | | |

    SF-Bound United Airlines Flight Makes Emergency Landing with only One Engine

    new-united-logoA United Airlines flight was forced to make emergency landing at Lincoln Airport, after one of its engines malfunctioned.

    The flight was carrying 168 people from Boston to San Francisco when a fault in one of its engines was noticed. The malfunctioned engine was then shut down and the Boeing 757-200 was diverted to Lincoln Airport where it made an uneventful emergency landing at 1:20 p.m. on April 6.

    All passengers and crew members safely exited. Another plane was arranged, which left Lincoln at 7:40pm to take the passengers to their destination.

  • | | | | | |

    Biplane Crashed during Thunder Over Solano Air Show in California; Pilot Killed

    biplaneA 1944 Stearman biplane crashed on a runway at Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, California.

    The incident happened at about 2 p.m on May 4 during the Thunder Over Solano air show, when the pilot was performing an acrobatic aerial maneuver very close to the ground. The specific stunt is known as “cutting a ribbon” where the plane is flown close to ground in inverted position and a knife from the plane is thrown to cut a ribbon, just off the ground.

    Air force officials have identified the pilot as 77 year old Edward Andreini, belonging to Half Moon Bay. According to the FAA records, Andreini owned the 1944 Boeing E75 Super Stearman.

    FAA and NTSB officials are investigating the accident.

  • | | | |

    Nepal Airlines Boeing Makes Emergency Landing in Kuala Lumpur

    A Nepal Airlines flight RA-416 en route from Kuala Lumpur to Kathmandu had to return and make an emergency landing due to a technical issue.

    The Boeing 757 carrying around 54 people was on its way to Kathmandu when the pilots noticed vibration in the fan blade of its right engine. The Airline spokesperson, Ramhari Sharma, confirmed that the plane landed back in Kuala Lumpur about 45 minutes after it took off.

    None of the passengers and crew members were hurt.

    A Nepal Airlines official said “A technical team is arriving in Kuala Lumpur to fix the problem. We hope the aircraft would be released by Saturday evening and will probably start regular flights from Sunday.”

  • | | |

    Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Complete Preliminary Information #MH370

    Friday, May 02, 09:30 PM MYT +0800 Media Statement 30 – MH370 Incident

    Malaysia Airlines wishes to make further clarification on the following matters:

    1) Malaysians On Board

    Malaysia Airlines confirms that 38 passengers of the 239 persons on board MH370 on 8 March 2014 were Malaysians. The names of the 38 Malaysians on board had been earlier shared in the Passenger Manifest which has been made public previously. Please see attached document for names of all Malaysian passengers onboard MH370.

    2) Exchange of Signals and Aircraft in Cambodia

    On the exchange of signals between ground and the aircraft soon after Ho Chi Minh Air Traffic Control advised that radio contact had not been established with MH370, as carried in the recently released MH370 Preliminary Report, Malaysia Airlines clarifies that what was referred to as signals was actually the aircraft displayed on the ‘Flight Following System’ screen. This was based on the aircraft projection at that point of time and not the actual aircraft position.

    When KL-ATCC (Kuala Lumpur Air Traffic Control Centre) Watch Supervisor queried Malaysia Airlines OPS (Operations) on the status of MH370, Malaysia Airlines OPS informed KL-ATCC Supervisor that MH370 was still sighted over Cambodian airspace in the Flight-Following System, which is based on a flight-projection.

    The word “Cambodia” was displayed by the Flight-Following System on the screen when zoomed-in, leading Malaysia Airlines to deduce that the aircraft was flying in Cambodian airspace. The Flight-Following System did not display the name “Vietnam”, even though the aircraft was over Vietnam airspace.

    The responsibility of aircraft tracking monitoring resides with Air Traffic Control Centres. For airlines, it is normal to engage flight following systems to assist its pilots to manage in weather conditions or route diversions. Such airline flight following systems are non-primary and non-positive controlling.

    Flight following systems also do not trigger airlines of any abnormality. Such situations have to be pilot initiated. Unless otherwise, airlines’ operations control centres would continue to see the aircraft as flying on its normal route, based on projected or predicted positions and locations.

    To make the flight-following systems work successfully and effectively, it is important to have visual depiction of the aircraft’s position, coupled with confirmation by air-to-ground communications, such as through ACARS or Satcomm or VHF or HF.

    In the case of tracking MH370, Malaysia Airlines’ flight-following system indicated that the aircraft was flying, however, there was no communication from or with the pilot. Malaysia Airlines OPS attempted to communicate with MH370 after we were flag by KL-ATCC, but was never able to make contact.

    3) On the Cargo Carried

    About 2 tons, equivalent to 2,453kg, of cargo was declared as consolidated under one (1) Master Airway Bill (AWB). This Master AWB actually comprised 5 house AWB. Out of these 5 AWB, two (2) house AWB contained lithium ion batteries amounting to a total tonnage volume of 221kg. The balance 3 house AWB, amounting to 2,232kg, were declared as radio accessories and chargers.

    Ends.

    Thursday, May 01, 07:00 PM MYT +0800 Media Statement 29 by Ahmad Jauhari Yahya, Group Chief Executive Officer, Malaysia Airlines

    Kuala Lumpur – 55 days since Malaysia Airlines’ flight MH370’s disappearance on 8 March 2014, a multi-nation search is still ongoing for the missing aircraft, its passengers and crew.

    This enormous search mission was carried out with the support from more than 20 states, firstly in the South China Sea, in the Malacca Straits, and on land along the Northern Corridor, and since mid-March when specialised assets were deployed in the air, on the sea and underwater in the southern Indian Ocean, where top experts concluded the aircraft’s last known position was.

    Despite such an intensified search operations, probably the largest one in human history, we have to face the hard reality that there is still no trace of the aircraft, and the fate of the missing passengers and crew remains unknown till this day.

    Malaysia Airlines is acutely conscious of, and deeply sympathetic to the continuing unimaginable anguish, distress and hardship suffered by those with loved ones on board the flight.

    We share the same very feelings and have been doing whatever we can to ease the pain of the families and to provide comfort for them.

    The Joint Agency Coordination Centre (JACC) in Australia has announced early this week that the search operation in the southern Indian Ocean will be moving to a new phase in the coming weeks, and it is certainly not ending.

    In this new phase, the Malaysian Government, working together with Australia and Chinese governments, other international partners and specialised companies, plans to intensify the undersea search by deploying more technologically advanced assets in the search zone.

    The Malaysian Government recently announced its decision to establish an international investigation team led by Malaysia. The members will include accredited representatives from the US, UK, Australia, China, France and Singapore. Also included are representatives from relevant international organisations and the civil aviation industry.

    This investigation is an independent process in accordance with ICAO standards and recommended practices. Malaysia Airlines commits itself to fully support this independent investigation and provide full information and assistance as required.

    From past experience, we understand the continuing search and investigation would be a prolonged process. While Malaysia Airlines is committed to continuing its support to the families during the whole process, we are adjusting the mode of services and support. Instead of staying in hotels, the families of MH370 are advised to receive information updates on the progress of the search and investigation and other support by Malaysia Airlines within the comfort of their own homes, with the support and care of their families and friends.

    In line with this adjustment, Malaysia Airlines will be closing all of its Family Assistance Centres around the world by 7 May 2014.

    Malaysia Airlines will keep in close touch with the families on news updates through telephone calls, messages, the Internet, and face-to-face meetings. With the support of the Malaysian Government, the airline’s Family Support Centres will be established in Kuala Lumpur and in Beijing. The detailed plan of follow-up support and services will be informed in person to the families.

    Malaysia Airlines will make advanced compensation payments soonest possible to the nominated next-of-kin who are entitled to claim compensation, in order to meet their immediate economic needs.

    Such advanced payments will not affect the rights of the next-of-kin to claim compensation according to the law at a later stage, and will be calculated as part of the final compensation.

    Immediately after the next-of-kin have returned home, our representatives will be in touch with them at the earliest opportunity to initiate the advanced compensation payment process.

    At this very difficult time, we wish to once again thank everyone for their understanding and support, especially from the families of the passengers and crew on board.

    Malaysia Airlines’ thoughts and prayers remain with the families of all those onboard MH370.

    -Ends-

    Below statement and attached documents were made public and shared with NOKs at 8:27pm (Malaysia local time), 1 May 2014:

     

    Audio Below

    1. 1. ATC Delivery
    2. 2. KL Ground
    3. 3. KL Tower
    4. 4. KL Approach
    5. 5. KL Radar

    IF ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS BELOW DO NOT SHOW IMMEDIATELY, CLICK WHERE THE MESSAGE SAYS “HERE” AND THE DOCUMENT WILL LOAD TO VIEW.

    Actions Taken Between 0138 and 0614

    Cargo Manifest and Airway Bill

    Maps

    MH370 Preliminary Report

    Seating Chart

  • | | |

    Pratt & Whitney Test Jet Makes Emergency Landing in Montreal

    PrattA test jet belonging to Pratt & Whitney had to make an emergency landing in Montreal, due to engine fire.

    The Boeing 747, with four regular engines and one test engine, took off from Mirabel Airport, located around 50 kilometers north of Montreal. Shortly after the take off, the flight crew noticed the fire and requested emergency landing.

    The plane made an uneventful emergency landing at about 11:16 am on April 29 and all 14 people onboard were evacuated safely.

    According to a spokesperson for Aéroports de Montréal, François Asselin “The 747 took off with a test engine aboard at about 10:35 a.m. this morning, and there was the beginning of a fire on takeoff. The fire was put out quickly and the plane landed at 11:16 a.m. without (further) incident.” He further said “We were told there was a problem with the engine, so we deployed the appropriate (safety) measures.”

    However, the spokesperson of  Pratt & Whitney Canada, Nancy German said there is no evidence which shows that the test jet landed due a engine fire. According to her, “the control tower saw something abnormal. I can’t say what….They advised the pilots that according to them, there was something abnormal and the pilots decided to return to base…..But there was no fire or any emergency procedures. No emergency was declared”.

     

  • | | | |

    Sara Bajc on MH370, plus some thoughts on conspiracy theories

    Sara Bajc, partner of Philip Wood, a passenger who is presumed lost on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, does not believe believe that #MH370 crashed and is at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. She believes the plane is intact because there have been no bodies, no wreckage, no black boxes found and published in the media.

    This isn’t news. It is one woman’s opinion. Probably the opinion of many family members of those aboard the plane. And why not? If I had someone lost aboard a missing plane, I too would probably support any kind of theory that kept hope of their survival alive. Can’t put a price on hope.

    But.

    What if there were a cockpit fire that emitted toxic smoke and destroyed electronics?

    What if someone shot down the plane?

    What if someone used some new Sci-Fi-like weapon?

    What if Malaysia did track the plane on March 8 as this tabloid says?

    What if the UK firm Inmarsat tracking is wrong? What if it is right?

    I’ve written enough fiction (and lived in spitting distance of Hollywood’s crazy cereal of fruits, nuts and flakes) to know that the marriage of “what if” and a couple of rational-sounding factoids can birth everything from a practically real-life scenario to wildly impossible science-fiction-fantasy voodoo whacko-crazy delights. So there you have it.

    You know what I believe? No one has the answers. Until someone is standing in front of me with proof, in my not-so-secret heart of hearts published in full naked glory out here on the internet, I will believe that anyone who says they think they know…is paranoid.

    Now…how can I fit all of this into a tweet?

  • | | |

    Passenger Tries to Break Into the Cockpit; Virgin Australia Flight Landed in Emergency due to Hijack Scare

    VA

    A Virgin Australia Airlines flight en route from Brisbane to Bali, Indonesia, was forced to make emergency landing after the flight crew reported an attempted hijacking by a passenger.

    The Boeing 737-800 was approximately 180 nautical miles away from Denpasar International Airport (about 30 minutes before the scheduled landing time), when a 27 year old Australian passenger, Matt Christopher Lockley, started banging at the cockpit door and tried to break in. The flight crew hand-cuffed him, took him to the cabin crew area and sent a mayday signal to the control towers in Makassar and Denpasar, indicating a possible hijacking attempt. The Bali airport authorities then prepared for an emergency landing protocol for the flight VA41, which was carrying 139 passengers and 6 crew members.

    According to a Transport ministry official Herry Bakti, the emergency signal was received at about 2pm local time. The authorities from Virgin Australia confirm that the pilot had sent the standard signal code for ‘unlawful interference’, after which standard emergency response protocols were adopted.

    The plane made an uneventful emergency landing and the Bali Police Chief, Inspector Benny Mokalu confirms that none of the passengers or crew members were harmed. The Indonesian military troops arrested Lockley, after the plane touched the ground.

    Matt Christopher Lockley hails from Queensland, Australia and holds a driving license and a plumbing industry council card. The cabin crew reported that he looked ‘unstable’ and ‘paranoid’ during the flight. Police officials said that he claimed that he was hammering the cockpit door because he wanted to take some medicines from his luggage.

    Heru Sudjatmiko, Virgin Australia’s Bali manager maintains that a drunk passenger tried to enter the cockpit which forced the emergency landing of the plane. It was not a hijacking attempt, it was a ‘miscommunication’. “I repeat, this is just a miscommunication. How the miscommunication occurred, I cannot answer because I wasn’t there. But it’s not true to say that the plane was hijacked…. I don’t know exactly what happened when the pilot communicated with the air traffic controller at Ngurah Rai,” he said.

    Lockey is being investigated by the local police and it is not clear what charges will be made against him.

  • | | |

    Norwegian Air Flight Passenger Makes Bomb Threat Midair

    Norwegian AirA Norwegian Air flight en route from Copenhagen, Denmark to Oslo, Norway had to make an emergency landing in Sweden, due to a bomb threat from an on-board passenger.

    The Boeing 737, carrying around 94 people, was on its way on April 25 afternoon when a passenger told a crew member that he had placed a bomb in the cargo hold. Following the threat, the plane made emergency landing at Landvetter airport, Gothenburg, Sweden, at around 3.30pm GMT.

    Lasse Sandaker-Nielsen, the spokesperson for Norwegian Air said “Passengers have left the plane and the man who had warned of the bomb is under control by the police.”

    Björ Blixter, a Gothenburg Police official said that the investigation is underway.

  • | | |

    Malaysia Search Update

    Examination of salvage floating off the coast of Australia revealed riveted sheet-metal that is not believed to be part of the missing plane, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau has said.

    The matter was found 6 miles east of Augusta. The search has been ongoing since Malaysia Airlines Flight 370’s disappearance on March 8, guided by data, hampered by bad weather.

    The search is continuing based on analysis of the location of the pings that were detected before the black boxes’ pinger battery ran out. It had been expected to last 30 days. The Malaysia Airlines Boeing had been en route from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to Beijing and veered far off course for unknown reasons, leaving a puzzle perplexing international authorities.

    Read more:

    New Malaysian MH370 Investigation Team Appointed by Government

    #MH370 Statement by Orion Captain regarding #Search Status

    MH370: One Ping Does Not A Discovery Make. Or Does it?

    Prime Minister Endorses Australian-based search

    Malaysia Airlines MH370 Where Are You? Can Satellites Tell Us

    Stolen Passports aboard Malaysia Airlines flight MH 370

    No Mayday, then Gone

    Malaysia Airlines Flight Update

    Malaysia Airlines Flight Missing

  • | | |

    New Malaysian MH370 Investigation Team Appointed by Government

    In order “…to evaluate, investigate and determine the actual cause of the accident so similar accidents could be avoided in the future” an international team has been appointed by the government of Malaysia to investigate MH370.

    Australia reports debris washing ashore that may be connected to the crash. If the debris proves to be from the plane, ocean patterns may be studied to help establish positioning. If the debris is related, it will be the first hard evidence found.

    The current search focuses in a 10-kilometer radius of the area of pings sourced, it is believed, from MH370’s black boxes before the ping batteries ran out.

    Poor weather conditions have curtailed air searches, although ships have continued.

    The position of Malaysian authorities is that the plane was deliberately diverted, but mechanical failure has not been ruled out.

  • | | | | |

    Emergency Landing at LAX

    An American Airlines Boeing 757 en route from Honolulu to Los suffered engine trouble en route and one of its two engines was shut down.

    Flight 246 declared an emergency in one of its two engines. Emergency services was on hand when the flight landed at 5:19 a.m. from Kona.

    No injuries were reported of the 140 passengers and seven crew aboard the flight.

    The last hour was flown on one engine.

  • | | | | |

    How to Freeze, Suffocate, or Brain Damage Yourself; Or Terror at 38,000 Feet

    Everyone following Aviation News by now has already heard of the sixteen-year-old boy who rode stowaway in the wheel well of a 767 from California to Kahului Airport in Maui Hawaii, surviving impossible conditions of 38,000 feet. Surviving outside of a plane is nothing short of a miracle. Conditions outside of a plane in flight are sub-human, making suffocation a certainty; and if one somehow were to manage the lack of air, then the trick would be surviving freezing conditions and decompression sickness. Hypoxia is almost a certainty at -80 degrees Fahrenheit, with no air.

    Most people who attempt such a feat end up frozen solid, or fall off. Plus, should I not mention that an emotional sixteen year old who ran away from home should not be able to breach airport security;

    Should not be able to survive the trip;and after he did, the story

    … should not be publicized in such a way that future idiots be inspired to follow in his idiocy. Newscasters may as well have posted an invitation to every idiot, prankster, and t-word in town.

    So all you stupids inspired to save yourself the cost of a plane ticket, if you are inspired to sneak on to a wheel well because you have a winter coat, and think you’re invincible, the truth is that this is how idiots die.

    In George’s Point of View

    Of course, the story is the breach of security not that the kid survived. Obviously in a real-life kind of way, it’s good the boy survived. Obviously in a real-life kind of way it is horrible and stupid that his survival is now going to be an idiot’s guide. But now let’s talk about what happened here.

    Security failed so many times and so many ways that it boggles the mind. The perimeter of the airport should not have been breached; the security of the plane should not have been breached; and on arrival, the boy should immediately have been discovered. At least the ground crew did eventually find the boy “wandering the tarmac, dazed and confused.” But then the news got ahold of the story and made it global. Good job, news people.

    In an interview at San Jose airport the spokesperson there said that no security is 100 percent fool proof.

    I disagree. Airport security, access to planes, especially those planes ready to board passengers and take off must be fool-proof.

    There are just too many fools out there.

    TSA security checks at airport are tedious and essential. Security cannot afford to have one single gun or nut job to get through their security wall, not a single one.

    Someone in California PLUS someone in Hawaii failed to do their job. Multiple someones. Aren’t security checks deliberately redundant? Surely someone at Hawaiian Airlines failed in a last-minute maintenance and/or security walk-around.

    I do find it ludicrous that all of these security experts and specialists interviewed for news programs about this security breach, industry professionals like the grounds operations coordinator at O’Hare, essentially post detailed “how to” instructions to climbing inside a wheel well.

    This is a wake-up call to security teams to plug the holes in their process, just as it is a wake—up call for idiots looking to die at 38,000 feet. Let’s hope the next one who tries this blunders into a security hole that has been filled with a smart security operative with some inescapable handcuffs in his pocket. Then let’s see how the news covers it.

  • | | | | | |

    Malaysia Airlines Jet Makes Emergency Landing. No, Not that flight, Another one.

    This Malaysia Airlines flight landed, but with a burst tire.

    One hundred sixty-six people (159 passengers, 7 crew) were aboard the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 737-800 that returned to Kuala Lumpur after a tire blew on takeoff. Flight MH192 had to burn off fuel in order to land safely, and returned four hours at 1:56 a.m. after take-off with emergency services on standby. The big clue was pieces of the blown tire left on the runway after takeoff.

    The passengers were accommodated in local hotels until the replacement jet completed the flight on Monday.

  • | | |

    AA Boeing 777-200 Makes Emergency Landing at Norfolk

    American AirlinesThe American Airlines flight 950 en-route to New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport from Sao Paulo, Brazil made an emergency landing in Norfolk, at 6:20 a.m. on Saturday, April 12.

    The Boeing 777-200 aircraft had 242 passengers and 15 crew members on board. No one was injured.

    A mechanical indicator light, signalling possible fire in the cargo area, prompted the pilot to seek an emergency landing at Norfolk International Airport. However, the airport fire crews did not find any indication of smoke or fire during their inspection after the plane landed.

  • | | | |

    #MH370 Statement by Orion Captain regarding #Search Status

    In a public statement, after the April 8 day’s search for #MH370, RAAF P3 Orion captain Flt Lt glasssaid that he was optimistic about the wreckage being found.

    Unlike the AF447 search at a parallel point in the search timeline one month in, there has been no visual confirmation of any wreckage or debris, possibly due to tropical storms in the Indian Ocean. The official statement is that the pings have been narrowed down to a twelve mile radius, but searchers are still trying to narrow this area.

    Once the area has been narrowed down, an autonomous underwater vehicle will be deployed in a grid (so-called Mowing Lawn pattern) until wreckage has been located.

    If the wreckage is found soon, it will have taken twenty-three months less than the search for Air France 447. So one should be perhaps less optimistic about the search, and more determined.

    Most recently, Australia announced the search area down to 75,000 sq km. Searchers plan to keep using the Ocean Shield, because it searches more area faster. Once the area is pinned down, they plan to deploy the AUV.

  • | | | |

    Moving the @MH370 Search Forward: Remus AUV

    Will the Remus be deployed to search for MH370? The Remus is the platform used to search for AirFrance 447, rated to 6000 meters. The AUV device was famously designed by the Naval Oceanographic Office, the Office of Naval Research, and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution – WHOI, in support of deep-water autonomous operations.

    Why would the Remus be ideal for the @MH370 search?

    The video below discusses the AF447 and the Titanic search, among others.

    See Remus Specs

  • | | |

    Smoke and Other Issues in Flight

    Just like it happens with cars, obscure plane parts wear out. Take for example an incident that happened in 2008, when a 747 cable burned out after the protective covering was worn off due to friction against a bolt.

    Take a look at this final report on this 747 smoke event on Eva Airways Flight BR67 at Bangkok Suvarnabhumi International Airport.

    Prior to this event, Boeing had sent out a service Letter to inform operators of the potential fire hazard from the arcing of a wire bundle which might result in a fire on Corrosion Inhibiting Compound (CIC) contaminated insulation blankets. They predicted it. It happened.

    So as we think about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. There is always the possibility that some small component like the one below failed, and led to something catastrophic. What if the pilots were overcome by smoke in the cabin? I am not saying that this DID happen, I am only saying there are myriad small parts that can lead to catastrophic events. It makes sense to look at any and all Boeing 777 safety advisories, in case they might predict some small event that cascaded into disaster.

    Thanks to input from John King.

  • | | | | |

    Southwest #762 Diverts to Boise

    While en route from Seattle to Phoenix, a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-700 flight 762 suffered a cracked windshield. Pilots made an emergency landing in Boise at Gowen Field. The plane went to maintenance, and the 143 passengers had to wait for another flight to get to Phoenix.

    The cabin never lost air pressure but had to dump fuel to make a safe landing.

    FOX 10 News | myfoxphoenix.com