Carrier

  • | | |

    Brazil Cessna Crash

    What: Cessna 310R en route from Leopoldina to Pampulha
    Where: Serra do Curral, Minas Gerais Brazil
    When: Feb 26 2010
    Who: 2 fatalities
    Why: After takeoff, the plane crashed in conditions of fog and low visibility. The mountainous crash site was 5 meters below the top of Serra do Curral mountain range. The plane apparently blew up on impacting a “wall” of mountain.

    A local fire department helicopter spotted the wreckage.

    The victims were identified as Tanus Sales and Rafael Tanus Pascoal Sales. Rafael was the pilot.

  • | |

    Pinnacle: In-Flight Wrestling

    What: Pinnacle/Delta New York to Atlanta
    Where: New York
    When: Feb 26 2010
    Who: 60 passengers
    Why: Flight 887 returned to the gate because of a sick passenger (during de-icing, a passenger had a panic attack), but that’s not why it was cancelled. It was cancelled when two flight attendants became fight attendants–and started fighting. Arguing, to be precise, but we have no idea to what degree. Accounts called this a spat, a brawl, a verbal disagreement, a fistfight, a wrestling match, an altercation, so your guess is as good as mine. Passengers were provided with alternative transportation; some of them quite inconvenienced.

    Certainly it is irrelevant that Pinnacle is out of Memphis, and Memphis has always been-from its very inception–a rowdy river-cowboy sort of town, with a wrestling “King” standing beside Elvis, and where wrestling (pronounced rasslin’) has cultural (or lack of cultural) roots. I’m sure ringside seats are not what these Delta-Pinnacle passengers had in mind when they got their tickets.

    This incident makes one wonder yet again about Pinnacle flight crew hiring practices.

    The flight attendants face an investigation and probable firing. I recommend charm school or anger management. Or both.

  • | | | |

    Unruly Albanian or Just Misunderstood


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Normando Carvalho Jr.

    What: US Airways Boeing 737-400 en route from Charlotte,NC to Houston,TX
    Where: Charlotte
    When: Feb 25 2010
    Who: Not available
    Why: After takeoff on this flight, an Albanian passenger got up and tried to exit the plane. It took 5 passengers and crew to subdue him. The pilots returned the plane to Charlotte where the disruptive Albanian-speaking passenger was taken into custody by police and removed to a hospital for observation.

    Was he suicidal? Confused? Destructive? In despair? Incontinent? We may never know.

  • | | | |

    Emergency Landing in Turin


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Jim Groom

    What: Thomas Cook Boeing 757-200 en route from Turin to Birmingham International
    Where: Turin
    When: Feb 21 2010
    Who: 231 passengers
    Why: While en route, the plane developed a fuel leak, substantial enough for passengers to see it pouring out of a wing. Although the captain announced a possible bird strike, a fuel leak had been detected in the plane in an earlier flight. The flight had to turn back, and circled Turin for half an hour before making an applause-filled landing.

    The fuel leak was judged to be a bad valve, which was replaced prior to being ferried back to Birmingham.

    One wonders if the ferry flight was actually the incident involved here:
    https://airflightdisaster.com/?p=8707

  • | |

    Testimony: Colgan Air

    Statement of Peggy Gilligan, Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety

    Before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security on Aviation Safety: One Year After The Crash of Flight 3407

    Chairman Dorgan, Senator DeMint, Members of the Subcommittee:

    Thank you for inviting me here today to provide you with an update on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Call to Action on airline safety and pilot training. There is no question that the FAA’s job is to ensure that we have the safest aviation system in the world. The aviation safety record in the United States reflects the dedication of safety-minded aviation professionals in all parts of our industry, including the FAA’s inspector workforce. In an agency dedicated to aviation safety, any failure in the system, especially one that causes loss of life, is keenly felt. When accidents do happen, they reveal risks, including the tragic Colgan Air accident. Consequently, it is incumbent on all parties in the system to identify the risks in order to eliminate or mitigate them. As Administrator Babbitt noted when he appeared before you in December, history has shown that we are able to implement safety improvements far more quickly and effectively when the FAA, industry, and labor work together on agreed upon solutions. The fastest way to implement a solution is for it to be done voluntarily, and that is what the Call to Action was intended to facilitate. On January 27, the FAA issued a report that describes the progress made toward fulfilling commitments made in the Call to Action and offers recommendations for additional steps to enhance aviation safety. I would like to use this opportunity to review the issues the Administrator identified in December and let you know where we stand on them.

    Pilot Flight Time, Rest and Fatigue: When Administrator Babbitt was last here he told you that the aviation rulemaking committee (ARC) he convened for the purpose of making recommendations on flight time, rest and fatigue, consisting of representatives from the FAA, industry and labor organizations, provided him with recommendations for a science-based approach to fatigue management in early September. While we were extremely pleased with the product provided, the ARC did not reach a consensus agreement on all areas and was not charged with doing any type of economic analysis. Consequently, in spite of the Administrator’s direction for a very aggressive timeline in which to develop a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), his hope that a rulemaking proposal could be issued by the end of last year was not realized. The complexities involved with these issues are part of the reason why the FAA has struggled to finalize proposed regulations on fatigue and duty time that were issued in the mid-1990s. However, with the Administrator’s continued emphasis on this topic, we hope to issue an NPRM this spring. Although this is slightly later that we originally hoped, it is still an extremely expedited schedule, and I can assure you the FAA team working on this is committed to meeting the target.

    One of the issues contributing to fatigue that I know is of interest to many of you is that of pilots who commute by air to their job. I would like to describe some of the emails and letters the Administrator has been receiving on the issue of commuting from pilots who choose to commute by air to their job. As you can imagine, those pilots who commute responsibly are understandably concerned that they could be forced to relocate because of the irresponsible actions of a few. Should some sort of hard and fast commuting rule be imposed, it could result in families being separated, people being forced to sell homes at a loss, or even people being forced to violate child custody agreements. It is important to keep in mind these personal accounts because, to people not familiar with the airline industry, the issue of living in one city and working hundreds of miles away in another does not make sense. But in the airline industry, this is not only a common practice, it is one airline employees have come to rely on. So we want to emphasize these issues are complex and, depending on how they are addressed, could have significant impacts on people’s lives.

    Focused Inspection Initiative: From June 24, 2009 to September 30, 2009, FAA inspectors conducted a two-part, focused review of air carrier flight crewmember training, qualification, and management practices. The FAA inspected 85 air carriers to determine if they had systems to provide remedial training for pilots. The FAA did not inspect the 14 carriers that have FAA-approved Advanced Qualification Programs (AQP) because AQP includes such a system. Seventy-six air carriers, including AQP carriers, have remedial training programs. An additional 15 air carriers had some part of a remedial training program. There were eight air carriers that lacked any component of a remedial training program that received additional scrutiny and have since instituted some component of a remedial training system. Since we started, all carriers have implemented some component of a remedial training program. The FAA inspectors also observed 2,419 training and checking events during the evaluation. In the few instances we observed regulatory non-compliance, we took corrective action.

    Training Program Review Guidance: Based on the information from last summer’s inspections, the FAA is drafting a Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) with guidance material on how to conduct a comprehensive training program review in the context of a safety management system (SMS). A complementary Notice to FAA inspectors will provide guidance on how to conduct surveillance. SMS aims to integrate modern safety risk management and safety assurance concepts into repeatable, proactive systems. SMS programs emphasize safety management as a fundamental business process in the same manner as other aspects of business management. Now that we have completed our data evaluation and drafting, both guidance documents are in internal coordination.

    Obtain Air Carriers’ Commitment to Most Effective Practices: To solidify oral commitments made at the Call to Action, Administrator Babbitt sent a letter to all part 121 operators and their unions and requested written commitments to adhere to the highest professional standards. Many airlines are now taking steps to promote the larger airline’s most effective safety practices at their smaller partner airlines. The Air Transport Association’s Safety Council is now including safety directors from the National Air Carrier Association and the Regional Airline Association in their quarterly meetings. Several large air carriers are conducting periodic meetings with those with whom they have contract agreements to review safety information and we are encouraged by these efforts.

    In addition, I am pleased to say that since July 2009, after the Call to Action, the FAA approved 12 new Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA) programs. Three air carriers that had no Aviation Safety Action Programs (ASAP) have now established them. Four more air carriers have established new ASAP programs for additional employee groups. All of this supports the contention that the Call to Action did make a difference.

    Professionalism and Mentoring: Last week, the FAA met with labor organizations to discuss further developing and improving professionalism and transfer of pilot experience. In the interim, these organizations have answered the Call to Action and support the establishment or professional standards and ethics committees, a code of ethics, and safety risk management meetings between the FAA and major and regional air carriers. We also believe that labor organizations can explore some of the ideas raised in the Call to Action road shows, such as establishing joint strategic councils within a “family of carriers,” use of professional standards committee safety conferences, and mentoring possibilities between air carriers and university aviation programs, with the goal of coming up with concrete ideas on mentoring. These ideas merit further discussion and the FAA looks forward to continuing to work with these organizations on these concepts.

    Crew Training Requirements: As the Administrator explained during his last appearance before this Committee, the FAA issued a rulemaking proposal in January 2009 to enhance training programs by requiring the use of simulation devices for pilots. More than 3,000 pages of comments were received. The FAA is now developing a supplemental proposal that will be issued in the coming months to allow the public to comment on the revisions that were made based on the comments that were submitted.

    One of the things that the Call Action has shone a light on is the issue of varying pilot experience. The FAA is attempting to address this issue with an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in which we can consider possible alternative requirements, such as an endorsement on a commercial license to indicate specific qualifications. We know some people believe that simply increasing the minimum number of hours required for a pilot to fly in commercial aviation is appropriate. As Administrator Babbitt has stated repeatedly, he does not believe that simply raising quantity – the total number of hours of flying time or experience – without regard to the quality and nature of that time and experience – is an appropriate method by which to improve a pilot’s proficiency in commercial operations.

    The ANPRM requests recommendations from the public to improve pilot performance and professionalism; specifically on whether existing flight crew eligibility, training and qualification requirements should be increased for commercial pilots engaged in part 121 operations. The FAA is requesting comments and recommendations on four concepts for the purpose of reviewing current pilot certification regulations. The four concepts are: (1) requirement for all pilots employed in part 121 air carrier operations to hold an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate with the appropriate aircraft category, class and type rating, or meet the aeronautical experience requirements of an ATP certificate; (2) academic training as a substitute for flight hours experience; (3) endorsement for air carrier operations; and, (4) new additional authorization on an existing pilot certificate. The FAA has also asked for recommendations from industry and the public on any other concepts they may wish to offer. The ANPRM was published in the Federal Register on February 8.

    Pilot Records: While Congress is working to amend the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 and the FAA amends its guidance to airlines, Administrator Babbitt asked that air carriers immediately implement a policy of asking pilot applicants to voluntarily disclose FAA records, including notices of disapproval for evaluation events. The airlines agreed to use this best practice for pilot record checks to allow for a more expansive review of records created over the course a pilot’s career. The expanded review would include all the records the FAA maintains on pilots in addition to the records airlines already receive from past employers. Of the 80 air carriers that responded to the FAA on this issue, 53 air carriers, or 66 percent, reported that they already require full disclosure of a pilot applicant’s FAA records. Another 15 percent reported that they plan to implement the same policy.

    As the Administrator stated when he appeared before you in December, the core of many of the issues facing the air carrier industry today is professionalism. It is the duty of the flight crew to arrive for work rested and ready to perform their jobs, regardless of whether they live down the street from the airport or a thousand miles away. Professionalism is not something we can regulate, but it is something to which we must encourage and urge pilots and flight crews to aspire. The conversations we have been having, in part because of the Call to Action, help emphasize the importance of professionalism in aviation safety.

    In conclusion, our efforts will not stop or even slow down just because the final report on the Call to Action was issued. We have been gratified with the response to this effort. We believe that the collective efforts of FAA, the airlines, labor unions and, of course, Congress, will continue to result in implementing best practices, transferring pilot experience, and achieving an overall improvement in safety. Safety is at the core of the FAA’s mission, and we will always strive to make a safe system safer.

    Mr. Chairman, Senator DeMint, Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.

  • | | | | | |

    Luxair Lightning Strike, Lands with one Engine


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Tom Mousel

    What: Luxair de Havilland Dash 8-400 en route from Saarbruecken to Munich
    Where: 70 passengers
    When: Feb 24 2010
    Who: 70 passengers
    Why: After takeoff, the plane was struck by lightning.

    The lighting strike is probably the reason why an engine failed. The flight diverted to Luxembourg where it made a safe landing, and where they were able to arrange repairs.

    Passengers were provided overnight hotel accommodations, and scheduled to fly to Munich the next day.

  • | | | |

    Turbulence Injures Jetblue Flight Attendant.


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer John R. Beckman

    What: Jetblue Airbus A320-200 en route from New York to Fort Lauderdale
    Where: Fort Lauderdale
    When: Feb 24 2010
    Who: 1 injury
    Why: While en route, the plane encountered turbulence severe enough to injure a flight attendant. On landing at Fort Lauderdale, the flight attendant was hospitalized.

    George’s Point of View

  • | | | |

    Piper Crash Lebanon-Springfield

    What: KMT Consultants Piper PA-28-180 Cherokee C en route from St Clair County Airport to Lebanon- Springfield Airport
    Where: west of Lebanon-Springfield Airport
    When: Feb 23 2010
    Who: Pilot Kent Douglas Shilling of Springfield (lost in crash)
    Why: The Piper 28 airplane disappeared from radar about 4 miles west Lebanon Springfield Airport. Kent Douglas Shilling was piloting the plane. Shilling, who owns a flight school, was returning to Kentucky from Alabama. When his arrival in Lebanon-Springfield was overdue, a search ensued. The Emergency Operations Center received a call concerning the crash at 4:10 p.m.

    A state trooper found the wreckage in a wooded area off of Kentucky Highway 55 thirty minutes after the flight disappeared from radar.

  • | | | |

    JFK: Airbus Turns Back 2x


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Anthony Guerra

    What: Air France Airbus A380-800 en route from New York JFK to Paris
    Where: New York
    When: Feb 22 2010
    Who: 22 crew
    Why: While ferrying the flight to Paris, the plane developed fuel system problems and returned to JFK where it made a safe landing. This is after the flight had already been cancelled earlier for undesignated technical issues.

  • | | |

    Milwaukee: Emergency Landing


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Orlando Suarez

    What: Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-700 en route from Orlando to Milwaukee
    Photo: A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-7H4
    Where: Milwaukee
    When: Feb 21st 2010
    Why: On approach to Milwaukee, the crew reported issues with the flaps. The plane entered a flight pattern, and eventually made a safe if rapid landing.

  • |

    Press Release: Lufthansa


    Special flight schedule published at www.lufthansa.com due to expected pilots’ strike
    East Meadow, N.Y., Feb. 19, 2010 — As a consequence of the strike measures which have been initiated by the “Vereinigung Cockpit” trade union, Lufthansa is making corresponding adjustments to its flight schedule from Monday to Thursday, February 22- 25. About two thirds of the affected Lufthansa-operated flights will have to be cancelled, however Lufthansa regional partners such as Lufthansa City Line will operate their flightsaccording to schedule.

    The special flight schedule for the period of the strike can now be accessed at
    www.lufthansa.com and lists all flights which should be operating according to the current planning. Depending upon the actual operating conditions during the days of the strike, further changes could be made to the special flight schedule.

    Customers who have purchased a Lufthansa ticket for a flight which is operated by a partner airline (codeshare) will not find the LH flight number known to them in the special flight schedule. Since the partner airlines are not affected by the strike, these flights will operate as planned (flight numbers LH1400-2629 and LH5050-6999).

    Lufthansa is doing everything in its power to inform its customers as soon as possible and offer them alternative travel options. Passengers already booked on a Lufthansa flight during the period from February 22 to 25 can rebook once free of charge on another Lufthansa flight, if they wish to change their travel plans – provided their ticket was issued before February 18, the new travel date is before May 31, 2010 and their arrival and departure destinations remain the same.

    Should a flight be cancelled, and the purpose of the journey no longer applies,
    passengers can cancel their booking free of charge. Travelers have the opportunity to regularly check the status of their flight at www.lufthansa.com under the heading “My bookings”. A cancellation of the flight and the booking will be shown there. If a rebooking has been made, the travel alternatives will be shown there as well.

    Passengers on domestic German flights, whose flights have been cancelled, can
    independently purchase a rail ticket for the identical route in the same travel class and later, together with proof of the flight ticket purchased from Lufthansa, claim a refund. They can access the passenger receipt of their etix online at www.lufthansa.com under Information & Service > Check-in > Passenger Receipt.

    Customers can continue to obtain information about their bookings, as well as about the Rebooking options and cancellations, at the toll-free number 1-800-645-3880 in the U.S. and 1- 800-563-5954 in Canada.

    According to the special flight schedule, the following flights to/from North America are scheduled to take place during the period from February 22-25:

    February 22
    LH 412 Munich – Newark
    LH 413 Newark – Munich
    LH 430 Frankfurt – Chicago
    LH 431 Chicago – Frankfurt
    LH 434 Munich – Chicago
    LH 435 Chicago – Munich
    LH 438 Frankfurt – Dallas Ft Worth
    LH 439 Dallas Ft Worth – Frankfurt
    LH 492 Frankfurt – Vancouver
    LH 493 Vancouver – Frankfurt
    LH 498 Frankfurt – Mexico City
    LH 499 Mexico City – Frankfurt

    February 23
    LH 412 Munich – Newark
    LH 413 Newark – Munich
    LH 492 Frankfurt – Vancouver
    LH 493 Vancouver – Frankfurt

    February 24
    LH 412 Munich – Newark
    LH 413 Newark – Munich
    LH 434 Munich – Chicago
    LH 435 Chicago – Munich
    LH 442 Frankfurt – Detroit
    LH 443 Detroit – Frankfurt
    LH 492 Frankfurt – Vancouver
    LH 493 Vancouver – Frankfurt
    LH 498 Frankfurt – Mexico City
    LH 499 Mexico – City Frankfurt

    February 25
    LH 412 Munich – Newark
    LH 413 Newark – Munich
    LH 434 Munich – Chicago
    LH 435 Chicago – Munich
    LH 490 Frankfurt – Seattle
    LH 491 Seattle – Frankfurt
    LH 492 Frankfurt – Vancouver
    LH 493 Vancouver – Frankfurt
    ###
    Deutsche Lufthansa AG
    Corporate Communications
    Martin Riecken
    Tel.: +1 516-296-9671
    americaspr@dlh.de
    www.lufthansa.com
    http://twitter.com/Lufthansa_USA

  • | |

    Santo Domingo: Stowaway Falls off plane


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Anand Martinez

    What: Amerijet International/ABX Air Boeing 767-200 en route from Santo Domingo to Miami
    Where: Santo Domingo
    When: Feb 18th 2010
    Who: Flight crew (cargo flight)
    Why: After takeoff, Las Americas International Airport Air traffic controllers witnessed the unknown individual falling out of the Boeing’s wheel well. The flight continued to its destination. The stowaway’s body was recovered, although it remains unidentified. Stowaways would normally fall off or freeze (40 below zero at altitudes).

  • | |

    Jetlite Flight Goes Flat on Nagpur Runway

    What: JetLite en route from Mumbai to Nagpur
    Where: Nagpur
    When: Feb 20, 2010
    Why: After landing, while the plane was taxiing towards the bay, one of the tires on the nose-wheel deflated. The plane was briefly taken out of commission for repair, inconveniencing some passengers on the scheduled return flight. The pilot appeared to be unaware of the tire’s condition until pointed out on the runway.

  • | | | | |

    Compressor sends US Airways Airbus back to Phoenix


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Ronny Busch

    What: A US Airways Airbus A320-200 en route from Phoenix to New Jersey
    Where: Phoenix
    When:
    Who: 150 passengers and 5 crew
    Why: During/after takeoff, the plane’s engine “popped” when the left engine compressor stalled. The pilot reported engine trouble, andreturned to Phoenix where they made a safe landing. An alternative plane was provided.

  • | | |

    United Airlines: Turbulence injures Passengers


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Kaoru Kojima

    What: United Airlines Boeing 747-400 Tokyo to Washington
    Where: Alaska
    When: Feb 19 3:45
    Who: 245 passengers, Eighteen people injured (227 passengers 18 crew)
    Why: While en route, the plane encountered turbulence. Several people were injured. The figure was originally released as 20 injuries and later rounded down to 18. One person suffered a broken leg.

    A passenger was quoted saying that the plane…” jolted vehemently over Alaska twice or so about seven hours before its arrival. Many passengers were tossed from their seats, bumping into the ceiling.”

    After encountering turbulence over Alaska, the flight continued on to land at Narita.

  • | | | |

    British Airways Emergency Landing


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Ivan Kresanek

    What: British Airways Boeing 757-200 en route from Barcelona to London
    Where: Barcelona
    When: Feb 18th 2010
    Who: not available
    Why: After takeoff, the crew noticed an odor in the cockpit. Oxygen masks were deployed, and the plane returned to Barcelona. The flight was cancelled. No injuries were reported and there was no further notice regarding what the odor actually was.

  • | | | | |

    Qantas Emergency Landing at Sydney


    Pictured: A Oneworld (Qantas) Airbus A330-203
    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Songyuan Andy Zheng

    What: Qantas Airbus 330 en route from Sydney to Shanghai
    Where: Sydney
    When: ebruary 18, 2010
    Who: 197 passengers
    Why: After takeoff, the Qantas Airbus landing gear failed to retract, leading it to circle for 2 hours burning off fuel until it was light enough to land. Passengers were provided an alternative Airbus.

  • | | | | |

    Amsterdam: KLM Engine Failure


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Helmut Schnichels

    What: KLM McDonnell Douglas MD-11 en route from Suriname to Amsterdam
    Where: Amsterdam
    When: Feb 13th 2010
    Why: Prior to landing, the plane developed vibration in the right engine. Emergency services were on standby when the flight made the landing with the right engine on idle. No indication is made of the cause of the vibration or if the plane was removed from service.

  • | | |

    A Near Collision over Burbank


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Julian Hunt

    What: Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-700 en route from Las Vegas to Burbank
    Where: On approach to the Burbank airport
    When: Feb 13th 2010
    Who: 80 passengers and 5 crew
    Why: A small private plane and a SW Boeing came within 5900 feet of a collision, but between ATC and the Traffic and Collision Avoidance System warning, the flights adjusted, and there was no collision, and no wake turbulence problem. However a flight attendant broke her shoulder and another was also hospitalized with injuries that occurred during the evasive maneuvers.