Cause

  • | |

    5 Crew Members Fell Sick; US Airways Flight Made Emergency Landing in Ireland

    US AirwaysUS Airways Flight 715 en route from Venice, Italy to Philadelphia had to be diverted to Dublin Airport, Ireland for making an emergency landing on May 19 because five of its crew members and one passenger fell sick midair.

    The Airbus A330-200 had 238 passengers and 12 crew members on board at the time of the incident.

    This was the second incident in two weeks when a US Airways flight has been forced to make an emergency landing after its crew members fell sick. Earlier, another US Airways flight on the same route had to be diverted to the same airport in Ireland nine days ago on May 10.

    The causes of sickness is not yet known. The sickness symptoms included nausea, watery eyes and dizziness, as per health officials in Ireland.

  • | |

    Atlanta-Bound Delta Flight Makes Emergency Landing at Dulles Airport

    250px-Delta_logo.svgDelta Airlines flight 4916 had to make an emergency landing at Dulles International Airport in Virginia, around 26 miles west of downtown Washington, D.C.

    The flight en route from Westchester, NY to Atlanta, GA, took off at about 6am on May 20. Shortly after take-off, the crew discovered a problem in one of its engines.

    The Canadair CRJ-700 with 58 passengers diverted towards the Dulles International Airport where it made an uneventful emergency landing.

    The plane is being examined by the maintenance crews.

  • | | | | | | | |

    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.

  • | | |

    First Officer Passes Out Midair; EL AL Flight 289 makes Emergency Landing in Croatia

    EL ALEL AL flight 289, en route from Tel Aviv to Venice, had to make an emergency landing in Dubrovnik, Croatia, after its first officer fell ill mid air.

    The plane departed from Tel Aviv at around 6 a.m. on May 15. After about 2 hours, the first officer went to use the bathroom and upon returning, told the captain that he was not feeling well. The captain informed the first flight attendant, and was searching for the nearby airports to make an emergency landing, when the first officer passed out. A doctor who was on board among the passengers gave him medical treatment during the flight.

    The captain successfully made a safe emergency landing in Dubrovnik, where the first officer was taken to a hospital.

    The airline later issued a statement confirming the incident.

    “El Al flight 289 from Tel Aviv to Venice, with 98 passengers on board, landed in Dubrovnik after the first officer fell ill during the flight and was unable to fulfil his duties,” maintained the airline.

  • | | | | |

    6ft Part of Wing Came Loose; CityJet Plane Makes Emergency Landing in London

    CityJetOn May 15, a CityJet flight en route from London to Florence had to return and make an emergency landing after a part of its wing became partially detached.

    According to a CityJet spokesperson, “The WX 281 flight had just taken off from London City Airport on its way to Florence when the cover of the operating mechanism on the wing became partially detached…The crew followed their standard procedures and, after a discussion with CityJet Maintenance Control, decided to return to London City Airport.”

    The Avro RJ85 aircraft carrying 61 passengers made an uneventful emergency landing at the London City Airport. No injuries were reported.

    The passengers were taken to their destination on another aircraft.

  • | |

    Light Plane Carrying Actor Cliff Parisi Makes Emergency Landing at Manston Airport

    Cliff ParisiA light plane carrying famous actor Cliff Parisi was forced to make an emergency landing at the Manston airport, located in Thanet District of Kent, England, shortly before the airport was scheduled to close.

    With Parsi and two others on-board, the plane was on its way to France when the pilot discovered a technical problem. He then diverted the plane towards Manston airport and made an uneventful emergency landing Thursday morning.

    Manston airport ceased operations a few hours later, at 17:00 BST, despite the offers made to its owners from various parties interested in buying it.

    Parsi, best known for playing the character of Minty in Eastenders and Fred in Call the Midwife, thanked and showed his support for the airport in a tweet.

    “Just had an emergency landing at Manston air field thank God they are open today tomorrow they are closed for ever #savemanston”, said Parsi.

  • | | |

    AA Flight 1461 Lands in Emergency at Tulsa International Airport

    American AirlinesAmerican Airlines flight 1461 had to divert and make an emergency landing at Tulsa International Airport, Oklahoma on May 14.

    The Dallas-bound MD-80 aircraft departed from Little Rock, Arkansas with 137 passengers and 5 crew members on board. However, the pilot found a mechanical fault and had to divert the plane towards Tulsa Airport, just a few minutes after it took off.

    The plane was welcomed by emergency crews when it touched the tarmac at about 12:45 p.m.

    No one was injured in the incident.

  • | | |

    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.”

  • | |

    Military Aircraft Made Emergency Landing in Bermuda

    Military planeA military aircraft made a safe emergency landing at L.F. Wade International Airport, Bermuda, on May 11 at 3pm.

    The eye-witnesses said that the plane was extending and retracting its landing gear repeatedly.

    A police spokesman confirmed the incident and said that all the emergency protocols were observed.

    The causeway remained closed for traffic during the emergency landing. The aircraft was surrounded by fire trucks and ambulances as soon as it stopped on the runway.

    The cause of incident is not yet known.

  • | | |

    Fokker 100 Makes Emergency Landing at Zahedan Airport, Iran

    An Iranian jet en-route from the northeastern city of Mashhad to Southeastern City of Zahedan, made an emergency landing at Zahedan airport on May 10, due to landing gear malfunction.

    The Fokker 100 plane was carrying 135 passengers at the time of incident, nine of whom suffered minor injuries.

    Reza Arbabi, a spokesperson of the governor-general office of Sistan and Baluchestan province, said that one of the landing gears of the plane failed to deploy when it was about to land on the runway in Zahedan. He praised the captain for his timely reaction and skillfully handling the emergency landing.

  • | | | |

    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.

  • | |

    Pakistani Chartered Plane Lands in Lucknow for Re-fuelling

    A Pakistani aircraft en-route to Dhaka from Lahore made an emergency landing in Lucknow due to a fuel shortage.

    The aircraft, chartered by some unknown company safely landed at the Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport in the afternoon of May 6.

    The pilot of the aircraft informed the Lucknow air traffic control about the fuel shortage while flying over Uttar Pradesh. The ATC granted permission for landing after obtaining necessary clearances from all concerned.

    The ATC officials said the aircraft was parked at a remote bay during the re-fuelling. All the passengers remained inside the plane.

  • | | |

    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.

  • | | |

    Delta Flight 5322 Lands in Emergency at Springfield-Branson National Airport

    DeltaA regional flight of Delta airlines made an uneventful emergency landing at Springfield-Branson National Airport after a problem in its wing flaps was identified.

    The Flight 5322 was carrying 50 passengers when shortly after take off, issues with its flaps were noticed. The pilots then returned towards Springfield, circled around the airport to burn off the fuel and finally made an emergency landing at about 10:35am on Monday, April 5.

    All the passengers and crew members were safely evacuated.

  • | | | |

    Seventy-Two Children Treated at Heathrow Airport After Falling ill Midair

    AmbulanceSeventy-two children aboard Emirates flight EK007, coming from Cape Town, South Africa to Heathrow airport on Sunday, suffered from diarrhea mid air.

    The children aged 10 to 14, were part of a Welsh choir. They were on their way back after performing in Cape Town when they began vomiting. The crew members then requested emergency services at Heathrow airport to provide medical aid to the sick children.

    Especially trained paramedics from the ‘Hazardous area response team’ were waiting at the scene when the Airbus A380 touched the ground. Sixty Children were treated at the spot while 12 were taken to a hospital. The hospital sources confirmed that all children were released late night after they received treatment for diarrhea.

  • | | | | | |

    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.

  • | | |

    Nigerian Woman Gives Birth aboard British Airways London-Bound Flight

    British airwaysA London-bound British Airways flight had to divert and make an emergency landing in Spain, after a 31 year old passenger went into labor.

    The flight originated from Nigeria, and was on its way to Heathrow Airport in London when a Nigerian passenger gave birth in the plane’s business class, at an altitude of 36,000 feet. The pilot then diverted the plane to Palme de Mallorce, the capital of Spanish autonomous community, Balearic Islands. The mother and baby boy were rushed to Son Espases hospital.

    Ujunwa Eneh Ozeh, hailing from Nigerian capital city Abuja, was 26 weeks pregnant and was accompanied by her 1 year old daughter, Nnedinma.

    Ozeh and her newly born child, named Michael, are in stable condition. According to hospital authorities, the mother will be discharged on Monday, however, Michael will be kept in the intensive care unit till his original due date in August.

  • | | | |

    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

  • | | |

    Landing Gear Failure Forces Small Plane to Make Emergency Landing in Springbank

    Small planeA Calgary Flying Club plane, carrying two club instructors, had to make an emergency landing on its belly, after its landing gear failed to extend.

    The incident happened on Wednesday, April 30 at Springbank Airport near Calgary, Alberta.

    Fred Burrow, the investigator from Transportation Service Board confirmed that the pilot initially tried to land at Springbank Airport at about 10am, but the plane’s landing gear failed to fully deploy. The plane was then landed in emergency, as the pilot’s efforts to resolve the issue remained unsuccessful and the plane was running short of fuel.

    The landing was made with the nose lowered and the engines shut off to minimize any possible damages. The plane landed on its belly, and the passengers exited safely.

  • | | |

    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”.

     

  • | | |

    Cobham Aviation Plane Landed in Emergency After Engine Fire

    One of the engines of a British Aerospace BAE-146 plane caught fire in Western Australia, after which it had to make an emergency landing at Perth Domestic Airport.

    The Cobham Aviation flight, carrying 97 people, was en route from Perth to Barrow Island. One of the four engines caught fire during its climb, shortly after the take-off.  The plane was then turned back towards Perth airport where it made a safe emergency landing.

    All the passengers and crew members exited safely.

    The cause of fire is under investigation.

  • | | | |

    Swiss European Airlines Flight Diverted to Stansted Due to Engine Fire

    A Swiss European Airlines flight LX-487 had to make an emergency landing at London Stansted Airport, after one of its engines caught fire.

    The plane was en route from London City to Basel on the night of Sunday April 27. During the initial climb, its right hand engine caught fire, after which the crew decided to halt the climb at the altitude of 5000 feet and shut down the engine. The plane was then diverted to the Stansted Airport, where it made an uneventful emergency landing, around 30 minutes after it took off.

    All 82 passengers and 4 crew members exited safely. The flight was cancelled and the passengers were accommodated in another flight from London’s Heathrow Airport.

  • | |

    Indonesian Authorities Drop Charges against the Alleged Virgin Australia ‘Hijacker’

    VAThe Indonesian police have dropped all charges against the 28 year old Australian who allegedly tried to break into the cockpit of Virgin Australia Airlines flight en route from Brisbane to Bali.

    After thorough investigation, the police officials learned that Matt Christopher Lockley was actually looking for the toilet after waking up from deep sleep. He mistook the cockpit door for the toilet door.

    The special crime director of Bali police, Suryambodo Asmoro, said “The suspect we released because he has good intentions to go back to his country on his own, So he is going back alone, not accompanied or escorted.”

    Lockley thanked the Indonesian authorities “I want to say thank you to the Indonesian police and authorities…They only followed procedures and they have provided me with a lot of care and support and I’m grateful for everything they’ve done.”

    He denied the accusations made by the Virgin Australia officials about his being drunk. He said that he had only taken Panadol, Voltaren and Coca Cola before getting on the plane.

    This post is an update of “Passenger Tries to Break Into the Cockpit; Virgin Australia Flight Landed in Emergency due to Hijack Scare”