Public Statement

  • | | | | |

    NTSB launches team to assist government of Guyana in aviation accident

    Washington – The National Transportation Safety Board launched a team of investigators today to assist the government of Guyana with its investigation into yesterday’s accident at Cheddi Jagan International Airport, Georgetown, Guyana, involving a scheduled passenger flight.

    On July 30, 2011, at approximately 1:25 am (EDT), Caribbean Airlines flight 523, (Trinidad & Tobago registration 9Y-PBM), en route from Trinidad to Guyana, overran the runway during landing at Cheddi Jagan International Airport in Guyana. Preliminary information from the Guyana Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) indicated that one serious and multiple minor injuries were reported aboard the Boeing 737-800, carrying 156 passengers and six crewmembers.

    The NTSB designated Bob Benzon as the U.S. Accredited Representative. He will lead the U.S. team, which includes seven NTSB staff with expertise in operations, meteorology, airworthiness, survival factors, and aircraft performance as well as representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing. The team is scheduled to arrive in Guyana this evening.

    The Guyana CAA is leading the accident investigation. The accident aircraft recorders have been recovered and, at the request of the CAA, will be transported to NTSB headquarters in Washington, DC to be downloaded.

  • |

    Transportation Secretary LaHood, FAA Administrator Babbitt Visit Shut Down LaGuardia Worksite and Tell Congress Not to Fly Home for the August Recess Without Passing

    U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Randy Babbitt joined with local contractors and construction workers at LaGuardia Airport on Monday to demand that Congress pass an FAA bill before getting on airplanes to fly away for vacation.

    Since Congress allowed the FAA’s last extension to expire on July 22, dozens of construction projects across the country have been issued “stop work orders,” including a $6 million project to demolish the decommissioned FAA Airport Traffic Control Tower at LaGuardia International Airport that employed 40 New York area workers. Other workers nationwide have similarly been forced to stop work on critical airport modernization projects, and nearly 4,000 FAA employees, many needed to oversee these projects, have been furloughed.

    “Members of Congress should not get on a plane to fly home for vacation without passing an FAA bill and putting thousands of people back to work,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “Congress needs to do its job for the good of these workers, for the good of our economy and for the good of America’s aviation system.”
    FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt said, “Every day this goes on, we fall further behind. We need our 4,000 FAA employees and tens of thousands of construction workers back on the job so we can get critical projects moving again while it’s still construction season. Congress must act quickly before leaving for the August recess.”

    “It wasn’t easy telling my construction workers we’ve been shut down because of a fiscal situation in Washington,” said Luca Toscano, Vice President of Paul J. Scariano Inc. and contractor on the LaGuardia airport project. “Some of these guys just got back to work after a long time, and their benefits have all expired. So for them this is like running into a brick wall, and they’re asking me, ‘How do we explain this to our families?’ I don’t know what to say to them.”

    “No doubt there are important policy questions that need to be resolved with the aviation legislation,” said Stephen E. Sandherr chief executive officer of the Associated General Contractors of America. “But construction workers shouldn’t have to suffer because Washington hasn’t figured out a way to work out its differences.”

    “Because Congress has failed to pass an FAA extension, New York has lost access to millions of dollars for airport construction projects that would employ hundreds of construction workers. These have been tough times for the construction industry and workers have been hardest hit. For the sake of workers across the country who have already lost a week’s pay because of Congress’ inaction, we need an extension now,” said Paul Fernandes, Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York Chief of Staff.

    Without a reauthorization, the FAA is unable to get roughly $2.5 billion out the door for airport projects in all 50 states that could put thousands of people to work in good paying jobs. In addition to the nearly 4,000 FAA employees in 35 states, and the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico who have been furloughed and forced to go without pay, Associated General Contractors (AGC) estimates that 70,000 construction workers and workers in related fields have been affected.

    The FAA’s previous extension expired at midnight on Friday, July 22. Since then, more than 200 “stop work orders” have been issued for airport construction projects and contracts around the country. While the flying public will be unaffected and safety will not be compromised, stopping work on these projects will significantly increase the ultimate costs of construction for taxpayers and could delay important programs.

  • | | | | |

    Spanair JK5022: Final Report

    Update
    What: Spanair Flight JK5022, a 15-year-old MD-82 jet en route to Las Palmas in the Canary Islands.
    Where: Madrid airport Terminal Four
    When: Wednesday, Aug. 20, 2008 2:45pm
    Who: Carrying 166 passengers and nine crew, at the time of this writing, the number of fatalities had mounted to 154 people.
    Why: The jet swerved off the runway and caught fire during takeoff.

    The final report of Spanair Flight JK5022 was released, it claims that the pilots failed to deploy the flaps for takeoff. The report blames the crash on “pilot error.” The automated voice warning to alert the crew did not sound.

    Already more than one hour late, the flight experienced a technical issue with the plane (a sensor reporting excessive temperature in an air intake, and the temperature sensor was de-activated on the ground) that forced the first takeoff attempt to be aborted when there were failure signals taxiing away from the terminal. The aircraft was inspected and then tried to take-off for the second time, which ended in the crash.

    The National Transportation Safety Board said that “that the probable cause of the accident was the flightcrew’s failure to use the taxi checklist to ensure the flaps and slats were extended for takeoff. Contributing to the accident was the absence of electrical power to the airplane takeoff warning system which thus did not warn the flightcrew that the airplane was not configured properly for takeoff. The reason for the absence of electrical power could not be determined.

    A similar disaster occurred in the Northwest Flight 255 in Detroit in 1987 when 154 people also died in an MD-82 due to incorrect flap settings.

    As a consequence, Spanair and McDonnell Douglas now require a TOWS* system check prior to every flight.

    The Interim Report is available here.

    Final report (Spanish).PDF

    *The Take Off Warning System is part of CAWS. TOWS provides alert warnings on the following components involved in the configuration of the aircraft for takeoff: Flaps, Slats, Brakes, Auto brake, Auto spoilers, Spoilers and Stabilizer Trim.

  • | |

    FAA Shutdown

    All air traffic controllers and safety inspectors continue to work at full capacity during the shutdown, however:
    4,000 FAA employees are still furloughed
    70,000 construction workers commissioned for aviation-related projects out of a job.

    FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt has come out in support of a long-term reauthorization bill recognizing the safety priorities of the FAA. “We’re not going to budget safety.”

    219 STOP WORK ORDERS have been issued.

    A Press Release was submitted July 27, 2011 titled What They’re Saying: We Need an FAA Bill Extension

    Contractors have been told to stop work on critical airport modernization projects around the country after Congress failed to pass legislation giving the FAA the authority necessary for work to continue by last Friday’s deadline. Dozens of “stop work orders” have been issued for major projects designed to build and modernize control towers and other aviation infrastructure from coast to coast. Construction workers, engineers and planners were told not to come to worksites across the country after the FAA was forced to issue stop work orders on projects ranging from the construction of new air traffic control towers to the rehabilitation and modernization of air traffic facilities. Nearly 4,000 FAA personnel, many needed to oversee various aspects of these projects, were furloughed on Saturday. Stopping work on these projects could significantly increase the ultimate costs of construction for taxpayers. Affected contractors, airport managers, and local officials across America are calling for action.

    “This is no way to run the best aviation system in the world.”
    -Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation, Portland Press Herald, July 26, 2011

    “Unless Congress acts quickly, more work on projects critical to our nation’s aviation system will come to a halt.”
    -Randy Babbitt, FAA Administrator, My Fox News Chicago, July 25, 2011

    “So for them [construction workers] this is like running into a brick wall, and they’re asking me, ‘How do we explain this to our families?’ I don’t know what to say to them.”
    – Lucca Toscano, Vice President Paul J. Scariano construction firm, Fast Lane, July 25, 2011

    “I got a telephone call Friday about noon that said the job was going to go into suspension effective midnight Friday…Disappointment for the most part. Most don’t really understand what’s going on and why something like that there is affecting what’s going on here on their everyday job.”
    –Ken Hengst, project manager for EAS Contracting, KRIV-FOX Houston, July 26, 2011

    “It’s never a good way to run a construction project just to randomly tell people just to stop work.”
    -Paul Bradbury, Jetport Director, Portland Daily Sun, July 26, 2011

    “I’ve been doing this for 19 years, 7 here at this airport. I’ve never seen anything quite like this… As you can tell, if this project stopped right now, we’d literally have a torn-up ramp. The busiest ramp here at the airport, having this kind of hole in it.”
    – Brian Kulpin, Reno-Tahoe International Representative, KTVN Nevada, July 25, 2011

    “It’s depressing, you got a site [McCarran Control Tower] that was flourishing with activity and there’s nothing going on right now.”
    –Sasha Milosavljevich of Archer-Western Contractors, CBS News, July 26, 2011

    “The economy has devastated construction in Las Vegas in the last couple years and we were really excited to get this going…It’s disheartening we’re in this position now and our people have to stay home while Congress works this out.”
    –Darren Enns, secretary-treasurer of the Southern Nevada Building and Construction Trades Council, Las Vegas Sun, July 26, 2011

    “It’s very frustrating. It puts about 50 construction workers out of a job. But about 200 people are involved in this some way—designers, engineers, vendors, delivery folks. It’s going to be a hardship on them.”
    – Kevin Klein, Cherry Capital Airport Director, Associated Press, July 26, 2011

    “The longer it goes on, the worse it affects us.”
    – Bob Graf, contractor for Palm Springs International Airport, Desert Sun, July 26, 2011

    “We were informed Friday to stop all construction activity… The scary portion for us is the indefinite nature of all this”
    – Dan Anello, project manager at Oakland International Airport, San Francisco Chronicle , July 26, 2011
    “The shutdown affected all airport divisions…The folks I normally deal with have been furloughed. Any questions or things we have to do are on hold until this is resolved.”
    – Rich Nuttall, Denver Airport Manager, Telluride News, July 26, 2011

    “We had already bidded and awarded the contract and most of that cash would have stayed in the local economy, so there is an economic impact.”
    – Cindi Martin, Glacier Park International Airport Director, Daily Inter Lake, July 26, 2011

    “Our airports are not only our most important resources for moving goods and people, they are critical to creating jobs and putting Americans back to work…we need Congress to pass extension legislation for the FAA now.”
    -Antonio Villaraigosa, Mayor of Los Angeles, Our Weekly, July 25, 2011

    “We seem to be being hijacked by a completely ego-driven and frankly ridiculous fight in Washington,”
    – Annise Parker, Houston Mayor, KHOU 11 News, July 26, 2011.

    “It’s inaction like this that’s hurting our economy that everyone is working so hard to improve. Laying all these employees off, stopping this project, delaying grant money that’s already been awarded, it only trickles down to hurt our economy even more.”
    -Luzerne County Commissioner Maryanne Petrilla, Citizen’s Voice, July 27, 2011

    “It’s very important that the people in Washington get back to work and get this bill passed so the tower is completed and the working-class people get back to work.”
    – Wilkes-Barre Mayor Tom Leighton, Citizen’s Voice, July 27, 2011

  • | | | |

    Yemenia Flight 626, Comoros, Updated

    The BEA sent this letter to the president of the Inquiry committee, the Ministries of Communications of Moroni, New technology, Transportation and tourism (Loosely translated. For the original, click the link below the letter):

    Re: Yemenia Flight 626
    Monsieur President,

    I have read the first progress report on flight IY626 that crashed June 29, 2009 during the landing procedure at the airport in Moroni. This report is dated June 25, 2011 but has not, to my knowledge been released to date.

    This report contains the facts that for the most part, were already available three months after the accident.

    However, the BEA addressed you in May 2010 regarding the publication of a progress report in the context of the first anniversary of the accident. This note has been taken into consideration after a year.

    No action improving safety of flights has been recommended by your Commission which is the Commission’s responsibility.

    I recall that France, through the intermediary of BEA, has been deeply involved in this investigation. The underwater research was funded by France for $ 3 M.

    The fact that the commission has not yet begun to use the information collected from its recorders, two years after reading them. This is inacceptible.

    I urge you that the investigation that you lead henceforth be conducted with diligence and in accordance with international provisions.

    I would be grateful for the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry to please ensure that is has established a plan to lead to the publication of a final report within the best times.

    In the meantime, I urge you to accept the assurances of my highest consideration.

    Director of the BEA
    Jean-Paul Troadec

    lettre.commission.d.enquete.comorienne.

  • | |

    Safety Investigation into Air France Flight 447

    The BEA has released the following document:

    Safety Investigation into the accident on 1 June 2009 to the Airbus A330-203, flight AF447 which we have available in English as a PDF

    This Interim report comes about after the readout of the flight recorders and breaks down the flight into three phases related to the CVR, autopilot and stall warning.

  • |

    Press Release: American Airlines and Transport Workers Union Agree

    “American Airlines and the Transport Workers Union have reached two tentative agreements in principle for the Simulator Technician workgroup and the Ground School and Simulator Pilot Instructor workgroup.
    “These tentative agreements provide our Simulator Technicians and Ground School and Simulator Pilot Instructors with market-based compensation, including structural increases, and enhancements to other contract items such as vacation and holidays.
    “Both parties worked collaboratively during this negotiating process to reach tentative agreements that address the interests of our TWU-represented employees and the company.
    “It is our understanding the TWU will provide details of the agreements and the voting process to its members in the coming days.

    “American Airlines has more than 50,000 employees represented by unions, including approximately 80 simulator technicians and approximately 160 ground school and simulator pilot instructors.”

  • | |

    Essential Air Services Shutdown Pending

    The 20th temporary extension of the Federal Aviation Administration expires in days.

    The House passed a bill threatened by a presidential veto, and the FAA may be shut down midnight Friday, and end “Essential Air Service” to 13 cities.

    Thirteen airports are targeted to lose their EAS subsidies.

    Press Release – Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Urges Swift Action by Congress on FAA Bill

    July 20, 2011

    WASHINGTON – Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Randy Babbitt called on Congress today to pass a clean extension of the FAA’s authorization in order to avoid airport project construction delays and employee furloughs. The current FAA reauthorization expires at midnight this Friday, July 22, 2011. LaHood and Babbitt said they oppose the House bill because it includes controversial provisions that needlessly threaten critical FAA programs and jeopardize thousands of public and private sector jobs.

    “Congress needs to stop playing games, work out its differences, and pass a clean FAA bill immediately. There is no excuse for not getting this done,” said Secretary LaHood. “Important programs and construction projects are at stake. This stalemate must be resolved.”

    Secretary LaHood also said, “I want to reassure the flying public that, during this period, safety will not be compromised.”

    “We are going to be forced to furlough valuable FAA employees unless this situation is resolved quickly,” said FAA Administrator Babbitt. “These employees do everything from getting money out the door for airport construction projects, to airport safety planning and NextGen research. We need them at work.”

    If Congress does not extend the FAA’s authorities approximately 4,000 employees will be furloughed beginning Saturday July 23, 2011. Without the appropriate authority, taxes will not be deposited into the Trust Fund to pay some FAA employees. Employees who are paid out of the Trust Fund handle a variety of functions including: airport safety and engineering standards; airport safety planning; the Airport Improvement Program, which administers construction project grants to airports; and Research, Engineering, and Development, which includes NextGen research and testing.

    Congress has extended the FAA’s authorization 20 separate times.

    Without a full year extension, FAA will be unable to move forward on more than $600 million in airport construction projects that include good paying jobs for local communities across the country. Some of these projects include:

    GulfportBiloxi International Airport: proceed with construction of a terminal building expansion, rehabilitation runway lighting, rehabilitation of a taxiway, and rehabilitation of an access road.
    RichmondInternational Airport: proceed with construction of a new apron for terminal concourse A.
    Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport: proceed with construction of taxiway Y and Z rehabilitation.
    LaredoInternational Airport: proceed with the rehabilitation of the Engineered Material Arresting System which will help protect passengers if an aircraft leaves the runway.

    Additionally, during each of the previous 20 short term extensions, the FAA’s Airport Improvement Program has only received small portions of its $3.5 billion in grant money.

    As a result, states and airports have been left waiting to plan projects or begin construction since the total amount available is unknown. Some projects that are already underway are being constructed in stages and the total cost of the project will likely be higher as a result of that approach.

    For example, in Wisconsin, the state has delayed accepting construction bids until officials know how much federal funding is available. Unless the FAA receives a longer extension, projects in Wisconsin could be delayed into next year since the construction season will start to wind down at the end of the summer.

  • |

    Series of Operational Errors by Pilot Led to 2009 Airplane Crash in Montana

    The National Transportation Safety Board determined today that the cause of the March 2009 deadly crash of a Pilatus airplane was a series of operational errors made by the pilot. The pilot failed to ensure that a fuel system icing inhibitor (FSII), commonly referenced by the brand name “Prist”, was added to the fuel prior to the accident flight.

    The pilot also failed to take appropriate remedial actions, including diverting to a suitable airport, after the airplane warning systems indicated a low fuel pressure state that ultimately resulted in a significant lateral fuel imbalance. And, the pilot lost control while maneuvering the left-wing heavy airplane near the approach end of the runway.

    “The pilot’s pattern of poor decision making set in motion a series of events that culminated in the deadly crash,” said NTSB Chairman Deborah A. P. Hersman. “Humans will make mistakes, but that is why following procedures, using checklists and always ensuring that a safety margin exists are so essential – aviation is not forgiving when it comes to errors.”

    On March 22, 2009, at about 2:32 pm (MDT), a Pilatus PC-12/45, N128CM, crashed about 2,100 feet west of runway 33 at Bert Mooney Airport (BTM) in Butte, Montana. The flight departed Oroville Municipal Airport in Oroville, California, en route to Gallatin Field in Bozeman, Montana but the pilot diverted to Butte for unknown reasons. The pilot and the 13 passengers were fatally injured and the aircraft was substantially damaged by impact forces and a post-crash fire. The airplane was owned by Eagle Cap Leasing of Enterprise, Oregon, and was operating as a personal flight under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident.

    During the investigation, the NTSB determined that the pilot did not add a fuel system icing inhibitor when the airplane was fueled on the day of the accident. The Pilatus flight manual states that a fuel system icing inhibitor must be used for all flight operations in ambient temperatures below 0 degrees Celsius to prevent ice formation in the fuel system. The NTSB concluded that the airplane experienced icing in the fuel system which resulted in a left-wing-heavy fuel imbalance. The increasing fuel level in the left tank and the depletion of the fuel from the right tank should have been apparent to the pilot because that information was presented on the fuel quantity indicator. This should have prompted the pilot to divert the airplane to an airport earlier in the flight as specified by the airplane manufacturer.

    The NTSB issued recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration and the European Aviation Safety Agency, to require fuel filler placards and guidance on fuel system icing prevention.

  • | | |

    Luddington Crash Report Posted: Debris in Fuel

    TSB Identification: CEN10FA465
    14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
    Accident occurred Friday, July 23, 2010 in Ludington, MI
    Aircraft: CESSNA U206F, registration: N82531
    Injuries: 4 Fatal,1 Minor.

    On July 23, 2010, at 1017 eastern daylight time (edt), a Cessna U206F, N82531, sustained substantial damage when it was ditched in Lake Michigan about 5 miles west of Ludington, Michigan, after a loss of engine power. The airplane was owned and operated by the pilot as a personal flight under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. It departed the Gratiot Community Airport (AMN), Alma, Michigan, at 0850 and was en route to Rochester International Airport (RST), Rochester, Minnesota. The single-engine airplane was over Lake Michigan at 10,000 feet above mean sea level (msl) when the engine lost power. The pilot reversed course but was unable to reach the shore, and he ditched the airplane. The pilot survived and was rescued by a fishing boat about 38 minutes later. The pilot rated passenger and three other passengers did not survive. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. An instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was activated.

    (Full)
    HISTORY OF FLIGHT

    On July 23, 2010, at 1017 eastern daylight time (edt), a Cessna U206F, N82531, sustained substantial damage when it was ditched in Lake Michigan about 5 miles west of Ludington, Michigan, after a loss of engine power. The airplane was owned and operated by the pilot as a personal flight under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. It departed the Gratiot Community Airport (AMN), Alma, Michigan, at 0850 and was en route to Rochester International Airport (RST), Rochester, Minnesota. The single-engine airplane was over Lake Michigan at 10,000 feet above mean sea level (msl) when the engine lost power. The pilot reversed course but was unable to reach the shore, and he ditched the airplane. The pilot survived and was rescued by a fishing boat about 38 minutes later. The pilot rated passenger and three other passengers did not survive. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. An instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was activated.

    On July 23, 2010, about 0659, the pilot rated passenger called the Princeton Automated Flight Service Station to obtain a weather brief and to file an IFR flight plan. The briefer informed him that there was an airmen’s meteorological information (AIRMET) for IFR conditions for the entire route of flight that was valid until about 1100 – 1400. There was a Convective significant meteorological information (SIGMET) to the south that paralleled the route of flight. The briefer reported that the winds aloft were from 260 degrees at 41 knots at 9,000 feet, and 270 degrees at 35 knots at 12,000 feet. The pilot rated passenger filed the flight plan and identified the flight as a “lifeguard” flight.

    The pilot reported that the purpose of the flight was to take one of the passengers to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, for medical treatments. The flight was a personal flight and was not associated with a charity organization. The patient and his wife were seated in the aft seats, seats 5 and 6. The patient’s doctor was sitting in the middle row on the left in seat 3. The pilot was in the left front seat and the pilot rated passenger was in the right front seat, seat 2. The fuel tanks were filled to capacity the night before the flight. The pilot reported that after climbing to 10,000 feet msl, he leaned the fuel mixture to approximately 14 gallons per hour (gph).

    The pilot reported that all of the instrument readings were within normal limits as they crossed the shore near Ludington, Michigan. The head winds were about 40 knots “directly on the nose.” Near mid-point over the lake (about 24 statute miles from the shoreline), the engine began to misfire and lose power, with the fuel flow dropping to about 11 gph. The pilot attempted to regain power by pushing in the mixture control to full rich but without effect. About 1005, the pilot contacted the Minneapolis Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) and reported that the airplane was losing power. He reversed course toward the Michigan shoreline. The fuel flow dropped to about 8 gph. The pilot switched fuel tanks and adjusted the mixture control in and out to try to regain power. He attempted to prime the engine but that had no effect. He reported that he turned on the high boost pump and got a short burst of power for about 30 – 45 seconds, but then the engine “failed completely.”

    The airplane descended through a cloud layer. About 1012, the airplane was about 12 miles from Ludington and about 2,300 feet above mean sea level (msl) and the airplane was still in the clouds. The surface weather at Ludington indicated that the cloud bases were at 1,800 feet msl. The pilot reported that they had a few minutes before water impact after breaking out of the clouds, so he had everyone don and inflate their life vests. Before impact, the pilot unlatched the pilot’s door on the left side of the airplane, and he had the front door of the rear cargo door unlatched. The pilot reported that he did not lower the flaps since the cargo doors would not open if the flaps were extended.

    The pilot reported that when he ditched the airplane, either the tail or the landing gear hit the water as he pulled up to go over a swell. The airplane pitched forward, flipped over on its back, and began to fill with water. The pilot unbuckled his seat belt and shoulder harness, fell a short distance, pushed the door open, and got out. He reported that the airplane was sinking rapidly. He saw the right seat passenger and the doctor in the water. A wave hit the pilot and when he resurfaced “everything was gone.” He kept yelling but got no response. He eventually started to swim toward the shoreline. About 30 minutes later a US Coast Guard helicopter flew over him but they did not spot him. A few minutes later a fishing boat spotted him and rescued him from the water. He was transferred to a Coast Guard vessel and was taken to shore.

    Using side scanning sonar, the Michigan State Police Dive Team located the airplane in about 173 feet of water on July 30. The dive team recovered all the bodies, with the last body being recovered on the morning of August 1, 2010.

    The airplane was found resting on its main landing gear on the sandy lake bottom. The airframe and engine were separated by the water impact. Both were raised to the surface by a local commercial recovery service on August 1, 2010. The airframe and engine were taken to a local facility where the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted its on-site investigation.

    PERSONNEL INFORMATION

    The 66-year-old pilot held a private pilot certificate with a single-engine land and airplane instrument ratings. He reported that he had 2,660 total flight hours with 1,200 hours in a Cessna 206. He had logged 25 hours of flight time in the last 90 days, and 7 hours in the last 30 days. He held a third-class medical certificate that was issued in November 2008.

    The pilot reported that he had flown similar “lifeguard” flights in the airplane with the pilot rated passenger in the past. He reported that the pilot rated passenger performed copilot duties when he flew with him. The pilot rated passenger also owned an airplane. When they flew in the pilot rated passenger’s airplane, the accident pilot would perform copilot duties.

    The 70-year-old pilot rated passenger held a private pilot certificate with a single-engine land and airplane instrument ratings. He held a third-class medical certificate that was issued on November 17, 2009. He had 2,150 hours of total flight time at the time of his medical examination.

    AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

    The airplane was a single-engine Cessna U206F, serial number U-206-01734, manufactured in 1972. It was designed to seat six and it had a maximum gross weight of 3,600 pounds. The airplane was equipped with a pilot (left) side door and a clamshell rear door serving the back two rows of seats. The accident airplane had its middle, right seat (Seat 4) removed. The engine was a 300-horsepower Continental IO-520-F3B, serial number 280171R.

    Annual Inspections
    The airplane’s maintenance logbooks indicated that four different inspection authorization (IA) mechanics had conducted the required annual maintenance inspections on the airplane within the last ten years. The logbooks indicated that the same IA mechanic had performed the last three annual maintenance inspections. On September 27, 2007, the IA mechanic performed his first annual maintenance inspection of the airplane. The total airframe time was 3,893.4 hours. His second annual inspection of the airplane was conducted on October 1, 2008, and the airplane had a total time of 3,908.1 hours. The last annual maintenance inspection was conducted on November 5, 2009, and it had a total time of 3,938.0 hours. At the time of the accident, the airplane had flown 7.5 hours since the last inspection and had a total time of 3,945.5 hours.

    FAA inspectors interviewed the IA mechanic concerning the annual maintenance inspections he had conducted on the accident airplane. According to the FAA inspectors, the IA mechanic reported that he used the inspection checklists provided by the pilot/owner in order to conduct the annual maintenance inspections. The pilot/owner provided the IA mechanic with the Cessna Service Manual for “Stationair Series, Skywagon 206 Series and Super Skylane Series, 1969 thru 1971.” The service manual indicated the items that needed to be inspected during a 50-hour inspection and 100-hour (annual) inspection. In the section of the checklist covering the “Engine Compartment,” Item 29 states that the “Fuel-air control unit screen” is required to be checked during every 100-hour inspection. In the section of the checklist covering the “Fuel System,” Item 2 states that the “Fuel strainer screen and bowl” is required to be checked during every 100-hour inspection.

    The Cessna Service Manual provides the following information about the fuel strainer:

    “Section 13-42. FUEL STRAINER DISASSEMBLY. (See figure 13.9.) To disassemble and assemble the strainer, proceed as follows:

    a. Turn off fuel selector valve.
    b. Disconnect strainer drain tube and remove safety wire, nut, and washer at bottom of filter bowl and remove bowl.
    c. Carefully unscrew standpipe and remove.
    d. Remove filter screen and gasket. Wash filter screen and bowl in solvent (Federal Specification P-S-661, or equivalent) and dry with compressed air.
    e. Using a new gasket between filter screen and top assembly, install screen and standpipe. Tighten standpipe only finger tight.
    f. Using all new O-rings, install bowl. Note that step-washer at bottom of bowl is installed so that step washer seats against O-ring. Connect strainer drain tube.

    The engine manufacturer’s “Operator’s Manual for IO-520 Series Aircraft Engines, FAA Approved September 1980,” also provided a checklist for 100-hours inspections of the engine. Item 14 of the 100-hour inspection checklist stated: “Fuel Metering Unit Inlet Screen: Inspect and clean.”

    According to the FAA inspectors, the IA mechanic reported that during the last annual inspection of the fuel strainer screen and bowl, he removed the bowl and found some water in it, but he did not remove the screen or gasket. According to the FAA, he also stated several times during the interview that he never checks the fuel metering inlet fuel screen, and that he did not check it during the last annual inspection.

    The aircraft logbook indicated that during the annual maintenance inspection on May 20, 2004, the following entry was made by a different IA mechanic: “Replaced fuel strainer cable assy [assembly] and replaced strainer screen assy [assembly].” The engine logbook for the same annual inspection had this entry: “Removed engine primer system and capped at engine.”

    METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS

    At 0955, the observed surface weather observation at Ludington (LUD), Michigan, was: wind 290 degrees at 6 knots with gusts to 17 knots; visibility 10 miles; ceiling 1,800 feet overcast; temperature 24 degrees Celsius; dew point 22 degrees Celsius; altimeter 29.81 inches of mercury.

    At 1016, the observed surface weather observation at Ludington (LUD), Michigan, was: wind 270 degrees at 7 knots; visibility 10 miles; ceiling 1,600 feet overcast; temperature 24 degrees Celsius; dew point 22 degrees Celsius; altimeter 29.82 inches of mercury.

    WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

    The postaccident inspection of the airframe and engine occurred on August 2 – 3, 2010. The inspection revealed that the fuselage was intact; however, the empennage was partially separated with extensive wrinkling and bending around the tailcone section aft of the rear seats. Some of the damage to the empennage was a result of the recovery effort. Both wingtips exhibited aft crushing. The engine was separated from the fuselage. The nose landing gear was separated from the fuselage and not recovered. All flight control surfaces remained attached to the airframe structure. Flight control cable continuity was established from all flight controls to all the primary and secondary flight control surfaces. The elevator trim tab measurement equated to about 10 degrees up. The flaps were found down about 30 degrees. The flap indicator and flap switch were found at the 20 degree position. The push pull rods to lift the flaps were cut by rescue divers during the recovery of the bodies. The rear cargo doors were found in the closed position, but they opened and closed normally. The key was still in the ignition and on the “Both” position.

    The inspection of the airplane’s fuel system revealed that about 60 gallons of fuel remained in the wing fuel tanks, about 30 gallons in each side. About the first five gallons drained from the wings appeared to be a mixture of fuel and water. The remaining liquid drained was light blue in color and appeared to be aviation fuel. Both wing fuel bladder tanks and exit port screens were clean. The fuel boost pump was removed and drained of water. The boost pump operated when it was powered by a 12 volt battery. The airplane was equipped with the optional fuel primer and the fuel primer control lever in the cockpit; however, the fuel line was capped-off (not operational) at the firewall.

    The inspection of the firewall fuel strainer revealed that the gasket did not provide a complete seal between the fuel screen and upper body. Instead, a portion of the gasket was positioned over the exit port which created a gap between the fuel screen and the upper body of the fuel strainer.

    The inspection of the engine revealed that all the cylinders and engine accessories remained attached to the crankcase. Oil was present in the engine. The crankshaft was rotated and drive train continuity to the cylinders and accessories was confirmed. All damage observed was consistent with impact. The propeller remained attached to the engine crankshaft flange. Both propeller blades exhibited aft bending toward the non-cambered side of the propeller blade.

    The inspection of the engine’s throttle and fuel metering assembly revealed that the fuel inlet filter screen was safety wired. The safety wire was removed and the fuel inlet screen was removed from the fuel metering assembly. The removal of the fuel inlet screen required a consistent pull (it did not come out freely) to remove it. The visual inspection of the inlet screen revealed that it was partially obstructed by debris that had become attached to the screen. The orifice of the fuel inlet passage was inspected. It contained the same debris material that obstructed the fuel screen and the debris blocked a majority of the orifice opening.

    The firewall fuel strainer, the fuel inlet screen, and debris found in the fuel inlet screen were sent to the NTSB Materials Laboratory for examination. The engine was shipped to the engine manufacturer for further inspection.

    MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

    No autopsies were performed.

    SURVIVAL ASPECTS

    The pilot reported that he used the life vests that were in the pilot rated passenger’s airplane since he could not find his life vests the night prior to the flight. He put the life vests in the seat pockets so that they would be accessible to the passengers. He reported that the passengers donned their life vests during the descent prior to water impact. He had the pilot rated passenger take the controls momentarily while he donned his life vest. He stated that he heard “a couple of the vests go off” while still inside the airplane.

    During recovery of the airplane and its occupants, the patient and his wife were found in the airplane with the patient still seated in seat 6. The patient still had his vests on, but the wife’s vest had come off and it was found in the airplane. Both life vests were deflated when the bodies were recovered. The pilot rated passenger and the patient’s doctor were found on the lake bottom within 50 yards of the airplane. The doctor still had his vest on but in a deflated condition. The pilot rated passenger was not wearing a life vest. A life vest was found near the copilot’s seat, seat 2, in a deflated condition.

    The inspection of the life vests revealed that they were manufactured in the 1980’s and the CO2 cartridges used to inflate the vests were also manufactured in the 1980’s. The inspection of the life vests revealed that passenger life vests had one CO2 cartridge attached to the vest. All the cartridges were found expended during the on-site inspection. The pilot’s vest had two CO2 cartridges but only one cartridge had been expended. The pilot reported that he was not aware that the vest had two cartridges.

    Search Conditions
    According to the Mason County Sheriff’s Department, the weather was cloudy with good visibility during the initial on-scene search for the wreckage and survivors. The water temperature was between 68 and 72 degrees Fahrenheit on the surface with 2 to 4 foot seas. The waters current appeared to be moving north towards Big Sauble Lighthouse, and then moving to the northwest from the lighthouse.

    Cessna Stationair Owner’s Manual
    The Cessna Stationair Owner’s Manual provided information and procedures for emergency landing without engine power, ditching, clamshell cargo doors, cargo door emergency exit procedures, and glide distance.

    Emergency Landing Without Engine Power
    The Emergency Procedure section of the airplane Owner’s Manual provides the procedures for “Emergency Landing Without Engine Power.” The procedure stated the following:

    If an engine stoppage occurs, establish a flaps up glide at 85 MPH. If time permits, attempt to restart the engine by checking for fuel quantity, proper fuel selector valve position, and mixture control setting. Also check that engine primer is full in and locked and ignition switch is properly positioned.

    If all attempts to restart the engine fail and a forced landing is imminent, select a suitable field and prepare for the landing as follows:

    1. Pull mixture control to idle cut-off position.
    2. Turn fuel selector valve “OFF”.
    3. Turn off all switches except master switch.
    4. Approach at 90 MPH.
    5. Extend wing flaps as necessary with gliding distance of field
    6. Turn off master switch.
    7. Unlatch cabin doors prior to final approach.
    8. Land in a slightly tail-low attitude.
    9. Apply heavy braking.

    Ditching
    The Emergency Procedure section of the airplane Owner’s Manual provides the procedures for “Ditching.” The ditching procedures state:

    1. Plan approach into wind if winds are high and seas are heavy. With heavy swells and light wind, land parallel to swells.
    2. Approach with flaps 40 degrees and sufficient power for a 300 ft./min rate of descent at 75 MPH.
    3. Unlatch the cabin door.
    4. Maintain a continuous descent until touchdown in level attitude. Avoid a landing flare because of difficulty in judging airplane height over a water surface.
    5. Place folded coat or cushion if front of face at time of touchdown.
    6. Evacuate airplane through cabin doors. If necessary, open window to flood cabin compartment for equalizing pressure so that door can be opened.
    7. Inflate life vests and raft (if available) after evacuation of cabin.

    Information on Cargo Door
    The airplane’s Owner’s Manual states that when conducting the “Before Entering the Airplane” checklist during the preflight, it is important check the cargo doors are securely latched and locked. An “IMPORTANT” note states:

    “The cargo doors must be fully closed and latched before operating the electric wing flaps. A switch in the upper door sill of the front cargo door interrupts the wing flap electrical circuit when the front door is opened or removed, thus preventing the flaps being lowered with possible damage to the cargo door or wing flaps when the cargo door is open.”

    The Owner’s Manual section titled “Cargo Door Emergency Exit” states the following information:

    “If it is necessary to use the cargo door as an emergency exit and the wing flaps are not extended, open the forward door and exit. If the wing flaps are extended, open the doors in accordance with the instructions shown on the placard which is mounted on the forward cargo door.”

    The red placard found on the front cargo door of the accident airplane stated:

    EMERGENCY EXIT OPERATIONS
    1. OPEN FWD CARGO DOOR AS FAR AS POSSIBLE.
    2. ROTATE RED LEVER IN REAR CARGO DOOR FWD.
    3. FORCE REAR CARGO DOOR FULL OPEN.

    Glide Distance
    The Operator’s Manual indicated that the maximum glide distance for the airplane with the following parameters: 1) Speed 85 mph indicated airspeed; 2) Propeller windmilling; 3) Flaps up; and 4) Zero wind. The Maximum Glide chart indicated that the maximum glide distance from a height of 10,000 feet above the terrain is a ground distance of 15 statute miles.

    TESTS AND RESEARCH

    Life Vests
    The life vests were tested at a manufacturer’s facility. The vests were overdue their inspection requirements. The pressure tests indicated that the vests inflated when new CO2 cartridges were used and held pressure. No anomalies were found with the life vests that would have precluded normal inflation and operation. Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 91 regulations do not require life vests for each occupant if the airplane is operated not for hire.

    Engine Inspection
    The engine was sent to the manufacturer for inspection and operational testing. The engine was put on a test stand and run. The engine experienced a normal start. The engine RPM was advanced to 1,200 rpm and held for 5 minutes to stabilize; 1,600 rpm and held for 5 minutes to stabilize; 2,450 rpm and held for 5 minutes to stabilize; and at full throttle and held for 5 minutes to stabilize. The throttle was rapidly advanced from idle to full throttle six times and it accelerated and decelerated without hesitation or interruption in power. It produced rated horsepower.

    NTSB Materials Laboratory Examination
    The NTSB Materials Laboratory examined the debris found in the fuel metering assembly’s fuel inlet screen. The examination of the material removed from the filter revealed several categories of materials present within the mixture. The materials present included: 1) cellulosic material similar to wood and sawdust; 2) non-metallic amber-colored flakes similar to varnish or shellac; 3) thin, ribbon-like metallic shavings; 4) white flakes similar to paint; 5) granular particulates similar to sand or dirt; and 6) fibers similar to fabric and glass fiber

  • |

    FAA Proposes $1.05 Million Civil Penalty Against Boeing

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a $1,050,000 civil penalty against the Boeing Company for allegedly failing to correct a known problem in production and installation of the central passenger oxygen system in its B-777 airliners.

    The FAA based its proposed civil penalty on inspections of nine newly assembled aircraft between April and October, 2010. Inspectors discovered that spacers in the oxygen delivery system distribution tubing on the aircraft were not installed correctly. Improper installation could result in the system not supplying oxygen to passengers should depressurization occur.

    “There is no excuse for waiting to take action when it comes to safety,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “We will continue to insist on the highest levels of safety from our aircraft manufacturers.”

    “The FAA has strict regulations when it comes to the maintenance and installation of aircraft systems that all manufacturers and operators must follow,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt.
    Boeing has 30 days from the receipt of the FAA’s enforcement letter to respond to the agency.

  • |

    NTSB Investigating Taxiway Collision at Boston Logan Airport

    The National Transportation Safety Board has opened an investigation into last night’s collision of two jetliners on a taxiway at Boston Logan Airport.

    On July 14, 2011, about 7:33 P.M. EDT, a Delta Air Lines B767-300ER, N185DN, operating as Delta flight 266, was taxiing on taxiway B for departure on runway 04 at Boston Logan International Airport (BOS), when its left winglet struck the horizontal stabilizer of an Atlantic Southeast Airlines CRJ900, N132EV, operating as ASA flight 4904, which was number three in line on taxiway M waiting for departure on runway 09.

    As the B767 approached and passed the intersection with taxiway M, the left winglet of the B767 struck the horizontal tail of the CRJ900. The CRJ900 sustained substantial damage, which included damage to the horizontal tail and vertical tail; the airplane lost fluid in all three hydraulic systems. Parts of the B767 winglet were sheared off and embedded in the tail of the CRJ900. The passengers on the CRJ900 were deplaned on the taxiway, and the B767 taxied back to the terminal.

    Flight data recorders from both airplanes are en route to NTSB headquarters. Air Safety Investigator Dan Bower is the Investigator-In-Charge. Parties to the investigation include Delta Air Lines, Atlantic Southeast Airlines, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Air Line Pilots Association.

  • |

    NTSB SAFETY RECOMMENDATION

    National Transportation Safety Board
    Washington, DC 20594

    July 7, 2011
    http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2011/A-11-056-059.pdf
    The National Transportation Safety Board makes the following recommendations to the Airborne Law Enforcement Association:

    Revise your standards to define pilot rest and ensure that pilots receive protected rest periods that are sufficient to minimize the likelihood of pilot fatigue during aviation operations. (A-11-56)

    Revise your accreditation standards to require that all pilots receive training in methods for safely exiting inadvertently encountered instrument meteorological conditions for all aircraft categories in which they operate. (A-11-57)

    Encourage your members to install 406-megahertz emergency locator transmitters on all of their aircraft. (A-11-58)

    Encourage your members to install flight-tracking equipment on all public aircraft that would allow for near-continuous flight tracking during missions. (A-11-59)

  • |

    Fatigue Understanding between NATCA and FAA

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) announced agreement on important fatigue recommendations that were developed by a joint FAA-NATCA working group which was established under the 2009 collective bargaining agreement.

    “The American public must have confidence that our nation’s air traffic controllers are rested and ready to work,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “We have the safest air transportation system in the world but we needed to make changes and we are doing that.”

    The agreement reinforces existing FAA policy that prohibits air traffic controllers from sleeping while they are performing assigned duties. The FAA will continue to provide air traffic controllers breaks on the midnight shift based on staffing and workload. While on break, air traffic controllers are expected to conduct themselves professionally and be available for recall at all times.

    The FAA and NATCA also agreed that all air traffic controllers must report for work well-rested and mentally alert. It is the employee’s responsibility to notify their supervisor if they are too fatigued to perform their air traffic control duties. As a result of this agreement, air traffic controllers can now request to take leave if they are too fatigued to work air traffic.

    This agreement marks the completion of the tasks required by this joint FAA-NATCA fatigue working group. The FAA and NATCA will continue to collaborate to reduce the risk of fatigue in the workplace.

    “Air traffic controllers have the responsibility to report rested and ready to work so they can safely perform their operational duties,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt. “But we also need to make sure we have the right policies in place to reduce the possibility of fatigue in the workplace.”

    “We are pleased that the efforts of the joint NATCA-FAA fatigue workgroup that produced these science-based recommendations have resulted in an agreement and their implementation into the schedules and work environments of our nation’s dedicated and highly professional air traffic controller workforce,” said NATCA President Paul Rinaldi.

    “We supported the FAA’s action to enhance aviation safety by eliminating single staffing on the midnight shift and we fully support these recommendations that address fatigue. They are common sense solutions to a safety problem that NATCA and fatigue experts have consistently raised for many years.”
    Air traffic controllers will also now be allowed to listen to the radio and read appropriate printed material while on duty during the hours of 10PM and 6AM as traffic permits.

    The FAA had previously adjusted work schedules to give air traffic controllers a minimum of nine hours off between shifts. The FAA and NATCA will develop new watch schedule principles that incorporate fatigue science for schedules beginning no later than September 1, 2012. The FAA and NATCA are already beginning to work with local facilities on watch schedules that reduce the possibility of fatigue in the transition from the day shift to the midnight shift.

    The FAA has also agreed to develop policies that will encourage air traffic controllers to seek medical help for sleep apnea. Currently, air traffic controllers lose their medical qualification if they are diagnosed with sleep apnea. The FAA will work to develop a process for most air traffic controllers with sleep apnea to regain their medical qualification once they receive proper medical treatment. The FAA’s Office of Aerospace Medicine will also develop educational material to raise awareness of the symptoms and the physical effects of sleep apnea.

    As a result of this agreement, the FAA will develop a Fatigue Risk Management System for air traffic operations by January of next year. This management system will be designed to collect and analyze data associated with work schedules, including work intensity, to ensure that the schedules are not increasing the possibility of fatigue. Systems like these are commonly used in other areas of aviation to evaluate levels of risk. The FAA is also designing a comprehensive fatigue awareness and education training program for employees.

    Read the agreement pdf here.

  • | | |

    A330 and A340 Landing Gear Airworthiness Directive

    EASA Emergency AD No.: 2011-0122-E has been published limiting the life of A330 and A340 landing gear parts.

    During ground load test cycles on an A340-600 aeroplane, the MLG bogie beam prematurely fractured. The results of the investigation identified that this premature fracture was due to high tensile standing stress, resulting from dry fit axle assembly method. Improvement has been introduced subsequently with a grease fit axle assembly method.

    Click to read the full pdf

  • | |

    FAA: Publishes SAFO on Runway Incursion increase

    11004
    From the SAFO:

    Recommendations describe a top down approach, a coordinated effort to mitigate identified hazards. Suggestions include management emphasis and training of pilots and support personnel (air carrier mechanics, ground personnel, and tug/tow drivers.)

    There are recommendations in each of these categories:

    • Planning
    • Situational Awareness
    • Written Taxi Instructions
    • Crew Resource Management
    • Communication
    • Taxi
    • Exterior Lighting

    The full pdf is available here
    https://airflightdisaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/SAFO11004.pdf

  • |

    IATA Checkpoint of the Future

    The International Air Transport Association (IATA) unveiled the first mock-up of a Checkpoint of the Future, designed to enhance security while reducing queues and intrusive searches at airports, using intelligence-driven risk-based measures.

    IATA’s Checkpoint of the Future is being shown to delegates attending the Association’s 67th Annual General Meeting (AGM) and World Air Transport Summit, in Singapore.

    “We spend $7.4 billion a year to keep aviation secure. But our passengers only see hassle. Passengers should be able to get from curb to boarding gate with dignity. That means without stopping, stripping or unpacking, and certainly not groping. That is the mission for the Checkpoint of the Future. We must make coordinated investments for civilized flying,” said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO.

    The main concepts of the Checkpoint are (1) strengthened security by focusing resources where risk is greatest, (2) supporting this risk-based approach by integrating passenger information into the checkpoint process, and (3) maximizing throughput for the vast majority of travelers who are deemed to be low risk with no compromise on security levels.

    “Today’s checkpoint was designed four decades ago to stop hijackers carrying metal weapons. Since then, we have grafted on more complex procedures to meet emerging threats. We are more secure, but it is time to rethink everything. We need a process that responds to today’s threat. It must amalgamate intelligence based on passenger information and new technology. That means moving from a system that looks for bad objects, to one that can find bad people,” said Bisignani.

    How does it work?
    The Checkpoint of the Future ends the one-size-fits-all concept for security. Passengers approaching the checkpoint will be directed to one of three lanes: ‘known traveler’, ‘normal’, and ‘enhanced security’. The determination will be based on a biometric identifier in the passport or other travel document that triggers the results of a risk assessment conducted by government before the passenger arrives at the airport.

    The three security lanes will have technology to check passengers according to risk. “Known travelers” who have registered and completed background checks with government authorities will have expedited access. “Normal screening” would be for the majority of travelers. And those passengers for whom less information is available, who are randomly selected or who are deemed to be an “Elevated risk” would have an additional level of screening.

    Screening technology is being developed that will allow passengers to walk through the checkpoint without having to remove clothes or unpack their belongings. Moreover, it is envisioned that the security process could be combined with outbound customs and immigration procedures, further streamlining the passenger experience.

    Next Steps
    Through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), 19 governments, including the United States, are working to define standards for a Checkpoint of the Future. IATA is also coordinating closely with the US Department of Homeland Security’s Checkpoint of Tomorrow program which has similar goals.

    “We have the ability to move to the biometric scanning and three-lane concept right now. And while some of the technology still needs to be developed, even by just re-purposing what we have today, we could see major changes in two or three years time,” said Bisignani.

    For more information, please contact:
    Director Corporate Communications
    AGM Media Centre Tel: +65 6688 2734
    Email: corpcomms@iata.org

  • | |

    Hot Volcanoes Cool Air Travel

    Nabro

    Nabro volcano, Eritrea sends ash plume more than 13.5 kilometres into the sky and disrupting air traffic across eastern Africa.
    Nasa photo
    Volcano Nabro in Eritrea


    Volcano Nabro erupted today throwing ash clouds up to 13.5 kilometres.The Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) said Monday that the 5,331 ft volcano has resulted in a large ash plume of up to 13.5 kilometres (8 miles) high. The scale of the eruption, compared to the ongoing eruption in Chile and 2010?s eruption at Eyjafjallajökull in Iceland, remains unclear. Ash is falling on the northern Ethiopian town of Mekele. The ash advisory issued by the VAAC (see below graphics) is predicting that the Ash plume will spread towards the Middle East Monday night.

    Puyehue

    Puyehue Volcano in Lago Ranco, Río Bueno and Puyehue Chile
    Puyehue Volcano in Lago Ranco, Río Bueno and Puyehue Chile
    The Puyehue Volcano in the Andes
    The Puyehue eruption began June 4th, 2011 when 3,500 people were evacuated. First the local airport was closed, then cancellation of hundreds of flights have continued this last week and a half. As of Friday, the cloud spread causing cancellations across South America towards Uruguay and into Brazil.

    *Eritrea, is a country in the Horn of Africa.

  • | | | | |

    US Airways Computers Down, Flights Cancelled

    A power outage in Phoenix knocked out all of US Airways computers, grounding flights all over the US.

    Boarding pass scanners are also down.

    US Airways has published three press releases regarding the outage:

    3:
    US Airways Releases Third Update Regarding System Outage
    TEMPE, Ariz., Jun 10, 2011 (BUSINESS WIRE) —

    US Airways’ (NYSE: LCC) website, usairways.com and airport computer systems have been restored following a systems outage earlier today.

    As the operation returns, flights may continue to be delayed.

    Early reports indicate that the systems outage was the result of a power outage near one of the airline’s data centers in Phoenix.

    We strongly encourage our customers to check their flight status before arriving at the airport by visiting usairways.com or by calling US Airways Reservations at 1-800-428-4322. (LCCG)

    SOURCE: US Airways

    US Airways
    Media Relations, 480-693-5729

    2:
    US Airways Releases Update Regarding System Outage
    TEMPE, Ariz., Jun 10, 2011 (BUSINESS WIRE) —

    US Airways’ (NYSE: LCC) website – usairways.com – and the airline’s airport computer systems are back online and we are working to restore operational order following a systems outage earlier today.

    Flights throughout the US Airways system have been impacted and are delayed. While usairways.com is back online, it may perform unreliably and in a delayed fashion.

    Early reports indicate that the systems outage was the result of a power outage near one of the airline’s data centers in Phoenix.

    We strongly encourage our customers to check their flight status before arriving at the airport by visiting usairways.com or by calling US Airways Reservations at 1-800-428-4322. (LCCG)

    SOURCE: US Airways

    1:

    US Airways Issues Statement Regarding System Outage
    TEMPE, Ariz., Jun 10, 2011 (BUSINESS WIRE) —

    US Airways (NYSE: LCC) is experiencing a computer systems outage that has impacted usairways.com and the airline’s airport computer systems.

    Early reports indicate that the systems outage is the result of a power outage near one of the airline’s data centers in Phoenix.

    Some airport computer systems are coming back online now and we are working to restore operational order.

    We strongly encourage our customers to check their flight status before arriving at the airport by calling US Airways Reservations at 1-800-428-4322. (LCCG)

    SOURCE: US Airways

    US Airways
    Media Relations, 480-693-5729

  • | |

    FAA imposing Penalties for Lasers

    The FAA released a legal interpretation, which finds that directing a laser beam into an aircraft cockpit could interfere with a flight crew performing its duties while operating an aircraft, a violation of Federal Aviation Regulations. In the past, the FAA has taken enforcement action under this regulation against passengers physically on-board an aircraft who interfere with crewmembers.

    Today’s interpretation reflects the fact that pointing a laser at an aircraft from the ground could seriously impair a pilot’s vision and interfere with the flight crew’s ability to safely handle its responsibilities.
    The maximum civil penalty the FAA can impose on an individual for violating the FAA’s regulations that prohibit interfering with a flight crew is $11,000 per violation.

    This year, pilots have reported more than 1,100 incidents nationwide of lasers being pointed at aircraft. Laser event reports have steadily increased since the FAA created a formal reporting system in 2005 to collect information from pilots. Reports rose from nearly 300 in 2005 to 1,527 in 2009 and 2,836 in 2010.

  • | | | |

    Friday: Factual Data on Air France 447

    Media excesses, and rumor mongering (my words) have moved the BEA to publish an informational note for the families of the victims, and the general public. The following “chain of events” comes from the initial reading of the Flight Data Analysis of the Cockpit Voice Recorder. There are new facts in the timeline, but the interim report will not be published until the end of July. Interested parties should remain aware that this is not a substitute for later reports. Causes of the accident and safety recommendations will only be revealed and understood after “long and detailed investigative work.”



    Point Enquête 270511 on site

  • | | | |

    CVR FDR NOT a Flight of Imagination

    Read in Portuguese
    In the continuing pursuit of the unvarnished reality behind Air France Flight 447, it does not matter why “Le Figaro” posted rumors and factoids in lieu of truth after the BEA reported that the complete data (flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder) was successfully recovered in Paris.

    It does not matter if “Le Figaro” is more concerned with stimulating traffic than it is about veracity, legitimacy and validity in reporting truth.

    Perhaps someone at “Le Figaro” is heavily invested in Airbus, and hopes to falsely boost the airline’s reputation. We have no idea of what their motives might be.

    What matters are the facts.

    What matters is that on recovery of the data from the data containers, the information appears to have been intact (according to the BEA).

    What matters is that the data recovery teams were able to open, extract, clean and dry the memory cards, and retrieve the actual data.

    There is no reason the data would not support exactly what the ACARS data already indicates, which is that the pitot tubes failed, and started a catastrophic landslide of mechanical events that led inevitably toward systems failure.

    We believe the aircraft stalled all the way from 35000 feet to the ocean. If the BEA had considered this, they would have found the plane in weeks.

    The plane sent out automated messages from which the sequence of failure has been inferred.

    It is an acknowledged FACT that the mechanical systems on board Air France Flight 447 were standard Airbus A330 systems, a “fly by wire” technology which is known to remove responsibility and action from the pilots when in certain situations. A fly-by-wire system modifies manual inputs of the pilot in accordance with control parameters.

    The pilots on this type of fly-by-wire system are unable to manually override if faulty data come streaming in from the frozen pitot tubes. The current thinking is that in the Air France Flight 447, the faulty Thales tubes streamed in faulty data to the on board systems. Disaster was all but inevitable.

    (In Sept 2009, the FAA sent out a directive indicating that “use of the Thales model has resulted in reports of airspeed indication discrepancies while flying at high altitudes in inclement weather conditions …(that) …could result in reduced control of the airplane.” )

    Prior to receiving the content of the black boxes, the collected data pointed to the following series of events:

    The Thales pitot tubes are small devices affixed to the plane exterior which measure air speed, but which have a proven tendency to freeze over, which obfuscates the data. Simply put, the Airbus system requires correct data input for the plane to fly correctly. When the frozen-over tubes began sending corrupted data, the system could no longer manage flight. On the 330, there is no way for pilots to manually override the failing systems.

    No one expects the black boxes to indicate anything else. What is expected, perhaps is a clarification of data, and a way to study the events in order to prevent a repetition of the same.

    The BEA strongly objected to media speculation. In fact, it sent out a press release specifically naming “Le Figaro” as the sensationalist publisher of invalid information. Here is what the BEA said:

    According to an article that appeared in « Le Figaro » on the evening of Monday 16 May 2011, the « first elements extracted from the black boxes» would exonerate Airbus in the accident to the A330, flight AF 447, which killed 216 passengers and 12 crew members on 1st June 2009.

    Sensationalist publication of non-validated information, whilst the analysis of the data from the flight recorders has only just started, is a violation of the respect due to the passengers and the crew members that died and disturbs the families of the victims, who have already suffered as a result of many hyped-up stories.

    The BEA repeats that, in the framework of its mission as a safety investigation authority, it alone has the right to communicate on the progress of the investigation. Consequently, any information on the investigation that comes from another source is null and void if it has not been validated by the BEA.

    Collection of all of the information from the audio recordings and from the flight parameters now gives us a high degree of certainty that everything will be brought to light concerning this accident. The BEA safety investigators will now have to analyse and validate a large quantity of complex data. This is long and detailed work, and the BEA has already announced that it will not publish an interim report before the summer.

    At this stage of the investigation, no conclusions can be drawn.

    So while we do respect our own experts who believe what they already believe (based on what was then available about the pitot tubes and fly-by-wire), we trust the BEA analysis will provide a solid analysis of the data and are aware that they have not released any new conclusions.

    We reiterate their emphasis, rejecting non-validated information, and agree no one should be jumping on any band-wagon of opinion, at least not until the authorities apply their proficiencies and start analyzing the data that no one was expecting would surface.

    While we are ruling nothing out and closing no doors, we are impervious to the contingent of nay-sayers who—regardless of the drastically different facts of every given situation—chant the same chorus in every aviation event, blaming the dead pilots because they are easy targets and can not defend themselves. Also, let us not ignore that liabilities due to pilot error are capped by International Convention. So no matter what the actual error, Airlines prefer “pilot error” because it means less coming out of their pockets.

    The Montreal Convention imposes two tiers of liability on airlines:
    -the first tier provides automatic compensation, deals with claims up to 100,000 Special Drawing Rights ($155,000 US). The airline has no defense against claims up to this amount.
    -the second tier deals with the portion of a claim exceeding the $155,000 limit. An airline can avoid liability of this portion only by proving it was not negligent or otherwise at fault. To avoid the liability the airline must prove a negative. There are, in fact, infinite ways an airline’s negligence can be involved, all of which the airline must disprove-a burden which is next to impossible to meet.

    If we as armchair analysts must err, let us err believing until proven otherwise, that the pilots were dependable, reputable, and rock-solid; let us remember that they too were passengers aboard the flight, human beings who fought as best they could, against whatever forces or failures brought them down. We believe pilots are valiant men who know the weight of their office, who know they are responsible for the lives they carry, and when they do their human best to survive, even in face of overwhelming physics, nature, weather, or mechanical failure, it is rash and unworthy of us to blame them precipitously. Sure, pilots can err, but let us not tar them with that brush without the facts.

    But for a single action, delayed reflex or overwhelming odds, those dead pilots who are so often blamed because they are defenseless targets, are themselves dead heroes.

  • | |

    FAA Proposes Changes, Additions to Safety Training

    The FAA is proposing additional training for pilots, due to pilot error allegations from the Continental flight 3407 crash in western New York. The FAA said the proposed rules regarding additional training, including real life scenarios in more advanced flight simulators, remedial training for pilots proven deficient, would be the most substantial and wide-ranging overhaul of airline crew ever. Training will be part of a group effort rather than an isolated testing environment.

    In the Continental Flight 3407 crash, the plane went into a full stall, activated the “stick pusher” (which points a plane’s nose downward to pick up speed.) The captain pulled back when the proper response would have been to push forward. The correction in a timely fashion would have saved the flight.

    FAA Announcement PDF

    Training Proposal PDF (full)

  • | |

    NTSB Reports on July 15 Flight, Turbulence, Injury

    NTSB Identification: DCA10FA076
    Scheduled 14 CFR Part 121: Air Carrier operation of DELTA AIRLINES INC
    Accident occurred Thursday, July 15, 2010 in
    Probable Cause Approval Date: 04/29/2011
    Aircraft: BOEING 767, registration: N184DN
    Injuries: 1 Serious,201 Uninjured.

    The NTSB full Narrative:
    History of Flight:

    On July 15, 2010, at about 0200 UTC, a Boeing 767-332ER, registered in the United States as N184DN and operated by Delta Airlines, encountered turbulence at flight level 360 near TOESS intersection north of Antonio B. Won Pat International Airport (GUM) Guam. One flight attendant suffered a broken ankle during the turbulence event. The flight had departed GUM at 1125 UTC and landed at Narita International Airport (NRT), its original destination, at 0344 UTC. None of the other 192 passengers or 9 crewmembers were injured. The flight was operating under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 121, and was on an instrument flight rules flight plan, and flying in visual meteorological conditions at the time of the event.

    According to the captain of the flight, at the time of the turbulence encounter he was navigating around scattered cloud build-ups. Nothing was showing on radar, as he adjusted the antenna tilt between -1 and -5 degrees. At that time the seatbelt sign was not illuminated.
    According to the injured flight attendant, she was walking down the aisle between the mid galley and the aft galley and fell to the floor at the time of the turbulence encounter.

    Injuries:

    None of the other 9 crewmembers or the 192 passengers were injured.

    Damage to Airplane:

    The airplane was not damaged.

    Meteorological Information:

    According to the operator, no turbulence was forecast for the area in which the airplane was flying at the time of the turbulence encounter. In addition, satellite imagery revealed that the airplane was in an area not conducive to turbulence when the event occurred.

    Medical and Pathological Information:

    The injured flight attendant was examined by a physician passenger who did not provide a diagnosis. She declined medical treatment upon arrival at Narita and proceeded to her home base of Minneapolis before seeking further medical advice. Upon arrival home, she saw a doctor who stated that her ankle was broken.

    Flight Data Recorder:

    According to the flight data recorder, the vertical acceleration during the turbulence encounter varied between +1.5 g and -0.3 g. The encounter lasted about 5 seconds.

    See Flight Attendant Injured in Clear Air Turbulence