|

Easa Proposes Airworthiness Directive for Airbus

Similar Posts

  • Babies In Carriers

    Patricia Friend of the Association of Flight Attendants told the New York Times “Every single thing on that airplane down to the coffee pots are required to be properly restrained except children under the age of 2.”

    Babies are safer in carriers. That’s a fact. So why are we delaying?

    Below, see where the NTSB is discussing this issue on December 9th in an open forum: (See below) This issue should concern us all.

    NTSB PUBLISHES AGENDA FOR CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY IN THE AIR AND IN AUTOMOBILES FORUM SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 9TH

    The National Transportation Safety Board has published its agenda for the Child Passenger Safety in the Air and in Automobiles forum, which will begin at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, December 9, 2010. The one-day forum will be chaired by NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman and all five Board Members will participate.

    Three panels of invited experts from non-profits, academia, federal agencies, industry, and professional associations will address subjects including safety risks to children when flying in airplanes or riding in automobiles; best practices for protecting children when traveling; child seat, seat belt, and vehicle design improvements; and identification of effective interventions for increasing use of child seats and seat belts.

    Child seats and other products approved for securing children in the air and on the roads will be displayed. Certified child passenger safety technicians may earn continuing education units for attendance at this event.

    Organizations and individuals can submit materials for the NTSB’s public docket for this forum. Submissions should directly address one or more of the forum’s three topic areas (identified by the panel titles on the agenda) and should be submitted electronically as an attached document to childsafety@ntsb.gov. The deadline for receipt is December 23, 2010. A description of the forum and complete agenda are available at http://www.ntsb.gov/children.

    The forum is open to all and free to attend (there is no registration). It will be held at the NTSB’s Board Room and Conference Center, located at 429 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W., Washington, D.C.

    The event will also be webcast live on the NTSB’s website. Webcast details will be posted on the website when available. Webcast archives remain posted for three months after the event. After three months, the NTSB FOIA office can provide copies.

    Directions to the NTSB Board Room: Front door located on Lower 10th Street, directly below L’Enfant Plaza. From Metrorail, exit L’Enfant Plaza station at 9th and D Streets escalator, walk through the shopping mall, at CVS store (on the left), take escalator (on the right) down one level. The Board Room will be to your left.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • |

    Least safe commercial jets

    An Airline Ratings study points out these planes as the least safe commercial jets to fly: LET 410, Ilyushin 72, Antonov AN-12, Twin Otter, CASA. This might be one of those cases where certain facts can’t be separated. How can statistics separate the effect of the planes being flown in third world countries with the least safe airports? How can one separate the fact of the Twin Otter’s heavy usage in Nepal, home of some of the worlds most dangerous airports?

    The same study indicates Boeing’s 777, 717, 787 and 767/757, the Airbus A380 and A340, the Embraer 135/145, and CRJ 700/1000 as the safest planes.

    While 137 airlines were deemed safest, only these carriers score top marks for both safety and service: Air New Zealand, Asiana Airlines, Cathay Pacific, Emirates, Etihad, EVA Air, Korean Air, Qantas, Royal Jordanian, Singapore Airlines and Virgin Atlantic.

    British Airways, Flybe, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa and Aer Lingus were considered safe but had lesser marks for service. The full spectrum of the rated airlines is located here: http://www.airlineratings.com/ratings.php

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • Press Release – FAA Certifies Santa’s NextGen-Equipped Sleigh for Christmas Eve

    For Immediate Release
    December 20, 2010
    Contact: FAA Press Office
    Phone: 202-267-3883

    WASHINGTON – Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) safety inspectors at the North Pole certified Santa One, the reindeer-powered sleigh piloted by Santa Claus, for its Christmas Eve round-the-world delivery mission.

    Santa One, led by Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, is outfitted with new satellite-based NextGen technology, which will allow Santa to deliver more toys to more children with improved safety and efficiency.

    “Children around the world will get their gifts on time, regardless of the weather, thanks to NextGen,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “We’re proud to say NextGen is bringing Santa Claus to town.”

    Rudolph’s red nose has been outfitted with avionics that will broadcast Santa One’s position via satellites to air traffic controllers around the world with improved accuracy, integrity and reliability.

    “Santa’s cockpit display will help improve his situational awareness by showing him and his reindeer flight crew their precise location in relation to other aircraft, bad weather and terrain,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt. “NextGen will help make this an extra-safe Christmas Eve.”

    The sleigh’s onboard systems have been upgraded with state-of-the-art, NextGen technology that will allow Santa One to maintain cruising altitude for as long as possible before making a continuous descent into cities and towns around the world. While maneuvering on rooftops, an advanced, onboard runway safety system will help reduce the risk of incursions between the sleigh and chimneys.

    Santa’s reindeer-powered sleigh is already energy-efficient, but the NextGen technologies will further reduce Santa One’s carbon hoofprint. The shorter, faster routings means that Rudolph and the other reindeer will consume less hay, resulting in fewer greenhouse gases.

    Unlike any other pilot, Santa has special permission from the FAA to fly thousands of domestic and international short-haul and long-range flights in one night. In keeping with the FAA’s science-based proposal to give pilots more rest, Santa will arrange his flight plan based on his circadian rhythm. Mrs. Claus also assured FAA safety inspectors that she’ll make sure he gets plenty of rest before the flight on Christmas Eve.

    Follow Santa’s progress on Christmas Eve at the NORAD Tracks Santa website: www.noradsanta.org

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • |

    Is a Four Year Prescription a Bandaid for the Airbus Glass Cockpit? Not Shatterproof

    According to the NTSB, “on January 25, 2008, a United Airbus A320, registration N462UA, experienced multiple avionics and electrical failures, including loss of all communications, shortly after rotation while departing Newark Liberty International Airport, Newark (EWR), New Jersey. The flight returned for landing at EWR and electrical power was restored to the cockpit after landing when the flight crew selected the AC Essential Bus button. There were no injuries to the 107 passengers and crew aboard the airplane and no damage to the airplane. The airplane was operating under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 and was a regularly scheduled passenger flight to Denver International Airport, Denver, Colorado.”

    Note that this was a glass cockpit. (A glass cockpit has digital instrument displays rather than analog.)

    In case of electrical failure, new Airbus models have backup systems and backups for the backups for their glass cockpits, but 50 episodes of multiple electrical failure have been recorded in the Airbus A320 (A318, A319, A320 and A321) according to AP. Obviously not all Airbus models are new.

    In 2009, the EU issued an order giving airlines four years to make the fixes so that pilots don’t end up losing all their electrical systems. The FAA issued the order in 2010. France reported 48 failures of 5 of 6 displays in 2008.

    The NTSB has suggested to the FAA that the optional fix be mandatory, but currentlyAirlines are not required to tell the Federal Aviation Administration when the repairs are made, and they can’t afford to automatically immediately ground planes when a bulletin is issued. Is this safety Russian-Roulette style?

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • |

    ICAO Takes Air Cargo Security and Transparency Safety Initiatives

    The ICAO released a report that they are joining forces with the World Customs Organization to counter terrorism and criminal activity. The Memorandum of Understanding between the WCO and ICAO is intended to strengthen Air Cargo Security.

    The complex, multifaceted network of the global air cargo system will require a complex, multifaceted safety solution.

    Read the press release pdf

    Two weeks ago, the ICAO announced they were adopting a Code of Conduct for sharing safety information touting the concept that “Transparency and sharing of safety information are fundamental to a safe air transportation system.”

    The code is based on consistent, fact-based and transparent response to safety, and a guide to international bureaucracies for implementation of transparency.

    Read the press release pdf

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • Is the Q400 Safe?

    When looking at track records, the biggest question of safety in the Bombardier Q400 seems to be the failure of the landing gear to retract. Airworthiness directives in the archives refer to this issue as “fatigue failure of the nose landing gear electrical harness” although when gear retraction failed in 2007 on a Scandinavian Airlines plane, the cause of the failure was described as “hydraulics actuator top eyebolt was separated from the actuator.”

    Of course in the Buffalo Crash, the landing gear issue did not come into play.

    Significant icing may have been THE problem. It may have been icing that crippled the plane, period. It may have been a salvageable situation. It may have been a crisis situation that nine out of ten pilots could have handled–or 1 in 100.

    Or it may have been one of several factors.

    The Buffalo flight apparently slowed enough to lose lift.

    When the stall-warning system angled the plane’s nose down to regain speed, instead of following the proper procedure–lowering the nose to get out of a stall–the captain pulled back on the controls and added power.

    Pilot training is being discussed as a factor in the crash. Or was it as James Fallows postulates a “tailplane stall?”

    Nasa Tailplane Stall Video

    However speculation is simply a logical exercise. The NTSB investigation is ongoing as the FBI, NTSB, and FAA examine the flight data and the world waits for an answer.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.