Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Bernhard Bauske
What: Air Malta A319 en route from Malta (Mala) to Reggio Calabria
Where: Reggio Calabria
When: Jul 23rd 2009
Why: After the bird strike, the plane landed safely and was towed. Passengers transferred to another plane to complete the trip to Rome
What: Air India Airbus A320-200 from Bhubaneswar to Mumbai
Where: Mumbai International Airport
When: July 25
Who: 91
Why: After hydraulic failure, flight IC-169 landed safely and was towed off the runway.
What: Advanced Helicopter Concepts MARSAN AVIATION ROBINSON R44 HELICOPTER
Where: FREDERICK, MD
When: 07/23/2009 10:30 pm
Who: Three of the victims worked for Advanced Helicopter Concepts, 1 passenger
Why: AIRCRAFT CRASHED AND BURNED ON I-70 (MM37) AFTER STRIKING POWER LINES.
Prior to the crash, the helicopter had been giving rides for a youth charity. It encountered power lines near or over Interstate 70, sparked, and hit the ground.
Fatalities included:
Kim R. Felix, 48, New Market
Jeffrey D. Nordaas, 24, Columbia
Niall R. Y. Booth, 43, New Market
George H. Tutor, Jr., 39, Westminster
What: American Airlines McDonnell Douglas MD-82 Austin to Chicago
Where: Austin,TX
When: Jul 24th 2009
Who: 145
Why: When indicators reported an engine fire after takeoff from Austin, the plane received clearance and landed 10 minutes after takeoff. No actual fire was found.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Jerome Mervele
What: Air Canada Boeing 777 Toronto to Beijing
Where: Pearson International Airport
When: July 24
Who: 288 passengers (or 305 also reported)
Why: After takeoff, warning lights alerted pilots that the flight was experiencing a wing-flap problem. The crew landed the plane immediately. Because of the full load of fuel, all the tires (6) burst on landing, However, there was no loss of control of the plane and no one was hurt. The plane, in fact, is slated to resume its workload six hours later around 9:30, presumably after repairs; one extremely reputable source listed the 9:30 flight to be a different plane entirely.
George’s Point of View
When we have conflicting facts, we report and let you decide (to paraphrase FOX).
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Fred Seggie
What: FlyBe de Havilland Dash 8-400 Paris’ Charles De Gaulle Airport to Cardiff
Where: Gatwick
When: Jul 24th 2009
Who: 46 passengers and 4 crew
Why: Twenty minutes after a haze filled the cabin of the Flybe jet, the plane made an emergency landing in London. No injuries were reported and the smoke has been attributed (so far) to a generic mechanical problem. The flight caused a dozen diversions and a dozen delays while the plane obstructed the runway.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer K Dennis
What: Easyjet Airbus A319-100 en route from Bristol UK to Venice
Where: Venice
When: Jul 24th 2009
Who: one passenger, two crew members
Why: En route, the flight encountered turbulence.
Turbulence in-flight: wounded on board an A319 in Venice Tessera
Following the signal received by the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB, entity of the United Kingdom), which is informed by the airline concerned, the Agency initiated an investigation on the July 24 incident in which the Airbus G-A319 encountered strong turbulence resulting in injuries to two crew members and a passenger.
See the Italian press release
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Farzad Farajpour
What: Aria Air Ilyushin IL-62 en route from Tehran to Mashad. The plane was leased by Aria Air from Kazakhstan
Where: Mashad Iran
When: July 24 2009
Who: 153 aboard. 17 died in the accident.
Why: On landing, the nose gear did not deploy; the main wheels sparked on touchdown.
The dead include the first three rows, the flight crew and the cabin crew. Also, there were 19 injuries reported so far.
Aria Air’s managing director Mehdi Dadpay was among the victims
George’s Point of View
This was the second Iranian airliner crash within 10 days. Iran should put their foot down on all airlines, government owned or not to insure that every single plane that takes off is airworthy.
What: a four-seat commercial Robinson R-44 in Maryland
Where: west of the Washington County-Frederick County line, on the western slope of a ridge known as South Mountain, in the eastbound lanes of Interstate 70.
When: Thursday night
Who: 4 on board
Why: After a night of storms and fog, Washington County emergency services got a call around 10:30 pm regarding the crash.
Here’s a peek at the bill that is addressing the FAA’s immediate future; the bill and it’s summary are posted here. Actions contained in the bill are in response to the Colgan Air Crash.
According to THOMAS the library of Congress, there are 4 versions of Bill Number H.R.915 for the 111th Congress
1 . FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)[H.R.915.IH]
2 . FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 (Reported in House)[H.R.915.RH]
3 . FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.915.EH]
4 . FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 (Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House)[H.R.915.RFS]
The Mexican Aviacsa airline has been banned from US airspace by the FAA. Until the airline comes up to code and addresses the safety violations the FAA pointed out, it will not be allowed to fly over its former Las Vegas service area. Twenty-five of Aviacsa’s Boeing 737s are not deemed airworthy. Ironically, Aviacsa’s repair stations have retained their certification and can still work on planes.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Vlad Moskvin
What: Transaero Airlines Boeing 737-300 en route from Moscow Domodedovo to St. Petersburg (Russia)
Where: Moscow
When: Jul 20th 2009
Who: 41 passengers and 6 crew
Why: On takeoff, the right wing lost a 60 by 80 centimeter “leading edge fairing”. The flight continued as usual and fortunately landed safely in St. Petersburg.
The part was found on the Domodedova airport runway.
George’s Point of View
I’m sure that all of us have heard of the old saying (paraphrased from De Minimis Maxima ) the mighty oak from tiny acorns grow.
When one considers the question of pieces falling off of a plane, it seems simultaneously a tiny pointless thing and a huge issue. Consider a miniscule hole in the roof of our house is hardly worth considering; perhaps it is even invisible to the naked eye. But look what damage it causes when it rains. Somehow I don’t think “the leading edge” is like a car’s hubcap, mostly for decoration. It’s there to do something, and when that part is gone, that something is undone and will have consequences. Maybe letting in some moisture. Maybe causing corrosion down the road.
As a frequent passenger, I tend to be somewhat fatalistic about plane parts. Look, some engineer put that part there for a reason. I don’t know what that reason is, but if it’s good enough for the plane’s engineer, it is good enough for me, and I’d just as soon not fly without it. So many carriers get bad reputations based on careless maintenance of old planes, and this is just the kind of incident that gets people talking. (Old planes need MORE maintenance as they get older, just like old furniture, old machines, old cars, old people, old EVERYTHING.) Certainly Russia knows that maintenance deferred–especially on an airplane–is a recipe for disaster.
I just hope they replace the part before the little acorn of a problem grows into a great big oak tree of a pending disaster. This may be the first incident in a chain of events that unravels the whole plane.
The professional association The Association of European Airlines has published an official statement protesting how European airports are “jacking up their fees” at a time when consumers are seriously tightening their belts. Cited as an offender is the 8.4% increase charged by Frankfurt Airport, who is “pre-financing expansion through higher ticket prices.”
Norway by contrast has frozen its fees.
The Association of European Airlines (AEA) brings together 33 European established scheduled network carriers. These collectively carry 366 million passengers and 7 million tonnes of cargo each year, operating 2,617 aircraft serving 662 destinations in 162 countries with 11,585 flights a day. They provide around 394,200 jobs directly, and generate a total turnover of €79 billion.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Tommy Desmet
What: Olympic Airlines Boeing 737-400 en route from Alexandroupolis to Athens
Where: Alexandroupolis’ Democritus Airport
When: Jul 22nd
Who: 60 passengers
Why: The OA took off, and shortly afterwards flew through a flock of birds, several of which were ingested. The plane made an emergency landing back at the airport, after which passengers debarked and switched to other flights.
Pictured: a Gazprom Avia Mi-8 helicopter
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Senior
What: Gazprom Avia chartered by Lukoil Oil company Russian-built Mi-8 helicopter
Where: Volgograd
When: July 22, 2009
Who: 8 aboard: five engineers and one crew member killed. Two crewmembers survived
Why: The helicopter crashed into the ground and burst into flames. The crash is attributed to engine failure.
George’s Point of View
Maintenance, Maintenance, maintenance
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Andrew Hunt
What: Qantas Airbus A330-300 en route from Singapore to Perth
Where: Singapore
When: Jul 22nd 2009
Why: After takeoff in bad weather, the plane’s left wing was struck by lightning; however the flight continued to Perth without any issues.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Moritz Meier
What: Air France Airbus A340-300 en route from Boston,MA to Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport
Where: Boston’s Logan Airport
When: Jul 22nd 2009 (returned at 2 am)
Who: 125 people
Why: During or immediately after takeoff, the number 4 engine caught afire. The crew shut down the engine, put out the fire, and dumped fuel before safely landing at the airport, where emergency crews remained on standby for “hot brakes.”
George’s Point of View
Emergency procedures move like clockwork. 125 lives saved.
Pictured: A Northwest/Pinnacle Airlines Canadair CRJ-200
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Ben Wang
What: Northwest/Pinnacle Airlines Canadair CRJ-200 en route from La Crosse WI to Detroit.
Where: La Crosse
When: Jul 18th 2009
Why: When the control panel indicated nose gear issues, the pilot opted to return to La Crosse, where they made a safe landing.
Consultor americano que atuou no caso da TAM afirma que “projeto do jato é defeituoso”
Marcelo Ambrosio
Ainda que as causas do acidente com o A330 da Air France jamais venham ser realmente conhecidas, para as famílias das vítimas os caminhos para minorar a dor das perdas que sofreram estão abertos. Isso porque para o direito, em qualquer país, não há distinção sobre o motivo do desastre quando o que conta realmente é a morte de quem era transportado. Um dos maiores estrategistas do mundo nesse tipo de processo judicial esteve ontem no Rio para discutir com parentes de vítimas do voo AF447 e deixou claro esse recado: não importam as causas, o fabricante tem o ônus. O mexicano George Hatcher integra a equipe de um escritório de advocacia (Masry & Vittoe), cuja expertise mundial é a de arrancar de empresas de transporte somas altíssimas, a maioria das vezes, em acordos judiciais, como indenização por danos morais.
Hatcher costuma fazer extensas investigações particulares antes de se decidir por recomendar que o escritório atue nesse ou naquele incidente. No caso do desastre do Atlântico, cujo montante de pagamentos pode alcançar o valor recorde de US$ 700 milhões de dólares, o veredito já foi dado.
– Vamos processar a Airbus. Tenho uma lista de 700 pilotos com os quais costumo discutir. Dois deles são comandantes da ativa do A330 e, embora não se conheçam, disseram a mesma coisa: foram os computadores defeituosos os responsáveis pela perda da aeronave. O Airbus, na avaliação deles, é um projeto defeituoso – definiu o consultor, cuja atuação junto às famílias de vítimas do acidente com o Airbus da TAM em Congonhas o levou a um processo em fase adiantada em uma corte da Flórida, nos EUA. São 77 famílias representadas pelo escritório e uma vitória já alcançada, que foi o acordo com a companhia aérea.
O que define o caso é o fato de que algo falhou e que o passageiro nada podia fazer para alterar esse quadro. As companhias tem noção disso e tentam jogar com o tempo e com a possibilidade do menor dispêndio de dinheiro possível. A escolha dos tribunais americanos, especialmente na Flórida, segue a lógica da possibilidade de sucesso.
O consultor garante que lá, em casos como o do AF447 ou do A320 da TAM, decisões são mais céleres e rígidas. A idéia de ingressar com uma ação na França não está descartada, mas os EUA seguem como a 1ª opção. A justiça brasileira é séria, na avaliação do especialista, mas demorada. A remuneração do escritório segue as mesmas regras das demandas trabalhistas, com o cliente arcando com custos após a sentença. Os advogados ficam com 30%.
– As cortes da Flórida são rigorosas, tem uma simpatia pelo drama das famílias e não perdem tempo. Os acordos nos EUA são os mais altos no por isso. No caso do acidente de Congonhas são processos que somam US$ 100 millhões e a audiência na corte já está marcada, para março de 2010. Fizemos um acordo parcial com a TAM, mas há outros réus, como a BFGoodrich, responsável pelos freios, e a Pratt&Whitney, fabricante das turbinas, uma das quais estava com o reverso quebrado.
A ação relativa ao caso da Air France deve ser aberta também na Flórida, onde há um centro de treinamento do consórcio europeu e um escritório comercial.
– Incluiremos também a Honeywell, que fabricou os computadores e os produtore dos softwares. Desde 2001 há alertas sobre essa questão nos aviões e nada mudou. Foram feitos 5.200 jatos pela Airbus até hoje e eles já tiraram 2.600 vidas, 600 em três desastres – acrescenta.
O mais complicado é calcular o valor de cada indenização, valor que leva em conta fatores, como idade, expectativa de vida ativa, etc.
– Para a Justiça americana, não há limite para esse valor – completa Hatcher, que conhece todos os representantes nos 77 processos relativos à TAM. – Conversei muito com todos eles esse tempo.
Terça-feira, 21 de Julho de 2009 – 00:00
What: New Plymouth Aero Club Cessna 152 en route from North Shore to New Plymouth.
Where: Waikato, near Te Kuiti New Zealand
When: 21 JUL 2009 1930
Who: 1
Why: Missing plane; circumstances largely unknown.
At 7:30, the plane’s distress beacon was heard, and though the pilot’s last communication indicated an anticipated landing at New Plymouth by 7.50 pm, the plane never arrived at its intended destination. Search was dispached in the vicinity of the beacon 35 miles west of Te Kuiti, but weather (tornados forecast), low cloud cover, and difficult terrain proved an obstacle to the search.
What: KAVOK British Aerospace 3212 Jetstream 32 en route to Venezuela
Where: Metropolitano Airport, Venezuela
When: 19 JUL 2009
Who: 2
Why: On landing at Metropolitano, the plane suffered substantial damage.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer HGabor
What: Transavia Boeing 737-700 en route from Amsterdam to Ibiza Spain
Where: Amsterdam
When: Jul 20th 2009
Who: 148 passengers
Why: During takeoff, the flight struck a bird; it took about twenty minutes to land back at the airport where the plane was assessed to be undamaged; however, when it took off after a two hour inspection, the anti-ice system turned out to be damaged, and the plane returned to Amsterdam where the passengers were provided an alternative flight.
George’s Point of View
I wonder what exactly was wrong with the icing system, and why it was missed on the ground.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer Flavio Guerra
What: United Airlines Boeing 767-300 en route from London Heathrow to Chicago O’hare
Where: Keflavik, Iceland
When: 2:51 p.m. CDT Monday
Who: 200 passengers (178 passengers reported also )
Why: Just over three hours after takeoff, the flight landed at Keflavic, diverting because of smoke in the cockpit. There were no injuries; and passengers safely debarked onto the taxiway.
George’s Point of View
Online, the wife of a passenger aboard this flight said the following:
There was an electrical problem in the cockpit. You could smell it.The stewards took us through the emergency landing procedure. I was sitting in the exit row, so the steward went over it with me again. I knew it was serious when I saw the steward take out his passport and wallet from the overhead and put it on him. I got mine out and did the same. (So our bodies would be ID’d if we crashed.) We were flying at altitude and then we slowly descended to about 500 feet above the water. We didn’t hear anything from the pilot during this whole time. But you could see Iceland ahead. When we landed I gave a thumb’s up to a flight attendant. She smiled and said, everything’s fine, as if it we were never in danger. But then I saw her close her eyes and silently say a prayer. We exited the plane to ambulances and emergency equipment.
I called United customer service to ask about them getting me on another flight out of there. They said “we don’t fly to Iceland.”
I said, now you do!This is attributed to the husband of Julia McEvoy.
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact Photographer George Canciani
What: Lufthansa A346 en route from Newark, NJ to Munich
Where: Newark NJ
When: Jul 19th 2009
Why: Near Boston, the plane developed electrical problems; and the crew decided to return to Newark. The passengers debarked and were only delayed two and a half hours before being permitted to continue their flight.
The Brazilian Consulate in Paris has accused Tam of negligence when loading planes in Brazilian airports. The consul said that even having paid a total of € 83 thousand in fines for transporting passengers with inadequate documentation to enter France, [Tam] did not pay attention to requirements of the Direction of French Border Police.
On the Tam website, Brazilian diplomats found incomplete information regarding requisite documents required by the French government to allow entry into France. Paris headquarters could not comment on these developments without permission from São Paulo.
