10 AUG 2009 _______________________________________ *Fatal midair crash over Hudson raises questions *Calls to restrict flight corridor over Hudson *Two arrested for airplane laser attacks (Australia) *Suspected bird strike forces NC emergency landing *FAA Criticized Over RNAV/RNP Strategy *NTSB issues recommendations on sleep apnea and fatigue *Pinnacle plans to relocate Colgan's headquarters to Memphis *Boeing prepares to begin 'challenging' 787 structural modification effort *ACSF INDUSTRY AUDIT STANDARD GAINS MOMENTUM *************************************** Fatal midair crash over Hudson raises questions By Alan Levin, USA TODAY The weekend midair collision between a sightseeing helicopter and a small plane over the Hudson River is the latest accident to involve an industry plagued by safety problems and calls for improved oversight, according to federal investigators. On Sunday, divers retrieved a helicopter and four more bodies, but little is known about why a Liberty Helicopter Tours flight collided with a small plane, destroying both aircraft and killing nine. The crash is at least the 14th involving a chartered sightseeing flight since 2000, according to National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) records. Including Saturday's collision, the accidents have killed 61 people. "The air-tour business has been the subject of NTSB interest for 20 years," said Peter Goelz, former managing director of the safety board. "There is nothing particularly complex in the majority of the accidents," Goelz said. "They fall back on pilot errors. Flying too close to another aircraft. Flying in weather they shouldn't be flying in. These are all completely avoidable accidents." A government watchdog agency said last month that the air-tour industry is only one segment of the charter flight business that does not receive adequate oversight by the Federal Aviation Administration. The Transportation Department's inspector general said these so-called "on-demand" flights tend to be riskier than scheduled airlines, yet receive fewer inspections and have less strict standards. Tracking fatalities In 2007 and 2008, there were 33 fatal crashes on charter flights, killing 109 people, the report states. No passengers died on a scheduled airline flight in the same period. "The number of fatalities from on-demand operations makes it imperative that FAA take action," the report said. FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said the agency had taken several steps in recent years to improve safety in the air-tour industry, particularly in Hawaii, where many of the accidents have occurred. In its response to the inspector general, the FAA said it agreed with the findings. The National Air Transportation Association, which represents charter companies, said the report contains inaccuracies, but the group called for safety improvements in the industry. For the second time this year, New York and New Jersey were transfixed by a dramatic aircraft accident on the Hudson River. Last January, a crippled US Airways Airbus A320 splashed down into the river after striking birds. Everyone on board survived and it was dubbed the "Miracle on the Hudson." On Saturday, a Piper PA-32 Saratoga private plane and a Eurocopter AS 350 helicopter hit with such force that they broke into pieces and plummeted into the murky waters of the river near the New Jersey shoreline. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg called the accident "unsurvivable." Three members of a Pennsylvania family in the single-engine plane, five tourists from Italy on the helicopter and the helicopter pilot died. Seven bodies had been recovered by Sunday, NTSB Chairwoman Debbie Hersman said. The planes were flying in a corridor reserved for small private planes and helicopters flying below 1,100 feet over the river. Pilots are responsible for avoiding other traffic. They are encouraged to announce themselves over a radio frequency reserved for aircraft in the area, said Bruce Landsberg, president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association's Air Safety Foundation. Another nearby helicopter pilot radioed the tour pilot to warn him, but there was no response, Hersman said. Factors in other crashes The NTSB has repeatedly urged the FAA and tour operators to improve safety, prompted by these findings: .Sept. 23, 2005, three passengers drowned in the ocean off Kauai after their helicopter crashed. The helicopter was not equipped with emergency floats, and it sank so quickly that some passengers did not have time to undo their seatbelts. .Sept. 24, 2004, four passengers and a pilot died when a tour helicopter struck a mountain on Kauai after flying into bad weather. The pilot was inexperienced with the weather, and the company made pilots work eight hours without a break. .Sept. 20, 2003, six tourists and a pilot died near the Grand Canyon. The sightseeing pilot had frequently been reckless, but the tour operator had not followed up. Liberty Helicopter Tours has had four other accidents with no serious injuries in the New York area since 2001, according to NTSB records. A woman who answered the phone Sunday at Liberty said that nobody at the company could comment. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-09-aircollision_N.htm *************** Calls to restrict flight corridor over Hudson Schumer says air space above river poses safety and security risk "Basically, they are responsible for looking out for each other." Salac Calls to restrict flights over the busy Hudson River corridor grew yesterday as police divers continued to recover bodies from Saturday's midair crash of a private plane and a helicopter carrying tourists. The "virtually unregulated" airspace poses safety and security risks, said Sen. Charles Schumer. The first 1,100 feet above the Hudson is a freewheeling highway for low-flying small aircraft, out of the reach of air-traffic controllers. "Pilots operate under visual flight rules," said FAA spokeswoman Arlene Salac. "Basically, they're responsible for looking out for each other." Pilots entering the airspace must announce their location and route on a common radio frequency. A pilot on the ground had used the radio to warn the helicopter of the approaching flight, but received no response. Also on the ground was Italian tourist Silvia Rigamonti, who decided at the last minute not to fly in the helicopter with her husband and son. Nine people are believed to be dead. Helicopter flights for tourists from the 30th Street Heliport are being phased out by April 1, 2010, under a legal settlement reached last year between the operators and community groups. The agreement cut the flights to 12,500 from June to next March. The previous year saw 25,000 tourist flights, many lasting no more than 15 minutes. http://www.metro.us/us/article/2009/08/10/04/5137-82/index.xml *************** Two arrested for airplane laser attacks (Australia) TWO men have been charged with shining a laser light at a plane as it approached Adelaide Airport. The pair also allegedly shone the light at road users south of Adelaide, a police spokesman said today. Police responded to reports of a laser light being shone at a commercial aircraft about 7.20pm (CST) yesterday. Some 40 minutes later, they arrested a 26-year-old and a 28-year-old at Victor Harbor, south of Adelaide. The men, both from northern Adelaide suburbs, have been charged with prejudicing the safe operation of an aircraft, acts to endanger life and carrying an offensive weapon. http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25907501-5005961,00.html *************** Suspected bird strike forces NC emergency landing RALEIGH, N.C.(AP) - A suspected bird strike shortly after takeoff forced a Northwest Airlines flight to make an emergency landing Sunday at Raleigh-Durham International Airport, officials said. No one was injured. Flight 1546 took off for Minneapolis just before 9 a.m. but quickly landed after the pilot heard a noise, airport spokeswoman Mindy Hamlin said. Northwest spokeswoman Leslie Parker said a bird apparently struck the left engine and pilots shut it down. Northwest was rebooking passengers on other flights. Parker said the plane had 148 passengers and five crew members. The type of bird and other details were not immediately released. Bird-aircraft collisions are not unusual, but they are being more scrutinized since Charlotte-bound US Airways Flight 1549 ditched into the Hudson River in January after striking a flock of Canada geese after takeoff from New York's LaGuardia Airport. Both engines on that aircraft were knocked out and all 155 people aboard survived. An April report from the Federal Aviation Administration found that Raleigh-Durham's airport has had six substantial incidents of birds colliding with planes between 1990 and this year, with the most recent case in 2002. Hamlin has said the airport actively guards its property from geese through a wildlife management program that includes the use of pyrotechnics to frighten birds away. Birds are sometimes captured and relocated safely away from the airport with the help of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, she added. ************** FAA Criticized Over RNAV/RNP Strategy The FAA is being accused of pursuing quantity over quality in a crucial NextGen initiative, with critics saying the agency is overlooking the areas of greatest need in favor of quick deployment. This is an ironic twist for an agency that is typically faulted for not moving fast enough on its modernization efforts. The FAA is exceeding its goals for rolling out new GPS-based airport approaches, but government and industry observers say it is not providing sufficient improvements. The agency is so far concentrating on overlays of existing routes rather than creating the new flight paths that will yield the most reductions in delays and fuel consumption. Because of the focus on overlays, the airline industry "is dissatisfied with the overall quality of [these] procedures, and they are not widely used," according to the U.S. Transportation Dept.'s Office of Inspector General (IG). The Air Transport Assn. (ATA) also believes there is "minimal value" in the overlay strategy, and the FAA should instead be using these new tools for sweeping redesigns of airspace. Meanwhile, the FAA and research organization Mitre Corp. stress the overlay approaches are producing substantial operational and safety benefits for airlines. They also provide savings much more quickly than the more advanced route designs, which require environmental assessments that can take years to complete. The new routes are based on Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance. RNAV/RNP procedures use satellite-based navigation and aircraft flight management systems to fly very accurate paths custom-made for different airports or air routes. RNP is more precise and is most often used for approaches, while RNAV is typically employed for departures and en-route paths. Ann Calvaresi-Barr, the IG's principal assistant inspector general, notes that RNAV/RNP procedures represent "the legs to the table - without them, NextGen will not function." Overlays allow existing approaches to be flown with greater precision and in all weather conditions. The real efficiency gains, however, come from the creation of more advanced RNP approaches, including curved flight paths, that will deconflict congested airspace. Since 2002, the FAA has published 159 RNAV routes, 270 RNAV arrival and departure procedures, and 163 RNP approaches. By the end of Fiscal 2009, the agency expects to have finished another 48 RNAV routes, 35 RNAV arrival and departure procedures, and 29 RNP approaches. While these numbers are impressive, Calvaresi-Barr notes they are almost all overlays that can be deployed much more quickly than new routes - making it easier to meet the FAA's quantity-based targets. The agency should focus more on quality instead of totals, and do a better job in prioritizing the new RNAV/RNP routes, she says. A continued reliance on overlays "is not going to get us the benefits that can be realized from these two systems . . . and is clearly not going to get us to what the NextGen goals are." The ATA wants to see RNP used to redesign whole blocks of airspace, particularly in the New York metropolitan area. Full implementation of RNP there would reduce conflicts between traffic destined for the four major airports in this region, says the ATA. "Doing this would be difficult, but the results would be worth the effort." The FAA has been attempting to redesign the New York airspace, but has been stymied by local opposition. Brian Will, American Airlines' program manager for Boeing 777s and 737s, agrees that the FAA's overlay procedures have been of little use to airlines so far. They are typically at airports that already have instrument approaches, whereas American would like to see RNAV/RNP procedures created for airports situated in mountainous terrain that have no instrument landing systems. The RNP approaches that are providing value are those introduced by airlines themselves, Will says. A handful of third-party developers and airlines - including American - are certified to create these special-use procedures. Will says the FAA committed to a fairly aggressive production schedule for RNAV/RNP procedures. "Their report card is [based on] whether they are making these numbers," he notes. FAA officials stress that the overlay approaches are far more than just a shortcut to boost the agency's numbers. Optimizing existing approaches and other routes can lead to major savings for carriers, the agency says. As well as making flight paths more efficient, they also allow landings in bad visibility, resulting in fewer diversions. The development of RNAV/RNP procedures "is a relatively young program" that began in 2002, says FAA Senior Vice President for Operations Richard Day. Overlays have been the priority in the early stages, but now the agency wants to shift to routes that would maximize benefits. It also wants to focus on integrated plans that look at RNP as part of a wider system, instead of on a runway-by-runway basis. Day says this will "accommodate our intent to accelerate NextGen as much as possible." Day notes that the FAA has "received increasing requests to add or accelerate new RNAV/RNP procedures more widely." However, this must be done "carefully and methodically to ensure a cohesive system," he cautions. Mitre Corp. also stresses the improvements gained from the RNP/RNAV procedures installed so far. To call the new routes overlays is actually an oversimplification, says Hassan Shahidi, Mitre's associate director for RNP/RNAV. While they may follow the same general path as the existing approaches, they do not have the exact altitude or route, he says. There are differences in vertical profile in particular, allowing a much more fuel efficient climb or descent. New RNP approaches at Portland (Ore.) International Airport provide a good example (see image, p. 43). Previously, there was a wide variation in the approach paths to which aircraft were vectored, while the RNP approaches are much more precise and on average slightly shorter. This adds up to substantial fuel savings over a year, as well as increasing safety and improving low-visibility operations. Shahidi says there are many cases where RNP approaches can be introduced to provide early advantages while a more comprehensive airspace redesign is undertaken. "The FAA can implement them earlier, tweaking flight paths a little and making altitude more efficient," he notes. "They can squeeze a little more out of procedures, and for airlines these days, every little bit matters." Other airports highlight both the limitations and advantages of RNAV/RNP efforts so far. At Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, for example, new RNAV departure routes have allowed 9-12 additional flight per hour, Mitre estimates. In addition to delay and efficiency benefits, they have also reduced controller workload by halving voice communications. However, the IG says inadequate controller and pilot training limits the full and effective use of these routes. There have been "operational problems" at both Atlanta and Dallas/Fort Worth due to pilots entering incorrect waypoint data and not flying the right path. Also, the FAA has yet to update its policies for controllers and pilots to allow RNP procedures to be used at airports with parallel runways, the IG says. Ten RNP procedures were introduced at Atlanta in 2007, but controllers have not used them yet for this reason. The agency is evaluating whether the parallel runway policies can be safely updated. Even so, the IG notes that airlines are not interested in these procedures because they are overlays. Opinions also differ regarding an RNP approach at Palm Springs, Calif. The IG says it is almost never used because its design does not provide any benefits. This shows that the FAA, in conjunction with stakeholders, must undertake more thorough cost-benefit analyses, according to the IG. However, Mitre says this approach has dramatically improved access to the airport during instrument weather conditions. Alaska Airlines reports at least 20 instances since 2005 in which the RNP approach allowed a landing instead of a diversion to another airport. There are many other question marks over the future use of RNP. One of them is airline equipage levels. Mitre estimates that while about 90% of airliners are equipped for RNAV, that total drops to 60% for RNP-equipped aircraft and 40% for more advanced RNP procedures. The FAA will be confronted with a mix of equipped and nonequipped aircraft, and it will need to figure out how to move to a "best equipped, best served" policy. Another concern for both the FAA and the IG is the potential proliferation of special-use RNP procedures created for specific airlines. Too many of these would further burden air traffic controllers and increase the complexity of the ATC system. The role of third-party developers is unclear and needs clarification, the IG says. The FAA has approved some companies, including Jeppesen and Naverus, to develop RNP approaches. So far, they have been contracted by airlines to create special-use procedures. But their role in the development of public procedures remains unclear, the IG says. The FAA should establish a policy "on how and to what extent" third parties will be used in such efforts, and also ensure effective oversight. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/aw081009p3.xml&head line=FAA%20Criticized%20Over%20RNAV/RNP%20Strategy&channel=awst *************** NTSB issues recommendations on sleep apnea and fatigue Following the conclusion of its investigation of go! pilots that fell asleep during February 2008 flight, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has issued six recommendations to FAA related to pilot fatigue and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The pilots were operating a CRJ200 on a flight from Honolulu to Hilo, Hawaii. But the aircraft flew 26nm beyond Hilo after the captain and first officer fell asleep at cruise altitude. The crew awoke and returned to Hilo. go! is a subsidiary of US regional operator Mesa Airlines. After the incident the captain was diagnosed with severe OSA, and NTSB raised separate questions over crew work schedules contributing to fatigue. In its recommendation letter to FAA NTSB highlights evidence that civilian pilots are significantly underdiagnosed for sleep apnea, even though they typically suffer from more risk factors associated with the condition including obesity and hypertension. Citing research from the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, NTSB says at least 7% of adults suffer from at least moderate OSA. "By contrast records maintained by the FAA of certified pilots document reported OSA in only 0.5%, 0.6% and 0.7% of first, second and third class medical applicants, respectively," the board states. "The US Air Force, by comparison, has diagnosed approximately 1% of its active pilot population with OSA, about double the rate reported by civilian commercial pilots to the FAA." NTSB states FAA does not provide guidance to aviation medical examiners outlining risk factors for OSA, nor does FAA routinely use medication information collected from examinations to screen for the condition. Three of NTSB's six recommendations are specifically related to OSA, including modifying the airman medical certificate to elicit specific information about a previous diagnosis of the condition and risk factors for the condition, creating a programme that identifies pilots with a high-risk for the condition to obtain necessary treatment and develop and distribute guidance for pilots, employee and physicians on identifying and treating high-risk individuals. The investigation of the go! pilots also triggered concern about pilot work schedules after it was determined it was third consecutive day the pilots started duty at 0540. "It is well established that early-morning start times are associated with sleep duration and increased fatigue," says NTSB, citing a 1998 North Atlantic Treaty Organization study that found pilots who were required to report for duty before 0600 slept less than six hours and had poorer quality sleep. NTSB also says the UK adopted new work limits for commercial pilots designed to account for fatigue-related scheduling characteristics. The board says it is unclear whether the schedule the go! pilots worked the day of the incident would have been permitted. "However, the incident flight crewmembers' recent work history suggests that their actual duty times were typically longer than nine hours," the board says. The remaining three NTSB recommendations centre on fatigue. The board is urging FAA to conduct research on how pilot fatigue is affected by unique characteristics of short-haul flying, and identify methods to reduce those effects. NTSB believes FAA should issue interim guidance with relevant safety information stemming from the research as it becomes available. Once the research is complete, the board recommends that FAA should require operators of short-haul flights, multi-segment flights to incorporate the interim guidance into their operating specifications. "Since 1989, the NTSB has highlighted the need to change flight and duty time regulations to reduce fatigue in commercial fight operations," the board states. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news ************** Pinnacle plans to relocate Colgan's headquarters to Memphis US regional Colgan Air will relocate its headquarters from Manassas, Virginia to Memphis, Tennessee, where parent company Pinnacle Airlines is headquartered. Colgan's leadership team and system operations control centre will begin moving by the end of 2009 as Pinnacle finalises its subsidiary's relocation plans this quarter. Pinnacle estimates the cost of relocation, training and infrastructure associated with the move at roughly $3 million. But Pinnacle is "negotiating with state and local authorities to obtain certain long-term incentives that will help offset the cost of relocating Colgan's headquarters", the company said today in its quarterly report. Pinnacle says the move was motivated by a lower cost of living and the opportunity to enhance the sharing of operational and safety "best practices" between Pinnacle and Colgan. The focus on sharing operational and safety practices follows a fatal Colgan Bombardier Q400 crash on approach to Buffalo during the first quarter. The accident prompted congressional and regulatory scrutiny of the regional airline industry and raised concerns about pilot fatigue and training. Last month, US House lawmakers introduced a bill to force the FAA and air carriers to rapidly boost regional airline safety through enhanced training and hiring requirements, fatigue countermeasures other interventions. Also in July, the FAA stepped up pressure on carriers to adopt voluntary safety schemes and the US Office of Inspector General (OIG) began auditing FAA regulations and domestic airline policies regarding crew rest and fatigue. The inspection was at the request of the US Senate commerce, science, and transportation committee and the Senate aviation subcommittee. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news *************** Boeing prepares to begin 'challenging' 787 structural modification effort Boeing's preparations for the installation of the 787 side-of-body modification are advancing as more details emerge about the challenge the airframer faces to gain access and incorporate the fix. Meanwhile, the pace of production continues to accelerate. The 787 static test airframe, on which the problems were first discovered, is being prepared for modification, programme sources confirm. Once installed, the wings will again undergo flex testing to validate the static strength of the new structure. Boeing engineers and assembly crews will face a challenge to install the reinforcement as the working area is significantly constrained, and has been described by programme sources as a series of "interconnected phone booths laying on their side". The area of repair is centred on two areas on both sides of the aircraft. The upper structure of both Section 11 (centre wingbox) and Section 12 (wingbox) will be reinforced where they meet at the side of the body. On the Section 12 side of the fix, crews will work inside a roughly 5m (16ft)-long space at the wing root, less than 2m high and about 1m wide. The areas on the top of these "phone booths" requiring reinforcement are 17I-beam stringers on Section 12 and another 18 on Section 11. They are tight, providing just 7-10cm (3-4in) clearance from the top skin of the wing. Preparations for the first two 787s differ from the other four flight-test aircraft because their working areas inside the centre fuel tank had been fully closed out and fuelled for engine runs. Meanwhile, Boeing continues to increase the pace of section deliveries to the Everett assembly line. Final assembly of the eighth aircraft (ZA101) is under way, although the upper panels of the final body join, sources say, will be done in an incomplete way to allow easier access for the modification work. The Section 11 part of the fix is expected to be incorporated at Global Aeronautica's plant in Charleston, South Carolina, from the fifteenth aircraft. Section 12 modifications will continue to be completed in Everett as aspects of the modification require all structures to be in place for the wing-to-body join process, sources say. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news *************** ACSF INDUSTRY AUDIT STANDARD GAINS MOMENTUM Alexandria, VA, June 10, 2009 - Support for the Air Charter Safety Foundation's (ACSF) Industry Audit Standard is growing within the industry. Since the program became available earlier this year, the Industry Audit Standard (IAS) has experienced rapid growth that has put the IAS on the path toward fulfilling its goal of being the single measure of safety and compliance for air charter and shared aircraft ownership companies. IAS Sets The Standard The ACSF Industry Audit Standard is the only audit program on the market today that comprehensively evaluates both an operator's Safety Management System (SMS) and its Part 135 regulatory compliance. The IAS is designed to position an operator, through a single audit, to gain world-wide recognition of its SMS program. The IAS is also the only program that evaluates operators every 24 months rather than annually, minimizing the administrative burden on operators and program managers. Operators Have Embraced IAS Beginning with the first full ACSF audit, conducted at Jet Solutions, LLC, industry support has only grown. Last March, ACSF was pleased to announce it reached an agreement with Executive Jet Management to be the exclusive provider of independent audits for their charter vendors. At this time, there are more than 30 audits scheduled over the next 12 months and new operators are contacting ACSF to learn more and schedule their own audit. Auditors Have Joined With ACSF ACSF audits are managed by the foundation and performed by companies whose auditors have completed ACSF IAS training. All audits are scheduled with ACSF, which then assigns an audit company to complete the IAS. These well-respected and established aviation audit firms have joined with ACSF: BlackBird Aero Services CharterX/Wyvern Morten, Beyer & Agnew R. Dixon Speas Associates Simat, Helliesen & Eichner, Inc. (SH&E) ACSF Launches Registry Database When the operator successfully completes the IAS, the ACSF recognizes them as an IAS Registered Operator. These operators are provided with the IAS Registered Operator logo to use on their Web site and marketing materials. Access to the registry to verify an operator's status and confirm key details is available at www.acsf.aero/registry. http://www.acsf.aero/en/rel/44/ *************** Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC