Flight Safety Information August 9, 2010 - No. 158 In This Issue NTSB Asks EASA To Update Cert Standards, Eagle strike in jet's engine halts Alaska flight FAA Orders Boeing 747 Fix NTSB Offer Training On Aircraft Accident Emergency Communications... FAA Proposes Hazmat Civil Penalties Against 11 Companies Cockpit-voice record on crashed An-24 incomplete ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NTSB Asks EASA To Update Cert Standards, Voices Concerns Over Airbus Safety Sun, 08 Aug '10 NTSB Suspects Problems in Airbus 300 Series Airplanes The controversy continues over the airworthiness of the Airbus 300 series airplane's vertical stabilizer and rudder design. With this concern specifically noted, the NTSB has issued Safety Recommendation A-10-119 and -120 and Reiteration of NTSB Safety Recommendation A-04-63. While the NTSB brought up their findings in the November 12, 2001 crash of an Airbus A300-605R,1 N14053, operated as American Airlines flight 587, they also specified concerns over another incident... albeit one far less tragic. The NTSB specified that on January 10, 2008, about 0848 central standard time, an Airbus Industrie A319, Canadian registration C-GBHZ, operated as Air Canada flight 190, experienced an in-flight upset after encountering wake turbulence from a 747 while climbing from flight level (FL) 360 to FL370.5 The flight crew declared an emergency and diverted the flight to Calgary, where it landed uneventfully. Of the 5 crewmembers and 83 passengers on board, 2 crewmembers and 8 passengers sustained minor injuries, and 3 passengers sustained serious injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed for the scheduled domestic passenger flight from Victoria International Airport, British Columbia, Canada, to Toronto Pearson International Airport, Ontario, Canada. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada investigated this accident; the NTSB and Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses provided accredited representatives and technical advisors to the investigation. Data from the flight data recorder (FDR) indicate that, during the upset, the airplane experienced several roll and vertical load factor oscillations and lost about 1,000 feet of altitude. Although the autopilot was engaged during the start of the wake vortex encounter, after about 3 seconds, the autopilot was disengaged, and there was a series of large oscillatory inputs on the left side-stick controller.7 In addition, the FDR recorded a series of three to four alternating rudder pedal inputs (right pedal, then left pedal) over the next 15 seconds. During these inputs, the airplane continued to oscillate in roll, reaching a maximum roll of 55º. At the same time, the recorded acceleration was also oscillating, with peaks of -0.46 G to +0.49 G of lateral load factor and peaks of -0.76 G to +1.57 G of vertical load factor. Because of the severity of the upset, following the emergency landing at Calgary, the airplane was grounded pending an inspection by Airbus engineers. During an extensive inspection, the vertical stabilizer was removed from the airplane and scanned ultrasonically to inspect for damage to the stabilizer's composite components. No damage was found, and the stabilizer was reattached and the airplane returned to service. Although no damage to the stabilizer was found, an analysis of the accident performed by Airbus indicated that the rear vertical stabilizer attachment fitting sustained loads 29 percent above its design limit load. Simulation work performed by Airbus revealed that these high loads were primarily the result of the flight crew's series of alternating rudder pedal inputs and were not the result of the wake turbulence. Information and animations provided by Airbus showed that if the pilots had not made any control inputs after the wake encounter, the airplane would have righted itself with minimum altitude loss and g-loading. Vertical Stab of AA587 Via these new documents, the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the European Aviation Safety Agency: Modify European Aviation Safety Agency Certification Specifications for Large Aeroplanes CS-25 to ensure safe handling qualities in the yaw axis throughout the flight envelope, including limits for rudder pedal sensitivity. (A-10-119) After the yaw axis certification standard recommended in Safety Recommendation A-10-119 has been established, review the designs of existing airplanes to determine if they meet the standard. For existing airplane designs that do not meet the standard, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) should determine if the airplanes would be adequately protected from the adverse effects of a potential aircraft-pilot coupling (APC) after rudder inputs at all airspeeds. If adequate protection does not exist, EASA should require modifications, as necessary, to provide the airplanes with increased protection from the adverse effects of a potential APC after rudder inputs at high airspeeds. (A-10-120) Vertical Stab of AA587 In addition, the National Transportation Safety Board reiterates the following recommendation to the European Aviation Safety Agency: Review the options for modifying the Airbus A300-600 and the Airbus A310 to provide increased protection from potentially hazardous rudder pedal inputs at high airspeeds and, on the basis of this review, require modifications to the A300-600 and A310 to provide increased protection from potentially hazardous rudder pedal inputs at high airspeeds. (A-04-63) FMI: www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2010/A-10-119-120.pdf Back to Top ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Eagle strike in jet's engine halts Alaska flight ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP)- An eagle was sucked into an engine of an Alaska Airlines jet as the aircraft was taking off from a small southeast Alaska town Sunday, causing the flight to be aborted. Seattle-bound Flight 68 was approaching takeoff speed when the eagle was ingested into the left engine shortly after 10 a.m. in Sitka. None of the 134 passengers or five crew members was hurt. "We were roaring down the runway and about the time they'd be picking the nose up, we hear a big kaboom," said passenger Bill Shake of Portland, Ore. "It sounded like a flat tire." Shake - traveling home after an annual fishing trip - said another in his large group saw two bursts of flames coming from the engine. Any shaking of the aircraft seemed to come from the sudden braking on the runway, said Shake, 68, a retired U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service official. "I've flown lots and lots of miles and I've never had anything like this happen," he said. "I've had bad weather and all those kinds of things, but not a bird strike." The bird collision automatically shut off the plane's engine, airline spokesman Paul McElroy said. McElroy said the jet braked to a stop about 3,000 feet from the end of the 6,500-foot runway, which ends at the water's edge. The plane then taxied back to the terminal with its single working engine. The airline sent a replacement plane from Anchorage to continue the flight. It departed from Sitka about 4 p.m Sunday. Meanwhile, aircraft mechanics were inspecting the sidelined Boeing 737-400 for damage. McElroy said he didn't know how often such bird strikes occurred. "It's certainly not unheard of but it is unusual," he said. Shake praised the pilot and co-pilot for doing "a tremendous job" safely stopping the plane. He said passengers applauded when the pilot stepped out of the cockpit and told them they were turning back because of the eagle strike. ***** Date: 08-AUG-2010 Time: 10:00 local Type: Boeing 737-490 Operator: Alaska Airlines Registration: N708AS C/n / msn: 28895/3098 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 139 Other fatalities: 0 Airplane damage: Minor Location: Sitka Rocky Gutierrez Airport (SIT/PASI), AK - United States of America Phase: Take off Nature: Domestic Scheduled Passenger Departure airport: Sitka Rocky Gutierrez Airport - SIT/PASI Destination airport: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport - SEA-KSEA Narrative: The plane ingested an eagle into it's port engine which shut down. Take off was aborted and the aircraft taxied back to the terminal on its remaining fucntioing engine. www.aviation-safety.net Back to Top ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FAA Orders Boeing 747 Fix By ANDY PASZTOR Concerned about potentially hazardous takeoff problems affecting many of the largest Boeing 747 airliners, U.S. air-safety regulators have proposed mandatory fixes to ensure the jumbo jets will climb properly. The Federal Aviation Administration last week moved to require certain engine-related wiring changes to Boeing 747-400 models. The fixes, according to the agency, are necessary to avoid potentially dangerous retraction of flaps, or panels that deploy from the wings to provide extra lift during takeoffs. The FAA and manufacturer Boeing Co. discovered that during takeoffs, sensors on a piece of equipment called thrust-reversers can prompt some leading-edge flaps to retract without pilot commands. Thrust-reversers are designed to muffle or redirect air coming out of the engine, but they are supposed to be deployed only after touchdown. Retracting flaps during critical early phases of flight "could result in reduced climb performance and consequent collision with terrain and obstacles," according to the FAA. The agency's proposed directive, issued last week, covers nearly 100 Boeing 747s flown by U.S. carriers and equipped with engines manufactured by both General Electric Co. and the Pratt & Whitney unit of United Technologies Corp. Many more planes flown by foreign carriers eventually will be covered by similar directives expected to be issued by air-safety regulators in Europe and elsewhere. The goal is to prevent small movements of thrust-reverser parts during takeoffs from triggering flap retractions. A Boeing spokeswoman said Sunday that the company itself issued service bulletins earlier this year urging airlines to voluntarily make the modifications. But only the FAA can mandate U.S. carriers to make such fixes. U.S. aviation regulators previously ordered similar fixes to Boeing 747-400 jets equipped with engines manufactured by Rolls-Royce PLC. Those modifications were mandated to become effective immediately because the planes with Rolls-Royce engines appeared especially prone to flap retractions. In one incident, according to the FAA, the pilots of one airline it didn't identify reported receiving stall warnings on a Boeing 747-400 jetliner shortly after takeoff when the leading edge flaps retracted on their own, and again when the flaps were redeployed automatically. The incident involved a Rolls-Royce engine, and the FAA didn't provide a date. http://online.wsj.com/ [http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103606529321&s=6053&e=0016S-WtrHKCW_AxhdyCwescnXw267L5a09EdiIvq4Z-OwKlziaa_RgLaNej9l3m06_r5JK4Pa5rbr42QJeg6aqdSTIi_ETvQ0O6ivLQK_g5KsiE_GmKrMcIg==] Back to Top ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NTSB Offer Training On Aircraft Accident Emergency Communications August 9, 2010 - The National Transportation Safety Board is devoting two days at its Training Center to offer guidance to aviation public affairs professionals on how to most effectively manage emergency communications following a major aircraft accident or incident. The training will be offered on October 7-8, 2010, at the NTSB Training Center in Ashburn, Virginia, (near Washington, D.C.) and is aimed at communications professionals working with airports, airlines and corporations with aviation departments. Representatives from the NTSB Office of Public Affairs will explain the process by which investigation-related information is verified and released to the news media and the family members of those affected by a major accident. Members of the national news media will be there to discuss how previous accidents have been covered and to talk about how social media is changing how breaking news is disseminated and consumed. The NTSB Training Center is the training facility for the National Transportation Safety Board, an independent federal agency that investigates all civil aviation accidents in the United States and selected accidents in other modes of transportation. The Training Center provides training for NTSB investigators and others from the transportation community to improve their practice of accident investigation techniques. The curriculum promotes independent, objective, and technically advanced accident investigations that will enhance the safety of all modes of transportation. The Mission of the NTSB Training Center is to promote safe transport by ensuring and improving the quality of accident investigation through critical thought, instruction, and research. Communicating lessons learned, fostering the exchange of new ideas and new experience, and advocating operational excellence. Providing a modern platform for accident reconstruction and evaluation, utilizing its high-quality training resources to facilitate family assistance and first responder programs, sister agency instruction, and other compatible federal activity. Airport and airline communications professionals will provide case studies on how communications during previous aircraft incidents and accidents were handled. Located on the Virginia campus of The George Washington University in Ashburn, the Training Center is ten miles from Washington Dulles Airport and 30 miles from Washington, D.C. Those interested in learning more should see the complete description of the training, registration information, and cost to attend at: http://www.ntsb.gov/TC/CourseInfo/PA302_2010.htm Back to Top ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FAA Proposes Hazmat Civil Penalties Against 11 Companies August 9, 2010 - The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing civil penalties ranging from $54,000 to $91,000 against 11 companies for alleged violations of Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations. Boston Scientific Corporation of Natick, Mass, was fined $91,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing medical-grade silicone fluid, a flammable liquid, to DHL for transportation by air from Alajuela, Costa Rica, to Boston Scientific headquarters, Oct. 23, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. DHL employees at its Cincinnati sorting hub discovered the leaking package. Westfield Coatings Corp., of Westfield, Mass., was fined $78,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing paint, a flammable liquid, for transportation by air from Westfield to Hudson, N.C., August 11, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the non-hazardous material leaking from the package. Fragrance Resources, Inc., of Clifton, N.J., was fined $54,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing a flammable liquid for transportation by air from Clifton to Ft Lauderdale, Fla., Dec. 23, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the package. Flight Options, LLC of Cleveland, was fined $65,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing isopropyl alcohol, a flammable liquid, to UPS for transportation by air from Cleveland to Las Vegas, Sept. 9, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the leaking package. Hammelman Corporation, Dayton, Ohio, was $54,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing methanol, a flammable liquid, for transportation by air from Pompano Beach, Fla., to Dayton, March 23, 2010. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the leaking package. Kemet Electronics Corporation of Simpsonville, S.C. was fined $58,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing silver paint, a flammable liquid, to UPS for transportation by air from Brownsville, Texas to Simpsonville, Aug. 20, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the leaking package. MSI Aircraft MTC SVS International, GMBH of Ruesselsheim, Germany, was fined $56,000 against for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing a fuel control unit, to FedEx for transportation by air from Ruesselsheim to Miami, May 22, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. A fuel control unit containing jet fuel is considered a hazardous material. FedEx employees at Fort Lauderdale discovered the shipment was leaking. Federal Express of Memphis, Tenn., was fined $65,000 for allegedly accepting a fiberboard box containing an unspecified toxic, corrosive liquid classified as a poison, for transportation by air from Oxford, Ala., to Chino Calif., April 1, 2010. An FAA hazardous materials special agent identified the mislabeled shipment before it could be loaded on an aircraft. Vitacost of Lexington, N.C., was fined $54,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing a flammable liquid and non-hazardous material for transportation by air from Lexington to Boca Raton, Fla., Jan. 29, 2010. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the leaking package. Cardinal Health of Madison, Miss., was fined $91,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing skin care products containing alcohol, a flammable liquid, to DHL for transportation by air from Madison to St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Sept. 11, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. DHL workers at the Cincinnati sorting hub discovered the leaking package. PSS Medical of Lubbock, Texas was fined $54,000 for allegedly offering a fiberboard box containing ammonium nitrate, a corrosive material, to UPS for transportation by air from Lubbock to Las Cruces, N.M., Dec. 31, 2009. The shipment was undeclared. UPS workers at the Louisville sorting hub discovered the package while sorting packages for shipment and delivery. In all instances, the companies allegedly offered the hazardous material for transportation (or, in the case of Federal Express, accepted it) when it was not packaged, marked, classed, described, labeled or in condition for shipment as required by regulations. Companies have 30 days from receipt of the FAA's notice of proposed civil penalty to respond to the agency. http://avstop.com/ [http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103606529321&s=6053&e=0016S-WtrHKCW9sFxttl3wxcvnQpORquwsyffczwIy3SznXReCk8zhXXCr7jMfugajyVYSd_TvQi4fznjQ5Gkvtt9Jk04WajYK1raQOLYTkK48=] Back to Top [http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103606529321&s=6053&e=0016S-WtrHKCW-AmzBot6_SeO26QzHctvtOeglLuOft8LGenxxEyI_RzrFoB6z_ctRmhB_Iw4WIVKQkqoboAzZ4dDB8341Rut0p] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cockpit-voice record on crashed An-24 incomplete Russian investigators have discovered that the information cockpit-voice recorder from the crashed Katekavia Antonov An-24 contains incomplete information about the accident. The Interstate Aviation Committee (MAK) says the recording only features the crew conversations for the first 80min of the fatal flight. MAK says, however, that the flight-data recorder has data from the last 90min. All 11 passengers, plus the flight attendant, were killed after the aircraft came down on approach to Igarka, in northern Russia, on 2 August. Only the flight crew - two pilots and an engineer - survived. Federal air transport regulator Rosaviatsia says the aircraft, which had been arriving from Krasnoyarsk Cheremshanka Airport, had been attempting to land at night, in rain, with visibility of 3,500m. It says the approach was being conducted using outer and inner NDB navigational aids. But it states that, as the An-24 prepared to land, it "deviated to the right of the approach path", struck the ground, broke up and caught fire. Rosaviatsia says the aircraft's commander was highly experienced, with 15,800hr on An-24s, while the co-pilot had 2,860hr on type. It adds that the 36-year old aircraft had last undergone scheduled maintenance in May this year, although it had a line check on the day of the accident. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC