Flight Safety Information November 15, 2010 - No. 235 In This Issue Another 29 Airbus A380 engines may be replaced Mid-air safety scare as pilots lose control of Airbus with 43 passengers on board Cockpit recorder overwritten in Qantas A380 engine incident... FAA at controls during 787 fire FAA: Manufacturers to set widespread fatigue life limits Southwest names its first vice president of OCC Pilots urged to avoid body scanning Jet engine surge cuts flight short Full Frontal Nudity Doesn't Make Us Safer: Abolish the TSA A single missing screw delays flight Another 29 Airbus A380 engines may be replaced SYDNEY (Reuters) - Operators of the Airbus A380 superjumbo aircraft may have to replace another 29 Rolls-Royce engines after an investigation into a Qantas engine failure identified problems, the Sydney Morning Herald said on Monday. Singapore Airlines may have to replace up to 20 Trent 900 engines, Australia's Qantas may need to replace another seven engines on top of the three already removed, while German carrier Lufthansa could be forced to find two new replacements, the paper said without citing its sources. Rolls-Royce has been scrambling to find a fix for the Trent 900 after an engine partly disintegrated in mid-flight Nov 4, forcing a fully- laden Qantas A380 to make an emergency landing in the worst incident to date for the world's largest passenger jet. Rolls-Royce said the failure was caused by a specific component in the engine's turbine and said it would replace the relevant module on its engines. A Qantas spokesman would not confirm the Sydney Morning Herald report and said while more engines may need to be replaced, Qantas was not in position to put a number on it. Back to Top Mid-air safety scare as pilots lose control of Airbus with 43 passengers on board Airbus is at the centre of a new safety scare after pilots temporarilty lost control of a juddering plane with 43 passengers on board. An electrical fault caused a twin-engined A321 jet to shake and veer sharply to the left for several minutes while the crew fought to regain control. By the time the glitch was rectified, the plane was 20 miles off course. Scare: The incident occurred on a BMI Airbus A321 on a flight from Khartoum to Beirut in August when the jet was cruising at 36,000 feet Airbus yesterday insisted the incident - which took place in August - was a 'one off' and said that no planes would be grounded. Airbus denied reports it was issuing a 'safety warning', but admitted it was drafting new advice for pilots - alerting them to the potential electrical fault and giving guidance on how to cope if it happens again. Last week an Airbus A380 London to Sydney jet was forced to make an emergency landing in Singapore after an engine exploded mid- air. Six aircraft have been grounded with an investigation into the explosion is underway. Yesterday Airbus said it was working closely with the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) about the latest glitch. The incident occurred on a BMI flight from Khartoum to Beirut in August when the jet was cruising at 36,000 feet. Pilots reported that the cockpit displays flickered without warning and the aircraft began to shudder, banking steeply to the left and failing to respond to commands for several minutes. Cockpit lights turned on and off and the crew were bombarded with a stream of warning messages until the fault corrected itself. Standby instruments operated normally, there were no injuries and the crew manually flew the jet to its destination. There are 620 Airbus A321s in service around the world. The planes can seat up to 180 passengers. Last week a Qantas Airbus A380 was forced to make an emergency landing in Singapore after an engine exploded mid-air Airbus spokesman Stefan Schaffrath said the company was investigating the cause of the fault. The new guidance - which will be sent to operators in the next two weeks - will tell pilots about the potential problem so they can 'instinctively respond', he said. 'None of the computer controls shut off - they flickered but they did not shut down,' he added. 'The symptoms of this event were new to us so we are seriously looking into it.' Last Thursday one of the four engines on an A380 jet burst into flames mid air, forcing an emergency landing. Terrified passengers saw flames, smoke and door-sized debris shooting from the engine as fragments of metal rained down over western Indonesia 15 minutes after take-off. All 459 people on the flight, many of whom were British, were unhurt after the incident. Yesterday engine manufacturer Rolls Royce said it had identified the fault which triggered an oil fire. 'The failure was confined to a specific component in the turbine area of the engine,' Rolls-Royce said in a statement. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ Back to Top Cockpit recorder overwritten in Qantas A380 engine incident Investigators have discovered that the cockpit-voice recording of the Qantas Airbus A380 engine failure was overwritten because the adjacent engine could not be shut down after the aircraft landed in Singapore. The inboard left-hand Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine, which suffered the in-flight uncontained failure, has been removed from the aircraft and is being transported to an engineering facility for technical inspection. "Removal of the engine will also facilitate closer examination of the damage to the surrounding wing and other structures and systems," says the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. The extent of this damage to the A380's airframe has yet to be detailed but images have shown evidence of shrapnel puncture to the wing, loss of hydraulic functions to the control surfaces and landing-gear, and loss of fuel or other fluid from the aircraft while airborne. ATSB investigators have retrieved information on the powerplant's performance from the flight-data recorder, and this has been distributed to the aircraft and engine manufacturers in order to understand the event fully. But while the flight-data recorder stored parameters from the entire flight, the ATSB states that its team in Canberra have only retrieved part of the cockpit-voice recorder audio. It says that the failure of the adjacent outboard left-hand engine to shut down, after the stricken A380 landed in Singapore, meant it continued to supply power to the recorder. Audio from the time of the in-flight engine failure - some two hours beforehand - was "overwritten", the ATSB adds: "That said, elements of the available audio are expected to be of assistance to the investigation." Indonesian search personnel are continuing to scour the island of Batam for debris from the destroyed engine, and the ATSB has released images showing the flight path of the A380 as it departed, and then returned to, Singapore, and the areas of interest for the recovery effort. "After initial success, the search is becoming increasingly difficult as a result of the local terrain, which includes virgin jungle," it says. Rolls-Royce engineers are examining the fractured turbine disc whose ejection is considered by investigators to have been responsible for the destruction of the engine. The manufacturer has already stated that it believes a component failure led to an oil fire which resulted in the loss of the disc. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top FAA at controls during 787 fire An FAA pilot was flying ZA002 at the time of the 787's emergency landing in Laredo, Texas, confirm those with direct knowledge of the incident. The FAA pilot, whose identity has not been disclosed, was sitting in the left seat of the 787 during its final descent into Laredo International Airport. A Boeing Test pilot was sitting in the first officer's seat on the flight deck. While the FAA pilot performed the landing, on any Boeing experimental aircraft, a Boeing test pilot is considered to be in control and responsible for the oversight of the flight. Two FAA personnel were part of the crew of 42 aboard ZA002, including the pilot and a systems engineer who was observing in the cabin during the more than 6h flight to test the aircraft's nitrogen generation system. At this late stage in the flight test campaign, which has already seen the accumulation of more than 2,300h of flight time, regulatory personnel are almost always involved in evaluating the aircraft for certification credit. As the investigation into the 9 November fire unfolds and safety and design recommendations are formed, the presence of the FAA pilot and systems engineer on board the 787 means regulatory authorities do not have to rely on Boeing's interpretation of events. During the failure of the P100 power panel, which was first noticed as ZA002 crossed through 1000ft above ground level (AGL), multiple engine indication and crew alerting system (EICAS) messages appeared on flight deck displays before load shedding reduced the available displays to a single screen on the left side of the flight deck. A source with direct knowledge of the incident says both heads up displays (HUD) were disabled as well and another says the location of the sole active display ultimately determined which member of the flight crew landed the aircraft. Evaluating how the aircraft responded to the fire is equally important to regulatory authorities as establishing the cause of the fire in the P100 power panel and Boeing maintains the 787 "performed as expected". In addition to the eye-witness accounts of those on board the aircraft, Boeing has significant additional data at its disposal to sift through as ZA002 is a fully instrumented flight test aircraft measuring parameters well beyond a normal commercial aircraft. Boeing continues to inspect ZA002 in Laredo, a process the company says will "take several days" to complete, and adds "it is too early to determine if there is significant damage to any structure or adjacent systems." First delivery to Japan's All Nippon Aiways remains scheduled for the middle of the first quarter 2011, but that date is believed to be in jeopardy with the 787 fleet grounded during the fire investigation. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top FAA: Manufacturers to set widespread fatigue life limits Manufacturers of 4,198 airline transport aircraft will be required to set new life limits for their products under new rules to be issued by the US FAA on 15 November. As part of the widespread fatigue damage (WFD) final rule, airframers of US-registered transport aircraft with takeoff weight of 34,019kg (75,000lb) or more will have between 18 and 60 months to determine the number of flight cycles or hours that each type can accumulate before showing the effects of the problem. "Once manufacturers establish these limits, operators of affected aircraft must incorporate them into their maintenance programs within 30 to 72 months, depending on the model of aircraft," says the FAA. "After the limit is in the maintenance program, operators cannot fly the aircraft beyond that point unless the FAA approves an extension of the limit." All new aircraft certified under Part 25 air transport certification rules will be required to have the limits. The FAA defines WFD as "the simultaneous presence of cracks at multiple structural locations that are of sufficient size and density that the structure will no longer meet the residual strength requirements of Part 25". WFD gained prominence in 1988 when an Aloha Airlines Boeing 737 lost a 5.5m (18ft) -long section of its upper fuselage at 24,000ft, killing one flight attendant. The FAA published a preliminary rule on the topic in 2006 based on recommendations made by an aviation rulemaking advisory committee (ARAC). Unlike the preliminary rule, the final rule does not require certificate holders to evaluate WFD associated with most repairs, alterations and modifications to the baseline aircraft structure, except for cases where modifications were mandated by airworthiness directives (ADs). "We've addressed the problem of aging aircraft with numerous targeted regulations and 100 airworthiness directives over the years," says FAA administrator Randy Babbitt. "This rule is a comprehensive solution to ensure the structural safety of today's airliners and the airplanes of tomorrow." In terms of benefits, the FAA estimates it will save $4.8 million over the next 20 years by not having to issue ADs to address individual cases of WFD as they are found. Other benefits not considered in the financial analysis include accidents avoided and a "longer economic life" for the aircraft. The agency estimates that the new rule will cause one airplane from today's fleet to be retired because of its reaching its WFD life limit in the 20-year analysis period. "The retirement of this one airplane will result in costs of approximately $3.8 million, with a present value of approximately $3.6 million," says the agency, adding that cost impacts to manufacturers to implement the rule were "found to be minimal". Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top Southwest names its first vice president of OCC Southwest Airlines has appointed captain Jeff Martin as its first vice- president of the operations coordination centre (OCC). A 20 year veteran of the carrier, Martin maintains his status as a captain/check pilot and civilian flight instructor for the airline. "Jeff's leadership, knowledge, and vision will be key as we prepare the operation for 2011 and beyond," says Southwest. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top Pilots urged to avoid body scanning (CNN) Pilots unions are concerned about radiation emitted by backscatter scanning machines to create full-body images. Pilots urged to avoid body scans, opt for pat-downs when unavoidable Union president calls pat-downs "a demeaning experience" Unions support security checks for pilots that would allow them to bypass standard screeningPilots' unions for US Airways and American Airlines are urging their members to avoid full-body scanning at airport security checkpoints, citing health risks and concerns about intrusiveness and security officer behavior. "Pilots should NOT submit to AIT (Advanced Imaging Technology) screening," wrote Capt. Mike Cleary, president of the U.S. Airline Pilots Association, in a letter to members this week. USAPA represents more than 5,000 US Airways pilots. "Based on currently available medical information, USAPA has determined that frequent exposure to TSA-operated scanner devices may subject pilots to significant health risks," Cleary wrote. American Airlines pilots have also received guidance from their union, the Allied Pilots Association, to decline full-body scanning. APA represents 11,000 pilots. "It's safe to say that most of the APA leadership shares my view that no pilot at American Airlines should subject themselves to the needless privacy invasion and potential health risks caused by the AIT body scanners," APA president David Bates said in a letter to members. Both unions are concerned about the effects of repeated exposure to small doses of radiation emitted by the backscatter technology used in some of the Transportation Security Administration's full- body scanners. In the course of their daily duties, pilots are routinely exposed to elevated levels of naturally occurring atmospheric radiation, which increases at higher altitudes. The unions urge members to choose security lines that use standard metal detectors whenever possible. When faced with AIT screening, pilots should opt for enhanced pat-downs, although this security procedure also concerns the unions. Unions are encouraging pilots to request private pat-downs. USAPA urges members to make sure a witness is present during the procedure. USAPA refers to incidents where Transportation Security Administration officers may have implemented the screening technique inappropriately. One pilot described his experience as "sexual molestation," according to Cleary's letter. Bates wrote, "There is absolutely no denying that the enhanced pat-down is a demeaning experience." Both unions are looking for long-term solutions to airline crew screening. "Pilots really should never have been subjected to this type of screening, ever. Because when we walk through these machines, within a few hundred yards we get into what potentially could be the biggest weapon on the airport, and that's the airplane," said James Ray, a USAirways captain and spokesman for USAPA. Pilots are well screened with security background checks and regular medical and mental health checks, he said. The union suggests implementing alternate identity verification technology that would allow pilots to bypass regular passenger screening. The TSA said it welcomes further discussion with pilots and emphasized the agency's role in addressing security threats. "We are frequently reminded that our enemy is creative and willing to go to great lengths to evade detection. TSA utilizes the latest intelligence to inform the deployment of new technology and procedures in order to stay ahead of evolving threats," the TSA said in a statement. Back to Top Jet engine surge cuts flight short British Airways 747 turns back to Vancouver November 14, 2010 An overheating engine forced a London-bound British Airways flight to turn around and make an emergency landing at Vancouver International Airport early yesterday. At close to 1 a.m., as the Boeing 747-400 operating as Flight BA084 neared the airspace over Jasper National Park, one of the plane's four Rolls Royce RB211 engines began vibrating abnormally, British Airways spokesman John Lampl said. "About half an hour into the flight, the flight crew detected an engine surge, which is like a backfire in a car," he said. "They followed the normal procedure, shut the engine down and returned back to Vancouver." At 2 a.m., B.C. Ambulance, Richmond Fire and Rescue Services and the airport's emergency airfield service were alerted and standing by for the landing as a precaution, said Vancouver Airport Authority spokeswoman Kate Donegani. At about 2:15 a.m. the airport's operations team had reported that the aircraft had landed safely. The plane taxied back to a gate and all 262 passengers walked off. By 3 a.m. the incident was over, she said. Bill Yearwood, a spokesman for the Transportation Safety Board, spoke with the pilots early yesterday evening, after they had rested. As the plane was over Blue River, a surge drew their attention to the engine's performance and its temperature reading. "When the plane reached between 10,000 and 11,000 feet there was a temperature exceedance on one of the engines, which caused the pilots to shut that engine down," Yearwood said. "They continued to climb and dumped fuel, and returned to Vancouver without further event." The Transportation Safety Board will be working with British Airways over the next few days to determine the cause of the engine malfunction, if there was one at all, Yearwood said. "These temperature surges can be caused from a number of things. It can be as simple as a bird ingestion -- if you were to damage the turbine from bird ingestion, you reduce the efficiency of the engine." www.timescolonist.com Back to Top Full Frontal Nudity Doesn't Make Us Safer: Abolish the TSA By ART CARDEN The Republicans control the House of Representatives and are bracing for a long battle over the President's health care proposal. In the spirit of bipartisanship and sanity, I propose that the first thing on the chopping block should be an ineffective organization that wastes money, violates our rights, and encourages us to make decisions that imperil our safety. I'm talking about the Transportation Security Administration. Bipartisan support should be immediate. For fiscal conservatives, it's hard to come up with a more wasteful agency than the TSA. For privacy advocates, eliminating an organization that requires you to choose between a nude body scan or genital groping in order to board a plane should be a no-brainer. But won't that compromise safety? I doubt it. The airlines have enormous sums of money riding on passenger safety, and the notion that a government bureaucracy has better incentives to provide safe travels than airlines with billions of dollars worth of capital and goodwill on the line strains credibility. This might be beside the point: in 2003, William Anderson incisively argued that some of the steps that airlines (and passengers) would have needed to take to prevent the 9/11 disaster probably would have been illegal. The odds of dying from a terrorist attack are much lower than the odds of dying from doing any of a number of incredibly mundane things we do every day. You are almost certainly more likely to die or be injured driving to the airport than you are to be injured by a terrorist once you're in the air, even without a TSA. Indeed, once you have successfully made it to the airport, the most dangerous part of your trip is over. Until it's time to drive home, that is. Last week, I picked up a "TSA Customer Comment Card." First, it's important that we get one thing straight: I am not the TSA's "customer." The term "customer" denotes an honorable relationship in which I and a seller voluntarily trade value for value. There's nothing voluntary about my relationship with the TSA. A much more appropriate term for our relationship is "subject." The TSA stands between me and those with whom I would like to trade, and I am not allowed to without their blessing. Second, the TSA doesn't provide security. It provides security theater, as Jeffrey Goldberg argues. The kid with the slushie in Tucson before the three-ounce-rule? The little girl in the princess costume at an airport I don't remember? The countless grandmothers? I'm more likely to be killed tripping over my own two feet while I'm distracted by the lunacy of it all than I am to be killed by one of them in a terrorist attack. The moral cost of all this is considerable, as James Otteson and Bradley Birzer argue. For even more theater of the absurd, consider that the TSA screens pilots. If a pilot wants to bring a plane down, he or she can probably do it with bare hands, and certainly without weapons. It's also not entirely crazy to think that an airline will take measures to keep their pilots from turning their multi-million dollar planes into flying bombs. Through the index funds in my retirement portfolio, I'm pretty sure I own stock in at least one airline, and I'm pretty sure airline managers know that cutting corners on security isn't in my best interests as a shareholder. And the items being confiscated? Are nailclippers and aftershave the tools of terrorists? What about the plastic cup of water I was told to dispose of because "it could be acid" (I quote the TSA screener) in New Orleans before the three-ounce rule? What about the can of Coke I was relieved of after a flight from Copenhagen to Atlanta a few months ago? I would be more scared of someone giving a can of Coke to a child and contributing to the onset of juvenile diabetes than of using it to hide something that could compromise the safety of an aircraft. And finally, most screening devices are ineffective because anyone who is serious about getting contraband on an airplane can smuggle it in a body cavity or a surgical implant. The scanners the TSA uses aren't going to stop them. Over the next few years, we're headed for a bitter, partisan clash over legislative priorities. Before the battle starts, let's reach for that low-hanging, bipartisan fruit. Let's abolish the TSA. http://blogs.forbes.com/artcarden/ Back to Top A single missing screw delays flight A MISSING screw delayed a Qantas flight from Sydney to Melbourne by an hour yesterday. Passengers aboard QF423, due out of Sydney at 10am, were told by the captain a regular ''walk-around'' safety check by Qantas staff before take-off found a screw missing from the pylon connecting an engine to a wing. Clubs NSW chairman Peter Newell, who was on the plane, told The Sun-Herald the captain said it would not depart until the right screw was found. At Coffs Harbour a QantasLink flight to Sydney was delayed five hours yesterday after a warning light had indicated a problem with the engines as it came into land. A Qantas spokesman said investigations suggested the warning was caused by a software problem. http://m.smh.com.au/ Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC