Flight Safety Information August 5, 2011 - No. 162 In This Issue Deborah A.P. Hersman Sworn in for Second Term as NTSB Chairman Senate Passes House Version Of FAA Extension By Unanimous Consent Lessons Of Air France 447 Start To Emerge AF447's initial altitude drift went virtually unchallenged Boeing chooses a rocket, looks for astronauts to fly on it Subject: National Heliport Survey for All Helicopter Pilots Poland disbands air transport unit of air force following Presidential crash Deborah A.P. Hersman Sworn in for Second Term as NTSB Chairman National Transportation Safety Board WASHINGTON - Deborah Hersman was officially sworn in today for a second two-year term as NTSB chairman. She became chairman on July 28, 2009. She was nominated for the second term by President Barack Obama on June 28, 2011, and confirmed by the U.S. Senate on August 2, 2011. "I am deeply honored to continue serving as chairman of the NTSB," Hersman said. "It has been a privilege to lead this remarkable organization with its dedicated and professional employees. I look forward to continuing to work with my fellow board members and the staff to make transportation safer for our citizens." Her term as chairman ends on August 3, 2013. She is concurrently serving a second five-year term as board member, which runs through December 31, 2013. http://www.amtonline.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=14240 Back to Top Senate Passes House Version Of FAA Extension By Unanimous Consent But A Partisan Undercurrent Could Still Threaten A Long-Term Solution The U.S. Senate has passed the House version of the FAA Continuing Resolution by unanimous consent, the only way the bill could be passed with many senators already in their home states for the congressional recess. Under the procedure, it only requires two senators in the chamber to pass a bill, as long as there is no objection. The passage took less than a minute on the Senate floor. CNN reports that President Obama is expected to sign the measure yet today (Friday). He said it resolves "the uncertainty hanging over the jobs of thousands of hardworking FAA employees." Original Story: There is widespread support across the industry and government for the deal reached Thursday to extend funding for the FAA for a 21st time since 2007, but the politics and finger-pointing which has caused a four-year delay in passing a long-term bill does not seem to have abated. Under the terms of the agreement, which is expected to be approved today (Friday), the Senate has largely accepted the package passed by the House about two weeks ago, but Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has the authority to waive provisions which would cut subsidies for some rural airports. Senate Democrats had balked at the loss of the "Essential Air Services" payments which can reach $1,000 per passenger. U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (pictured), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, called the deal "very welcome news." "I look forward to the FAA once again resuming regular operations," Hutchison said, "which will benefit travelers, airports, affected businesses and most importantly, allow furloughed FAA employees to get back to work. The House should now appoint conferees for the FAA authorization so that we can avoid a re-occurrence of this regrettable situation." "The FAA is back in business, and 74,000 American workers are back on the job. Work remains to be done to resolve the underlying issues. But this is great news on a day when other economic news has not been great. Today's temporary resolution of the FAA shutdown is a small but positive step for our economy and for our nation's vital infrastructure," said Congressman Chaka Fattah (D-PA), a Member of the House Appropriations Committee and Chair of the Congressional Urban Caucus. Labor groups were more partisan in their assessment of the deal. Teamsters President Jim Hoffa likened the Republican-led House bill as "hostage taking." "I applaud the Senate and Secretary LaHood for their willingness to put the public interest first," Hoffa said. "But this hostage-taking has to stop. House Republicans can't continue to threaten the well-being of our country for petty partisan advantage. Our elected officials should not be forcing Americans out of work to settle political scores." Hoffa said in a statement that, in his view, the dispute between the House and Senate over air service for small communities masked the real reason lawmakers couldn't agree on funding the FAA. Republicans want to repeal "a commonsense change in the union election rule implemented by the National Mediation Board last year. The rule no longer counts absent voters as "no" votes. As a result, union elections are now just like every other election in a democracy. But because Republican leaders oppose workers' rights, safety and modernization projects are halted and people are losing their jobs. "I'm also pleased that the Senate is standing firm on the basic democratic principle that the majority rules in a union election for airline workers," Hoffa said. "If House members were elected by the same system they want to impose on airline workers, none of them would be in office today." The head of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA was more measured in her remarks. "We applaud Senate Majority Leader Reid for his bipartisan effort to get 75,000 hardworking women and men back to work and finally put an end this shutdown," said AFA president Veda Shook (pictured). "The work they do for our nation's transportation system is vital to the future of our members' jobs and the communities we live in. "Additionally, AFA appreciates the work of U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood whose tireless championing of the agency's employees and their vital work was the voice of reason in a sea of insanity. "Over the past two weeks, the FAA has lost nearly $400 million in revenue that could have supported essential projects. It is shameful that in such difficult economic times, several Congressional leaders chose to play games and jeopardize the livelihoods of tens of thousands of Americans and their families as well as the long-term viability of the aviation industry. This shutdown was irresponsible and reckless. "We look forward to the re-opening of FAA and the ability for all those affected to return to work. However, this extension is a temporary solution. When Congress reconvenes, they must get serious and pass a comprehensive funding bill that allows the FAA to move forward on vital safety and airport improvement projects that will help to enhance the world's greatest aviation system." "Airports are thrilled with the news that Senate Majority Leader Reid has brokered a deal to get the FAA up and running again," said Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA) Greg Principato (pictured). "While airport projects across this nation have been delayed or postponed, and for some the construction season has been lost, it is great that thousands of construction personnel can get back to work. We also look forward to having our colleagues at the FAA back on the job working in partnership with airports to improve the safety, security and efficiency of the best aviation system in the world." While many members of the Senate have already left Washington's heat and humidity for their summer recess, the bill can be approved Friday using a process called "unanimous consent." The Associated Press reports that Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), who had blocked several attempts at passage of the bill before the recess, has said he will not stand in the way of passage of the continuing resolution. Congressman John Mica (R-FL), who chairs the House committee responsible for writing the legislation, reportedly had no comment. FMI: http://fattah.house.gov/, www.teamsters.org, www.afacwa.org, http://coburn.senate.gov, http://hutchison.senate.gov Back to Top Lessons Of Air France 447 Start To Emerge The crash of Air France Flight 447 may finally galvanize the air transport industry to address long overdue equipment and training shortcomings. Particular attention is being given to mitigating the occurrence of high-altitude stall and helping pilots to better recognize that condition. The need for such measures has been understood for some time, but the third interim report on the crash of AF Flight 447- the Airbus A330-200 that disappeared June 1, 2009, en route from Rio de Janeiro to Paris, killing all 228 onboard-has again highlighted the need for action, with cockpit voice recorder (CVR) data indicating that the pilots did not fully recognize the stall condition or take proper recovery action. While this report, issued on July 29 by the French aviation accident investigation office, the BEA, reinforces earlier suspicions that the pilots failed to recognize the stall and did not take appropriate action to recover the aircraft, it is still possible the final report will fault Airbus and how some safety-critical information is displayed to air crews. The report has also intensified the focus on loss-of-control accidents, by far the most common category. Many air safety experts agree that the industry has not done enough to deal with their root causes. One issue that keeps surfacing-both in the AF Flight 447 crash and in other cases-is how pilots can be trained to better understand highly automated aircraft and to improve their manual flying skills in case automation fails. With several recent loss-of-control accidents, even slow-moving authorities are beginning to feel that action is needed. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), itself the target of much criticism for its lax pitot tube certification standards, is holding a two-day seminar on loss of control in Cologne, Germany, in early October. Iced-over pitot tubes almost certainly led to temporarily incorrect speed readings that caused the A330's flight management system to switch from normal to alternate law, in which most automatic functions, such as auto throttle and autopilot, are unavailable. One safety recommendation calls for regulatory authorities to consider adding an angle-of-attack indicator in the cockpit. This echoes an emerging consensus from an independent group of safety experts among the pilot community and manufacturers, which is trying to help pilots recognize how small stall margins are at high altitude. Its findings are likely to be finalized in the coming months, potentially even before the final AF Flight 447 accident report is issued in the first quarter of 2012, an industry official says. The work actually predates the AF Flight 447 crash. The group also appears to echo another BEA recommendation linked to pilot training. The interim report calls for authorities to devise regular training programs "aimed at manual airplane handling, approach to and recovery from stall, including at high altitude." The BEA report notes that "the copilots had received no high-altitude training for the unreliable [indicated air speed] procedure and manual aircraft handling." Poor crew resource management once again is getting scrutiny as part of the accident report. The BEA raises questions about how the pilots flying the aircraft at the time interacted. "No standard call outs regarding the differences in pitch attitude and vertical speed were made," the report says. Moreover, "neither of the pilots made any reference to the stall warning" and "neither of the pilots formally identified the stall situation." Information provided by the BEA from the cockpit voice recordings suggests confusion persisted while the aircraft was descending. Among other things, the pilots did not know how to deal with one consecutive stall warning that stopped only after 54 sec. The captain only re-entered the cockpit at the end of that sequence and when the aircraft was descending in a deep stall, at a vertical speed of around 10,000 ft./min. In that situation, the pilot flying reacted by selecting takeoff/go-around thrust, but CVR recordings indicate fundamental confusion. "But we've got the engines, what is happening?" the pilot non-flying (PNF) said. And a few seconds later the pilot flying said, "I have no more control of the aircraft. I have absolutely no control of the aircraft." At about the same time the captain came back into the cockpit, the PNF asked, "What is happening? I don't know. . . I don't know what is happening." There is already controversy about some of the 10 safety recommendations. One calls for cameras to be installed in the cockpit "that make it possible to observe the whole of the instrument panel," the BEA says. But pilots have rejected previous efforts for video monitoring in the cockpit, arguing the information would be misused, and are poised to do so again. Although the BEA report suggesting the installation would be coupled with "strict rules relating to the use of such recordings," pilots note that safety data that should be safeguarded are already leaked, and the risk of that happening with video is seen as even greater. In a draft of its third interim report, the BEA considered issuing a recommendation about the functioning of the stall warning, which was not included in the final review. There is concern the stall warning sounded intermittently, rather than persistently. But eliminating the recommendation has raised suspicion among members of SNPL, one of Air France's pilot unions, that it was withdrawn to protect the manufacturer and shift blame to the crew. The union threatened last week to withhold further participation in the accident investigation until the BEA explains its course of action. In response, the investigators have said they merely held off on publishing that recommendation to further analyze the situation. A human factors working group has been set up to closely examine the human-machine interaction during the final phases of the flight. Once that work is completed, a safety recommendation on the stall warning could still emerge in the final report. "The current controversy focuses on a recommendation that corresponds to the functioning of the stall warning in a situation where the airplane reached an extreme angle of attack that is never encountered in flight tests, or even considered," the BEA says. But "it should be noted that the warning sounded uninterruptedly for 54 sec. after the beginning of the stall, without provoking any appropriate reaction from the crew. This fact must be analyzed as a priority by the working group." Air France, which early on ran into trouble with its pilot community over statements made in the wake of the crash, has since been defensive and unwilling to permit questioning of the crew, trying to keep the spotlight on technical problems leading to the crash. In response to the latest findings, the airline says, "It is important to understand whether the technical environment, systems and alarms hindered the crew's understanding of the situation." In Air France's view, the pilots showed "an unfailing professional attitude, remaining committed to their task to the very end." Air France has also expressed concerns to EASA about the A330's stall warning system. The latest review of the accident data, the first formal report since the cockpit voice and flight data recorders were recovered and analyzed, again highlights that the aircraft stalled at high altitude and that the pilots never performed the nose-down inputs to recover. Normal speed readings came back on both recorders after 29 and 54 sec., respectively. At that time, the aircraft was at 38,000 ft. at a displayed speed of 185 kt. In that moment, the aircraft was not stalled and could have been fully recovered by returning to its initial cruise altitude of 35,000 ft. with power being reduced. The pilot flying however, continued to pull back on the stick, with speed rapidly decreasing. He was not corrected by his two colleagues. Throughout the descent, the crew maintained the nose-up attitude of the airliner. In fact, the pilot flying made nose-up inputs and set thrust to takeoff/go around. The BEA notes that "In less than one minute after the disconnection of the autopilot, the airplane was outside its flight envelope following the manual inputs that were mainly nose-up." There was no indication of an engine malfunction, with the report noting flight control surfaces matched inputs. Other safety recommendations relate to gathering accident-related data. For instance, the BEA wants additional information to be recorded on the flight data recorder and relevant safety information to be broadcast once an emergency situation occurs onboard. In particular, it wants the position of the flight director crossbars and the conduct of the flight displays on the right side of the cockpit recorded (those on the left side already are). The FAA and EASA also are urged to examine the utility of storing air data and inertial parameters. Similarly, the BEA suggests authorities examine whether an emergency locator transmitter should be activated in such a situation. http://www.aviationweek.com Back to Top AF447's initial altitude drift went virtually unchallenged French investigators have highlighted an extraordinary lack of communication which allowed Air France flight AF447's initial excessive deviation from its assigned altitude to go virtually unchallenged. While much attention has focused on the failure to rescue the aircraft from its subsequent fatal descent, the deviation played a crucial role in the accident sequence because it took the aircraft to an altitude that decreased its aerodynamic stability and increased the risk of a stall. The aircraft had been cruising at 35,000ft, within a layer of turbulence, but was unable to climb above the rough air because of a poor temperature gradient. The aircraft's flight management system had calculated the recommended maximum altitude at 37,500ft. The co-pilot, who was flying, had already mentioned this altitude limit to the captain, who was preparing to leave the cockpit for a rest break. When the second co-pilot arrived to take the captain's place, the first co-pilot also referred to the lack of margin available to take the aircraft up to 37,000ft, saying: "What we have is some [recommended maximum altitude that is] a little too low to get to three seven." France's Bureau d'Enquetes et d'Analyses states that the first co-pilot mentioned that the A330 was "on the edge of the [turbulent] layer" and added that he would have preferred climbing to 36,000ft. "Climbing to a higher level was a constant preoccupation for the crew," the BEA said. "The pilots clearly wanted to fly outside of the cloud layer, probably to limit turbulence." As it continued to fly through the turbulence the A330 encountered the atmospheric icing which obstructed the pitot system, disturbing the speed data and causing the autopilot to disengage. The flying co-pilot took manual control but BEA says he made "rapid and high- amplitude" movements on the sidestick, which were "almost stop to stop", as well as a nose-up input which increased the A330's pitch to 11° in 10s. As the aircraft pitched up, its vertical climb rate increased to 5,200ft/min and then 6,900ft/min, while the pilots discussed the loss of airspeed information. Just 20s after the autopilot disconnection the second co-pilot noticed the aircraft was climbing and cautioned his colleague, who responded: "Okay, okay, I'm going back down." "According to the three [instrument displays] you're going up, so go back down," the second co-pilot added, and reiterated his concern again seconds later, as the aircraft climbed above 37,000ft - the altitude which the crew had previously considered too high for cruise. "Although the [recommended maximum flight level] had been a permanent preoccupation before the autopilot disconnection, neither of the two co-pilots made any reference to it," the BEA said. While the co-pilot made nose-down inputs which helped reduce pitch and vertical climb rate, they nevertheless "still remained excessive" and the A330 continued to climb "without any intervention" from the second co-pilot, it added: "At no time did either of the two co-pilots make any callouts on speed, pitch attitude, vertical speed or altitude." It said the "low level of synergy" between the two co-pilots might have resulted from "absence of a clear attribution of roles" by the captain before he left the cockpit, and a lack of crew resource management training for the situation. BEA stated that the second co-pilot should have immediately called out the excessive parameters. "The absence of specific training in manual aircraft handling at high altitude likely contributed to the inappropriate piloting inputs and surveillance," it said. Despite the rapid increase in pitch attitude and altitude, resulting from the flying co- pilot's inputs, the aircraft's trajectory seemed, at this point, to have been controlled. The A330 was just above 37,500ft. But the co-pilot made further nose-up commands to the side-stick, and the stall alarm started sounding for a continuous 54s period as the A330 continued to climb, reaching over 37,900ft before - just one minute after the autopilot had disengaged - it finally lost lift. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top Boeing chooses a rocket, looks for astronauts to fly on it Atlas 5 to be used for tests of new spaceship for NASA's use; pilots wanted Test flights of the Boeing Co.'s future crew-carrying spaceship would be conducted starting in as early as 2015 on United Launch Alliance's Atlas 5 rocket, executives announced Thursday. Whether Boeing's CST-100 capsule actually flies in that timeframe depends on whether NASA provides the necessary development funding, said John Elbon, the aerospace company's manager for the commercial crew project. But just in case, Boeing is already looking for pilots who could help with the design and testing of the craft. "We've only just started the interview process for that," Elbon told reporters during a teleconference. The candidates for Boeing's astronaut corps could include former NASA astronauts as well as test pilots who have never flown in space before, he said. He expected the first astronaut to be chosen in the next "half-year" or so. Boeing is already receiving $92.3 million for NASA in the second phase of the space agency's commercial crew program, which is aimed at supporting the development of new private-sector U.S spaceships for servicing the International Space Station now that the space shuttle fleet has been retired. That money is going toward the design and initial ground testing for the CST-100, a conical capsule that could carry seven passengers to the International Space Station or other orbital destinations. Millions more are going to three other companies that are working on their own spaceships: Blue Origin, Sierra Nevada Corp. and SpaceX. For the next phase of NASA's program, commercial providers will be expected to propose an integrated system, taking in all aspects of the orbital transportation from training to launch and mission operations. Blue Origin and Sierra Nevada have already said they intend to go with the Atlas 5, while SpaceX plans to use its own Falcon 9 rocket. . It took months for Boeing to decide which rocket it would use. Elbon said executives considered United Launch Alliance's offerings as well as alternatives from SpaceX and ATK. Elbon said the Atlas 5's reliability was "an important consideration" in the selection process. The Atlas 5 has had an unblemished record of success over 26 launches, and it's due to send NASA's Juno spacecraft toward Jupiter on Friday. The selection process was slightly complicated because Boeing is one of the venture partners in United Launch Alliance, along with Lockheed Martin. The Federal Trade Commission had to review Boeing's decision to ensure that it wasn't biased, and Elbon said the FTC's notice of compliance was received late last month. Boeing's craft would be launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., on an Atlas configuration known as the 412, which includes a solid rocket booster and a dual-engine Centaur upper stage. That's different from the rocket that will be used for Juno and for NASA's Mars Science Laboratory, which is due for launch in November. . Last month, United Launch Alliance and NASA struck a deal to work together on making the Atlas 5 crew-worthy. George Sowers, ULA's vice president for development, said the main tasks on the to-do list are to develop an Emergency Detection System and figure out the system for getting astronauts on and off the launch pad. Elbon said Boeing's development time frame called for the CST-100 to undergo a launch-pad abort test in 2014, an unmanned orbital flight test in the first quarter of 2015, an ascent abort tests in the middle of 2015, and a test flight to the International Space Station with Boeing pilots aboard by the end of that year. "This is the quickest way to close the gap and get crews flying again," Elbon said. He said the first operational flight for NASA astronauts, with a NASA pilot at the controls, would come in the first quarter of 2016. Eventually, commercial ventures such as Bigelow Aerospace may use the CST-100 to carry private-sector astronauts to their own space stations. "Depending on the customer, we [Boeing] will have a pilot or not," Elbon said. He emphasized that the time frame was dependent on continued development funding from NASA. Without that support, Boeing couldn't make the business case for the CST- 100 project, he said. So how much will be needed? Elbon declined to name a figure, citing competitive concerns, but he noted that the Obama administration sought $850 million for commercial crew development in its budget request for fiscal year 2012. "I think those numbers are in the neighborhood of what it would take to make this program successful," he said. It's not clear how that request will fare in the current budget-cutting environment, but the program got at least one vote of support on Thursday, from U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla. "The winner of this competition will be America," Nelson said in a statement. "All of this is going to bring down the cost and make human spaceflight more affordable." Nelson noted that private-sector spaceflight was aimed at freeing up NASA to pursue more ambitious exploration beyond Earth orbit - with potential missions planned to near-Earth asteroids, the moon and Mars - and he urged the space agency to move forward with that plan as well. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44021510/ns/technology_and_science-space/ Back to Top Subject: National Heliport Survey for All Helicopter Pilots Calling All Helicopter Pilots Make your opinion on heliports known and make it count! If your not a helicopter pilot pass this along to some friends that are. If you are a helicopter pilot do the same. The National EMS Pilots Association is conducting a survey to gather opinion on heliport design and safety from those who are most affected by the design and management of heliport facilities - the nation's helicopter pilots. We are seeking input from all pilots involved in any form of helicopter operations. The information gathered will be presented to the Federal Aviation Administration and to all stake holders in the helicopter industry to assist in the current efforts to rewrite the new FAA heliport advisory circular. You must act soon because time is of the essence! Take 15 minutes now or at your earliest opportunity and make a positive impact on your industry for years to come. Survey Link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HeliportSurvey Sincerely, Rex J. Alexander President, National EMS Pilots Association Mobile: 260-579-2374 Email: rex.alexander62@yahoo.com "SAFETY: It's not a destination! It's a journey that never ends!" Back to Top Poland disbands air transport unit of air force following Presidential crash Poland's government disbanded an air force regiment and fired some high- ranking officers as a consquence of findings in a Polish investigation into the plane crash that killed President Lech Kaczynski and 95 others. The 36th Special Regiment of Aviation Transport was a special aviation regiment of the Polish Air Force established in 1945. All of its aircraft were for national public use, the most important being transport of Polish politicians, officials and forces commanders. The Polish investigation concluded that: The immediate cause of the accident was the descent below the minimum descent altitude at an excessive rate of descent in weather conditions which prevented visual contact with the ground, as well as a delayed execution of the go-around procedure. Those circumstances led to an impact on a terrain obstacle resulting in separation of a part of the left wing with aileron and consequently to the loss of aircraft control and eventual ground impact. Relating to the 36th Special Regiment, the report concludes: * incorrect training of the Tu-154M flight crews in the 36 Regiment; * ineffective immediate supervision of the 36 Regiment's flight training process by the Air Force Command; * failure by the 36 Regiment to develop procedures governing the crew's actions in the event of: a) failure to meet the established approach criteria; b) using radio altimeter for establishing alarm altitude values for various types of approach; c) distribution of duties in a multi-crew flight. These findings prompted the decision to disband the regiment. Government flights will now be handled by Poland's national commercial airline, LOT. More information: * Final Report from the examination of the aviation accident no 192/2010/11 involving the Tu-154M airplane, tail number 101, which occurred on April 10th, 2010 in the area of the SMOLENSK NORTH airfield www.aviation-safety.net Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC