Flight Safety Information August 8, 2012 - No. 161 In This Issue Qantas upgrades flight crew checks after mix-up between pilots 2 pilots walk away after copter crashes into Ellis County field (Texas) Air Asia Passenger Jumps From Moving Airplane After Reagan National Airport close call, FAA bans opposite-direction traffic flow American Eagle flight lands safely in Monterey after pilot declares emergency PRISM Certification Support Q2 profits plunge for Scandinavian airline SAS as jet fuel costs rocket Hong Kong's Cathay Pacific Airways posts $120M 1H loss on fuel costs, biggest loss since 2003 NTSB TRAINING CENTER - Course: MANAGING COMMUNICATIONS FOLLOWING AN AIRCRAFT Invitation to the 4th Global Humanitarian Aviation Conference Qantas upgrades flight crew checks after mix-up between pilots QANTAS has upgraded its flight crew checks after a mix-up between pilots resulted in an Airbus A380 lifting off from Los Angeles without them being able to see its speed on their computer displays. An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report today revealed the captain of the Melbourne-bound flight had failed to enter the progressive take-off speed into the navigation plan and the first officer had then twice cleared a "check takeoff data'' alert from his screen. He had mistakenly assumed all the relevant information had been covered when the crew of four had cross-checked their information. It was only when the aircraft hit 100km/h that the captain realised they did not have the progressive take-off speeds - including the critical speed when the pilot may decide to continue or about the takeoff - displayed on their primary flight data. The first officer and captain had considered aborting the takeoff, but as there were no warnings from any other instrument they made an instant decision to continue. Instead, the captain and one of the second officers read out the speeds from hand- written calculations they had previously made. The captain, who had 21,000 flying hours' experience, told an air safety investigation he had not entered the takeoff speeds into the navigation plan because he had been distracted by problems with locking one of the aircraft doors and a confusing set of lights on the runway. The takeoff from Los Angeles on October 8 last year went smoothly, with passengers oblivious to the problem. A Qantas spokesman said today the speed was also displayed on other instruments the crew saw. But the airline advised the Australian Transport Safety Bureau it had changed its flight- check manuals with instructions to warn over such an incident. It has also updated computer software from the manufacturer Airbus on its A380s fleets to ensure there is an extra warning about the takeoff speeds to reduce any chance of the mistake being repeated. Qantas described the incident as "a process error with no operational safety risk''. "The aircraft took off normally and safely. Both Airbus and Qantas have made changes to ensure that the process error cannot occur again,'' a spokesman said.. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/qantas-upgrades-flight-crew-checks-after- mix-up-between-pilots/story-fndo3ewo-1226445894821 Back to Top 2 pilots walk away after copter crashes into Ellis County field (Texas) Two Bell Helicopter test pilots flying a 214ST test aircraft walked away safely after making an emergency landing Tuesday in an Ellis County cotton field. Initial reports from officials indicated that the aircraft, which is being used to test technology and components planned for use in new helicopter models, either lost power to the tail rotor or had the tail rotor break apart. "It's one of the most complicated things that can go wrong flying a helicopter," said Jon Kettles, a Dallas aviation attorney and former Army helicopter pilot. The tail rotor is the primary means of controlling the direction of a helicopter, which naturally wants to spin around under the main rotor. The two-man flight crew apparently conducted a near textbook emergency landing, only to have the helicopter tip onto its side when one of the wheels dug into soft dirt. Photographs of the accident site show the four-bladed main rotor badly crumpled and no sign of the tail rotor. The fuselage itself does not appear to be badly damaged. Bell spokesman William Schroeder said the accident is under investigation by Bell and the National Transportation Safety Board, but he would not otherwise comment or provide details about the aircraft and what it was doing. "Our focus at this time is on the safety and well being of our crew members," Schroeder said. He did not identify the two-man crew. "We cannot speculate as to the possible causes of the incident; however, it will be fully investigated,' Schroeder said. "We are in contact with National Transportation Safety Board and fully cooperating with relevant authorities." The 214ST, originally developed in the late 1970s as a military helicopter for Iran and sold commercially after the fall of the Shah, is the biggest helicopter ever produced by the Fort Worth-based company. Only 96 were ever built, according to aviation references. In its original state, the twin-engine aircraft with a large version of the trademark Bell two-bladed rotor could haul 15-17 passengers with a maximum takeoff weight of about 17,500 pounds. By comparison, a fully-loaded Bell 212, a 1970s twin-engine version of the original Huey models, could take off at about 11,000 pounds total weight. The aircraft being flown Tuesday was acquired by Bell less two years ago to use in testing components for new aircraft, particularly the 525 Relentless commercial copter unveiled in February. The aircraft involved in Tuesday's accident was probably testing main rotor components, was heavily instrumented and transmitting live data back to Bell engineers on the ground at the time, according to a source close to the company. With that data, engineers should be able to determine the sequence of events, and perhaps even why the accident occurred. The tail rotor assembly had not yet been found late in the day. Schroeder declined to comment on whether the accident would be a setback to the new helicopter's development program. Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/08/07/4162932/2-pilots-walk- away-after-copter.html#storylink=cpy Back to Top Air Asia Passenger Jumps From Moving Airplane I guess some people need to think their travel plans through a little more carefully. On an Air Asia flight from Miri to Kuala Lumpur, a passenger decided he did not want to be on board anymore. He took matters into his own hands and actually opened the emergency exit door, jumping out of the airplane while it was taxiing on the runway. According to news.com.au, the drastic move caused panic among other fliers, and emergency procedures were activated. "The raft automatically opened when the door was opened. The passengers inside the aircraft started screaming. The flight attendants immediately alerted the pilots and the plane was stopped in its track," said passenger and Environment Department chief Siva Nathiran. The plane was delayed for over an hour and the man, believed to be in his late 20s, was later arrested. While he was taken to the hospital, he did not suffer any injuries. http://www.gadling.com/2012/08/07/air-asia-passenger-jumps-from-moving-airplane/ Back to Top After Reagan National Airport close call, FAA bans opposite-direction traffic flow One week after a control-tower mistake at Reagan National Airport sent passenger planes hurtling at one another at a combined speed of 436 miles an hour, the government temporarily banned aircraft from flying in opposite directions as they arrive and depart from airports. The nationwide prohibition on two-way traffic would not have prevented the July 31 incident in which a controller sent two commuter flights into the path of a third commuter jet that was inbound. There were 192 passengers and crew members aboard the three planes. Williamson happened to spend Tuesday afternoon on the Potomac River near Reagan National Airport, shooting photographs of arriving and departing planes not long after a close call involving two jets taking off from the airport and one trying to land. David Grizzle, chief operating officer at the Federal Aviation Administration, said in a memo Tuesday that preliminary findings of an investigation confirmed that a communication lapse between the tower and a radar control facility in Warrenton was to blame. "This incident should not have happened," Grizzle said in a memo to Michael P. Huerta, the acting FAA administrator. When a storm-driven wind shift occurred, supervisors in the tower and in Warrenton agreed to turn traffic at National 180 degrees so inbound planes would approach from the north rather than from the south. That meant outbound planes should switch their takeoffs to the south. On a busy Tuesday afternoon, that change was not communicated to at least one controller in the tower. Unaware, she sent the two outbound planes off to the north.U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood declined to specify what caused the communication failure Tuesday, citing the ongoing investigation. The suggestion of a possible cause emerged from Grizzle's memo. "This incident also raised the issue that front line managers are not only overseeing operations in the tower, but also managing administrative tasks," Grizzle said. "During times of moderate to heavy and/or complex traffic, we need to be sure that they are solely focused on operations at the facility." LaHood and the FAA have a history of swift reaction when issues arise. Several controllers were suspended or fired last year after a report that one had been sleeping during an overnight shift at National led to discovery of other late-night nappers. Grizzle said the suspension of two-way traffic was being taken "out of an abundance of caution" while improvements in oversight and training are considered. Two-way traffic, or "opposite direction" operation, as the FAA calls it, is when aircraft arrive or depart opposite to the predominant flow of traffic on that runway based on the wind direction. This is a common event, and there are many reasons that opposite-direction traffic may be used. They include protecting noise-sensitive areas, conducting flight checks of navigational systems and expediting the landing of emergency or VIP aircraft. Pilots will also ask for opposite-direction operation for convenience. It is up to the controller to approve the request, traffic permitting. The tower controller in last week's incident discovered she had directed two planes to take off in the path of the incoming plane after they already were airborne. Tower controllers own the airspace roughly three miles from the end of the runway. The inbound pilot had been turned by the Warrenton controllers about 10 miles out and was put on an established flight path that follows twists of the Potomac south to minimize engine noise. He was instructed to switch radio frequencies to contact the tower. There is no rigid definition to how quickly he should have done that, largely because at busy hours a pilot might have to wait until that frequency clears to make the contact. When the inbound pilot called the tower, the controller sounded surprised. "Are you with me?" she is heard saying on a recording of the radio transmission. Recognizing the problem, the controller ordered the pilot to turn to the right. The controller ordered an additional right turn, then instructed the pilot to abort his approach. As the pilot executed the maneuver, his plane was little more than eight-tenths of a nautical mile from the oncoming plane, or about 1,650 yards, and the difference in their altitude was 800 feet. With a combined speed of 436 mph, at one point they were 12 seconds apart. As he turned to avoid contact with the first plane, the inbound pilot came too close to the second plane: 800 feet of altitude. Planes are required to maintain a separation of three miles and 1,000 feet of altitude. Grizzle said investigators also have resolved one issue stemming from the incident that had raised concerns. The inbound pilot who had been redirected twice is heard on the radio cautioning the controller that his plane is low on fuel. Grizzle said the investigation revealed that the plane, inbound from Portland, Maine, with 73 on board, "did have adequate fuel, and, in fact, had more fuel than the FAA regulations require." http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/after-reagan-national- airport-close-call-faa-bans-opposite-direction-traffic-flow/2012/08/07/b2191a6c-e0c1- 11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_story.html Back to Top American Eagle flight lands safely in Monterey after pilot declares emergency MONTEREY, Calif.(AP) - An American Eagle flight has landed safely at Monterey Regional Airport after the pilot declared an emergency. Airport officials say the Los Angeles-to-Monterey flight touched down without incident shortly after 10 a.m. Tuesday - about 15 minutes after it was due in. The pilot encountered problems with the airplane's flaps, prompting the emergency declaration. The plane was carrying 32 passengers, two pilots and a flight attendant. No one was hurt, and the passengers deplaned normally after the plane taxied to the gate. Back to Top Back to Top Q2 profits plunge for Scandinavian airline SAS as jet fuel costs rocket STOCKHOLM (AP) - Scandinavian carrier SAS AB, the largest airline in Northern Europe, on Wednesday reported a worse-than-expected 42 percent drop in second-quarter net profit, blaming mainly soaring jet fuel costs. The Stockholm-headquartered company, which for years has struggled amid cut-throat competition from low budget airlines, posted a profit of 320 million kronor ($48 million), down sharply from the 551 million kronor recorded in the same three months a year earlier. Revenues rose slightly, to 11.39 billion kronor from 11.31 billion kronor, mainly thanks to an increased number of passengers. But fuel costs continued to hammer bottom-line earnings. CEO Rickard Gustafson called it an "unsatisfactory earnings level," but said the group's cost-cutting program - launched last year and aiming to save 5 billion kronor ($750 million) over 2012-13 - is starting to pay off. "The relatively high jet-fuel price fell slightly during the second quarter only to increase again during July, constituting a major challenge for the entire aviation industry," he said. Costs for fuel rose some 800 million kronor in the quarter compared with the same period in 2011. Even though SAS shied away from providing a profit forecast for the full year 2012 - citing the uncertain economic trend, jet-fuel prices, competition and exchange rates - it said it expects 5-7 percent passenger growth in the market. Back to Top Hong Kong's Cathay Pacific Airways posts $120M 1H loss on fuel costs, biggest loss since 2003 HONG KONG (AP) - Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd., Hong Kong's biggest airline, posted its biggest first-half loss in a decade on Wednesday because of persistently high fuel prices, the global economic slump and poor air cargo demand. Cathay blamed jet fuel prices, its biggest expense, for "significantly" affecting profitability. It's fighting back by upgrading its fleet and confirmed it's beefing up an existing order for Airbus A350 jets by adding 10 more to the deal and converting 16 others into larger models. The company said Europe's economic instability was having a big effect on both its passenger and cargo services, while revenue from many other international routes was also under pressure because of increased competition. The Asian carrier is the latest in a string of global airlines that have reported poor results amid grim economic conditions. "Cathay Pacific's core business was significantly affected by the persistently high price of jet fuel, passenger yields coming under pressure and weak air cargo demand," Chairman Cristopher Pratt said in a statement. "These factors are common to the aviation industry as a whole. Airlines around the world are being adversely affected by the current business environment." Profits from associated companies, including Air China, in which Cathay has a 20 percent stake, showed a "marked decline." Air China, one of China's three major state-owned airlines, warned last month that first-half profit would fall by half because of the economic slowdown in China, the world's second biggest economy. Other Asian airlines including Korean Air Line Co., South Korea's biggest carrier, and Singapore Airlines, have reported quarterly losses this year because of the global slump and high fuel prices. Cathay, which also owns regional Hong Kong-based carrier Dragonair, posted a loss of 935 million Hong Kong dollars ($120.5 million) or 23.8 Hong Kong cents a share for the first six months of 2012. That's down from a profit of HK$2.8 billion ($360 million), or 71.4 cents, last year and the biggest first-half loss since a HK$1.2 billion loss in January- June, 2003 amid the Sars health crisis. Revenue rose 4.4 percent to HK$48.9 million. The airline had warned in May that first half results would disappoint and that it would respond to the challenges by freezing hiring and allowing cabin crew to take unpaid leave. Cathay also reiterated plans to modernize its fleet by replacing older, fuel-thirsty jets with newer, more efficient ones, confirming plans announced earlier to beef up an existing 30-jet Airbus order and speed up retirement of older, gas-guzzling Boeing 747 aircraft. Fuel is the airline's single biggest expense, accounting for 42 percent of total costs. Pratt said the price of oil rose sharply from February to the end of May, pushing the airline's fuel bill up by 6.5 percent, or HK$1.3 billion, over last year. The airline is converting 16 jets to the larger A350-1000 model and ordering 10 more of the same model, which chief executive John Slosar said uses about 16-17 percent less fuel on average than a Boeing 777. The 777 in turn is 20 percent more efficient than a 747. The new and upgraded jets will add $4.4 billion to the deal but the airline said it's getting a "significant" discount from Airbus, without disclosing the actual price - common practice in the aviation industry. Back to Top NTSB TRAINING CENTER - Course ____________________ MANAGING COMMUNICATIONS FOLLOWING AN AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT OR INCIDENT October 25-26, 2012 NTSB Training Center, Ashburn, VA Tuition: $852 (Early Bird Discount: $802 for registrations received by October 8) CEUs: 1.3 DESCRIPTION The course will teach participants what to expect in the days immediately following an aviation disaster and how they can prepare for their role with the media. OVERVIEW * How the National Transportation Safety Board organizes an accident site and what can be expected in the days after an aviation disaster from the NTSB, FAA, other federal agencies, airline, airport, media and local community * Strategies for airline and airport staff to proactively manage the communication process throughout the on-scene phase of the investigation * How the NTSB public affairs officers coordinate press conferences and release of accident information and what information the spokespersons from the airport and airline will be responsible to provide to the media * Making provisions for and communicating with family members of those involved in the accident * Questions and requests likely encountered from the airlines, airport staff, family members, disaster relief agencies, local officials and others PERFORMANCE RESULTS Upon completion of this course the participant will be able to: * Be better prepared to respond to a major aviation disaster involving a flight departing from or destined for participant's airport * Demonstrate greater confidence in fielding on-scene questions about the many aspects of the investigation and its participants, including what types of specific information may be requested * Identify the appropriate Public Affairs roles for the various organizations involved in an accident investigation. * Be more productive in the first few hours after an aviation disaster by understanding which tasks are most important and why * Perform job responsibilities more professionally and with greater confidence given the knowledge and tools to manage the airport communications aspect of a major aviation disaster COMMENTS FROM PREVIOUS PARTICIPANTS "A must for people in the industry." - participant from a U.S. airline "Best two professional days I have ever spent. Very Beneficial. Provided real-life examples of guidelines of what can and can not be said." - participant from a state transportation department "Provided great insight into the role of print, wire, and live media in disseminating accurate and valid information free of spin and speculation." - participant from business aviation "Very good information for those who have never been through a major accident." - participant from a U.S. airport "As a corporate communications manager, the information is invaluable." - participant from a U.S. airline See more comments and a complete list of the 219 organizations from 28 countries that have sent staff to this training: http://www.ntsb.gov/TC/CourseInfo/PA302comments.htm Complete course description and registration information>>> http://www.ntsb.gov/trainingcenter/CourseInfo/2012-Courses/PA302_2012.html List of area hotels and restaurants>>> http://www.ntsb.gov/TC/facilityloc.htm GROUP TRAINING NOW AVAILABLE: Do you have 10 or more people in your organization that could benefit from this training? If so, it may be more cost-effective to have the course come to you. A one-day version of this course is now available and can be customized and delivered at any location. See the course description for more details: http://www.ntsb.gov/TC/CourseInfo/2011-Courses/PA303_2011.html MORE INFORMATION Web: http://www.ntsb.gov/TC/TrainingCenter.htm E-mail: TrainingCenter@ntsb.gov Phone: 571-223-3900 Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP, FRAeS, FISASI CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC