Flight Safety Information April 11, 2014 - No. 075 In This Issue 5th signal detected 'not likely' from MH370 black boxes, officials say Air Safety Reaches New Highs Aviation: Commission updates the European safety list It's Time to Halt The FAA's Arbitrary and Expanding Domestic "Drone" Ban First Air pilots fired after flying plane off course during Arctic trip What the airlines say about their MPL pilots PRISM SMS FAA responds to Alaskan pilots' concerns TransPac Aviation Academy Graduates Newest Class Of Chinese Pilots American Airlines' Boeing 777-200ERs will lose first class section, gain 13 seats Calls for Application for...The ISASI Rudolf Kapustin Memorial Scholarship Embry-Riddle Worldwide to offer UAS workshop in San Diego April 24, 25 Upcoming Events 5th signal detected 'not likely' from MH370 black boxes, officials say (CNN) -- Elevated hopes that Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 might soon be found were tempered Friday, when the joint search agency said the latest signal probably isn't from the missing plane. The most recent acoustic signal detected by an Australian aircraft in the search Thursday is "unlikely to be related to the aircraft black boxes," Australian chief search coordinator Angus Houston said in a statement Friday. "On the information I have available to me, there has been no major breakthrough in the search for MH370," Houston said. "Further analysis continues to be undertaken by Australian Joint Acoustic Analysis Centre." But Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott told reporters in China on Friday that authorities are "very confident" the signals picked up by acoustic detectors are coming from the black box of missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, CNN affiliate Sky News Australia reported. It's unclear whether Abbott was referring to four signals detected earlier this week. Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared from military radar for about 120 nautical miles after it crossed back over the Malay Peninsula, sources say. Based on available data, this means the plane must have dipped in altitude to between 4,000 and 5,000 feet, a senior Malaysian government official and a source involved in the investigation tell CNN. The dip could have been programmed into the computers controlling the plane as an emergency maneuver, said aviation expert David Soucie. "The real issue here is it looks like -- more and more -- somebody in the cockpit was directing this plane and directing it away from land," said CNN aviation analyst and former National Transportation Safety Board Managing Director Peter Goelz. "And it looks as though they were doing it to avoid any kind of detection." But former U.S. Department of Transportation Inspector General Mary Schiavo was not convinced. She said the reported dip could have occurred in response to a loss of pressure, to reach a level where pressurization was not needed and those aboard the plane would have been able to breathe without oxygen, or to get out of the way of commercial traffic, which typically flies at higher altitudes. That would have been necessary had the plane's transponder been turned off and it lost communications. "If you don't have any communications, you need to get out of other traffic," Schiavo said. "We still don't have any motive and any evidence of a crime yet," she said, adding that most radar can track planes at altitudes below 4,000 feet, so the plane's descent may not have indicated any attempt by whoever was controlling it to hide. She held out hope that the black boxes hold the answers and that they will be found soon. New flight details revealed Malaysian sources told CNN that Flight 370's pilot, Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah, was the last person on the jet to speak to air-traffic controllers, telling them "Good night, Malaysian three-seven-zero." The sources said there was nothing unusual about his voice, which betrayed no indication that he was under stress. One of the sources, an official involved in the investigation, told CNN that police played the recording to five other Malaysia Airlines pilots who knew the pilot and copilot. "There were no third-party voices," the source said. The sources also told CNN that Malaysian air force search aircraft were scrambled about 8 a.m. March 8 to the South China Sea and the Strait of Malacca, soon after Malaysia Airlines reported that its plane was missing. The aircraft took off before authorities corroborated data indicating that the plane turned back westward, a senior Malaysian government official told CNN. But the air force did not inform the Department of Civil Aviation or search and rescue operations until three days later, March 11, a source involved in the investigation told CNN. Later Thursday, communications officials from Malaysia's Transportation Ministry denied that jets had scrambled shortly after the plane went missing, calling that claim a "false allegation." Possible signal raises hope The possible signal heard by a search plane was picked up through sonar buoys equipped to receive such electronic data and was detected near the Australian ship Ocean Shield, said the Joint Agency Coordination Centre. The Australian Defense Force source said the signal detected was not at the 37.5 kHz frequency consistent with the pingers from flight data recorders but in a range that suggests strongly that it is from something that is man-made. Commodore Peter Leavy of the Royal Australian Navy said Wednesday in Perth that existing technology in RAAF P3 aircraft had been modified to allow the acoustic processor to pick up sounds in the frequency range. Using the technology in this way is experimental, according to the source. The source said four RAAF P3 Orions have been modified with this technology, with the sonar buoys expiring and sinking about eight hours after they are deployed from the aircraft. On Wednesday, Leavy said that each P3 is capable of deploying 84 buoys, laid in a pattern or grid coordinated with the Ocean Shield. Although Leavy said the buoys have sensors that can detect signals "at least" 1,000 feet below the surface, the source is confident that the technology has been tested at a "much deeper depth." Crews have been narrowing the search area in the Indian Ocean. Imagining the search underwater Search areas shrinks Up to 12 military aircraft, three civil aircraft and 13 ships were assigned to assist in Friday's search for the Boeing 777-200ER, which was carrying 239 people when it vanished March 8 on a fight from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to Beijing. There were no sightings reported by search aircraft or objects recovered by ships on Thursday, the Joint Agency Coordination Centre said. Friday's search area was about 18,000 square miles (46,700 square kilometers), centered 1,436 miles (2,312 kilometers) northwest of Perth. That's far smaller than the search area's size a few weeks ago. "It's pretty incredible, if you look at where we started, which was virtually the entire Indian Ocean, now getting it down to what's essentially a couple hundred square miles (where the pings have been detected) is pretty miraculous," Marks said. The Ocean Shield first picked up two sets of underwater pulses on Saturday that were of a frequency close to that used by the locator beacons. It heard nothing more until Tuesday, when it reacquired the signals twice. The four signals were within 17 miles of one another. "I believe we are searching in the right area, but we need to visually identify wreckage before we can confirm with certainty that this is the final resting place of MH370," Houston said Wednesday. As the search continues, a U.S. Navy supply ship will help provide supplies and fuel to the ships that are looking for the missing plane. The USNS Cesar Chavez will help supply Australian naval ships involved in the search "in the coming days," the Navy said in a statement. That's likely a sign that search teams are preparing for a lengthy hunt, analysts said. Tracking pings is only one early step in the hunt to find the plane's data records, wreckage and the 239 people aboard. "I think they're getting ready for the long haul," Goelz said. "Even if they do get four or five more pings, once they drop the side-scanning sonar device down, that is going to be painstaking and long. So I think they are settling in for the long search." Friday is Day 35 in the search. Time is of the essence: The batteries powering the flight recorders' locator beacons are certified to emit high-pitched signals for only 30 days after they get wet. "The signals are getting weaker," Houston said Wednesday, "which means we're either moving away from the search area or the pinger batteries are dying." http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/ Back to Top Air Safety Reaches New Highs Global Accident Rate For Airline Flights in 2013 Was the Lowest On Record By ANDY PASZTOR CONNECT The global accident rate for airline flights in 2013 was the lowest on record, according to an international standard- setting group, underscoring a steady improvement in airline safety despite recent attention on the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. The overall crash rate for scheduled commercial flights in 2013 dropped to 2.8 accidents per 1 million departures world-wide, a 13% drop from 2012 and at least a 30% decrease from rates recorded during each of the seven years before that, according to the International Civil Aviation Organization, the air-safety arm of the United Nations. The preliminary results were "the lowest recorded since it began tracking the global accident rate" decades ago, the organization said. Coming after years of record-low fatalities globally, the latest report reflects how stepped-up international cooperation, enhanced collection of data and improved pilot training have yielded broad safety gains. Even when there were fatal accidents around the world in 2013, the total number of deaths dropped to 173 from 388 a year earlier. Since 2009, total world-wide fatalities dropped by more than two-thirds. If investigators are able to unravel why the Malaysian Boeing BA -2.55% 777 veered sharply off course, airline officials say the event is likely to put only a temporary blemish on the industry's safety record. It will be just "another strange but eventually explained incident," according to Tony Tyler, chief executive of the International Air Transport Association, the industry's main global trade group. In the U.S., the statistics are even better. Over five years ending April, American carriers flew some 3.7 billion passengers, or roughly 10 times the U.S. population, "without so much as putting a scratch on anyone" who was a passenger, Nicholas Sabatini, a former head of safety at the Federal Aviation Administration, told CNN last weekend. Instead of using traditional safety measures such as accidents per million departures, U.S. airlines and regulators are focused on the number of fatalities across those departures. The revised standard was developed partly because based on statistics, the time planes now spend taxiing on the ground is the most dangerous part of each trip. Africa, a perennial laggard in safety, showed significant improvement. The continent which has about 2% of global traffic, accounted for 10% of total world accidents in 2013. The U.N. body highlighted some improvements across Africa, which had one fatal accident causing 33 deaths last year, after two crashes that killed 167 people in 2012.The region's latest overall accident rate, however, was roughly four times the global average, compared with 2012 numbers that came in about 50% above the global average. The data, coordinated more closely than before with IATA-generated safety statistics, indicate that runway-related events were the single largest category of crashes in 2013. Accidents on runways or other airport surfaces accounted for about half of all crashes, more than twice as many as the next largest category. The ICAO has been working intensely for five years with African governments to improve safety, and the report describes "tangible results" from nine countries have addressed "significant safety concerns." But support from industry, ICAO and other sources "will still be required for safety concerns to be fully addressed," the report said. IATA last week released its own safety report for 2013 highlighting many of the same themes, but including different statistics based on different categories of commercial aircraft. According to IATA, there was one accident that left the airplane seriously damaged for every 2.4 million flights. Regarding Africa, IATA's report said the region's serious accident rate over the past five years averaged about one crash per 155,000 flights. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304512504579493951673246282?mg=reno64- wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304512504579493951673246282.html Back to Top Aviation: Commission updates the European safety list 10-Apr-2014 The European Commission has updated for the 23rd time the European list of airlines subject to an operating ban or operational restrictions within the European Union - better known as "the EU air safety list". On the basis of safety information from various sources and hearings before the EU Air Safety Committee, the Commission decided to remove all airlines from Swaziland from the EU safety list. There is also positive news for the Philippines, where Cebu Pacific Air is allowed to operate to the EU, and for Kazakhstan, where national carrier Air Astana is allowed to increase the number of its flights to the EU. Vice-President Siim Kallas, responsible for mobility and transport, said: "When countries do what it takes to ensure the safety of their aviation industry, it is important that the EU recognises these efforts. The proof is the aviation safety progress we are witnessing in Africa. Swaziland is now the second country, after Mauritania, to be removed from the EU safety list. Promising progress was also noted in Zambia, Mozambique, Sudan, and Libya, as well as in the Philippines and Kazakhstan." The new list replaces and updates the previous one , adopted in December 2013. As from today, the list can be easily consulted with a new online search tool. In addition to the airlines from Swaziland, also Cebu Pacific Air from the Philippines was removed from the list. Following last year's removal of Philippine Airlines from the safety list, this is seen as further proof of the gradual improvement in air safety in the Philippines. Kazakhstan's Air Astana saw the restrictions lifted on the amount of flights it can operate since 2009 to the EU. All other Kazakh airlines remain banned until the Kazakh authorities have implemented a sustainable system to effectively oversee the safety of these carriers. Progress was noted in Libya, which will maintain its voluntary restrictions not to fly to the EU - which they have applied since the Libyan revolution - as well as in a number of other countries whose carriers are on the safety list, such as Sudan, Mozambique and Zambia. It is hoped that the continuation of this progress could lead to positive decisions in the future. The Commission decision is based on the unanimous opinion of the EU Air Safety Committee, which met from 25 until 27 March 2014. The EU Air Safety Committee consists of aviation safety experts from the Commission, from each of the 28 Member States of the Union, as well as from Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). The Commission decision also received a positive opinion from the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. Background information The updated EU air safety list includes all airlines certified in 20 states, for a total of 294 airlines fully banned from EU skies: Afghanistan, Angola, Benin, Republic of the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon (with the exception of 3 airlines which operate under restrictions and conditions), Indonesia (with the exception of 5 airlines), Kazakhstan (with the exception of one airline which operates under restrictions and conditions), Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Mozambique, Nepal, Philippines (with the exception of two airlines), Sierra Leone, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sudan and Zambia. The list also includes two individual airlines: Blue Wing Airlines from Suriname and Meridian Airways from Ghana, for an overall total of 296 airlines. Additionally, the list includes 10 airlines subject to operational restrictions and thus allowed to operate into the EU under strict conditions: Air Astana from Kazakhstan, Afrijet, Gabon Airlines, and SN2AG from Gabon, Air Koryo from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Airlift International from Ghana, Air Service Comores from the Comoros, Iran Air from Iran, TAAG Angolan Airlines from Angola and Air Madagascar from Madagascar. http://centreforaviation.com/members/direct-news/aviation-commission-updates-the-european-safety-list-162696 Back to Top It's Time to Halt The FAA's Arbitrary and Expanding Domestic "Drone" Ban By: Sean lawson This week we learned of two new FAA actions against domestic operators of what are popularly called "drones" and what the FAA calls "unmanned aircraft systems" (UAS). In one case, the FAA has claimed that it is illegal for volunteers to use radio controlled model aircraft to search for missing persons. In the other, an agency spokeswoman advised a news outlet against publishing donated video taken by a model aircraft, implying that the agency could take legal action against the news outlet if it published the video. With these actions, the FAA has gone too far in attempting to enforce a purported ban on domestic drones. The agency's overly broad definitions of the devices and uses to be regulated have invited arbitrary enforcement that is not only unwise but, in some cases, infringes core constitutional liberties. The FAA should cease enforcement of its purported ban until it can implement congressionally mandated regulations developed using the required notice and comment rulemaking process. Recent FAA actions against search, rescue, and recovery, as well as photography and news gathering, have been enabled by the agency's overly broad definitions of the devices and uses it has sought to ban. In the case of devices, though most people likely picture something similar to the U.S. military's Predator when they hear the word "drone," the FAA definition is so broad as to include what amount to children's toys. In the most egregious case of attempted enforcement to date, the agency sought to fine Raphael Pirker $10,000 for unsafe operation of an aircraft, in this case a four and a half pound styrofoam model airplane. In dismissing the case, the administrative law judge ruled that the agency's definition of "aircraft"-which is broadly defined as a "device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air"-to include model aircraft was "risible" as it implied that the agency could regulate paper airplanes or toy gliders, something that not only defies FAA's legal authority, but also common sense. The FAA appealed the decision and continues to take enforcement action against operators of model aircraft for what it claims are illegal purposes. In one recent example, the FAA is attempting once again to impose up to a $10,000 fine, this time for the use of a model aircraft by the Washington Nationals baseball team to take aerial video of their spring training. A team official echoed the Pirker judge's sentiments by noting that the team does not seek FAA permission for its pop flies, which fly higher than the model aircraft used for videography, and which would also be considered unmanned "aircraft" under the agency's laughable definitions. Similarly, in the case of uses and users, the agency's definitions are overly broad and not clearly defined. The agency identifies three categories of use/user: public, civil, and hobby/recreational. Anything that is not public, i.e. government use, is civil, with a special area carved out for hobby and recreational use. Any use that is deemed "commercial" or for "business purposes" is automatically civil and considered illegal unless the operator first obtains specific permission from the FAA. Hobbyists and recreational users operate under a set of voluntary guidelines for model aircraft issued in 1981. Though these categories may seem clear on the surface, they are not. First, as the judge in the Pirker case noted (p. 5), "business" purpose is not clearly defined in the FAA's 2007 policy document purporting to ban such uses. Similarly, neither the voluntary 1981 guidelines for model aircraft, nor the 2007 policy statement, defines what counts as a hobby, recreational, or sport use of model aircraft. The 1981 guidelines for model aircraft also do not prohibit their use for commercial purposes as the FAA claimed in its 2007 policy statement (PDF of the 1981 model aircraft guidelines). The impact of these ambiguities is that the meaning of these terms has become arbitrary, and with predictable negative results. They have been applied inconsistently and have resulted in an ever expanding list of supposedly illegal uses of model aircraft. Though its definitions are unclear, some cases seem to fall squarely within the scope of "commercial" or "business purposes." For example, this was the case when the FAA informed a beer company that using a radio controlled octocopter to deliver beer to ice fisherman violates FAA's purported ban. But in the case of EquuSearch, the group using a model aircraft to aid in search and rescue operations, we see the FAA implicitly carving out a heretofore nonexistent and wholly undefined category of use somewhere between commercial civil use and recreational use. EquuSearch is a volunteer group and, as such, is not using their model aircraft for "commercial" or "business purposes." So, they have not violated that provision of the FAA's purported ban. One could, therefore, argue that their use of the model aircraft falls under the hobby/recreational guidelines. That is, their "hobby" is search, rescue, and recovery. But apparently, the FAA does not see it that way because it says this is an illegal use. This implies that there are uses that, though they are not commercial, are also not hobby or recreational. It is not clear where the lines are, however. It was not even clear until news of the EquuSearch case that this invisible category existed, nor that this kind of use is supposedly illegal. The EquuSearch case demonstrates that FAA enforcement has become arbitrary and capricious. It is impossible to comply with laws and regulations when they are hidden and unwritten. Though the EquuSearch case is disturbing, FAA beliefs and actions in relation to First Amendment-protected activities should also be cause for serious concern. Within the FAA's broad category of civil use, there is no space carved out for photography or news gathering. In fact, the FAA has been clear that it considers journalism to be a "commercial" activity. As such, though use of a model aircraft for hobby or recreational purposes is considered legal, use of the same device for journalism is specifically prohibited. But, here again, we see an expanding scope of what the FAA deems an illegal use. In a trove of FAA cease and desist letters recently released as a result of a FOIA request, we can see that individuals or groups engaged in aerial photography or news gathering have been disproportionately targeted. But one of the more recent letters, sent to Hybird Video LLC of Grandview, Missouri, in June 2013, says, "The use of a Quadcopter UAS for aerial photography is prohibited without proper authorization." This implies that any use of a model aircraft for aerial photography, even noncommercial, is considered illegal. Even more ominously, the letter warned, "The Grandview and local law enforcement agencies will be notified of this operation" (PDF of letters). Finally, in the most recent and most disturbing case, an FAA spokeswoman implied that even publishing drone video footage obtained by someone else is illegal. After a fire in Dayton, Ohio, local hobbyists offered to donate to the Dayton Business Journal video footage of the fire taken with their model aircraft. When the news outlet asked the FAA about the legality of using the footage, an FAA spokeswoman advised the news outlet to "err on the side of caution" and not publish because, the spokeswoman said, "It's still prohibited in the U.S. to use drones for commercial operations, and if it had to go through the court we would get our lawyers involved." There is good reason to believe that the FAA's purported ban is not legally enforceable because it did not follow the proper procedures for rulemaking. This was the judge's decision in the Pirker case (p. 8). The fact that Congress felt the need to instruct the agency to promulgate rules for the integration of UAS into the domestic airspace by 2015 is also an indicator that there are no rules. That is, the FAA was instructed to make rules precisely because there are none now. Finally, even the FAA seems to acknowledge the lack of rules, but, astonishingly, sees this lack of rules as providing it the authority to ban journalists from using a technology that is otherwise legal for hobbyists. In response to a Spokane, Washington journalist's use of a model aircraft for news gathering, FAA spokesman Les Door said, "we can't let them [journalists] do it [use model aircraft for news gathering] as long as there are no rules in place." The first, most obvious point to make here is that a lack of rules does not serve as a foundation for banning an activity. In fact, it is just the opposite. The use of a new technology is legal until the government makes it illegal or regulates its use in some way, not the other way around. Second, even if the FAA's purported ban were enforceable, it is likely unconstitutional when applied to photography and news gathering. First, as currently applied, model aircraft are specifically banned for journalists, even though they are legal for hobbyists. This is an unconstitutional content-based restriction on speech because it discriminates on the basis of the speaker's identity. Second, just because First Amendment activity is undertaken for compensation or commercial purposes does not mean it loses its protection. If it did, newspapers would have no more protections than beer companies, which is not the case. Third, telling a news organization that they should not publish content obtained by someone else is a classic prior restraint on speech and is unconstitutional. Congress has given the FAA the authority to promulgate rules for the integration of UAS into the domestic airspace. Indeed, some regulation is certainly sensible as there are foreseeable safety concerns as the number of UASs increases. Nonetheless, the FAA has not yet followed the proper procedures for creating those congressionally mandated regulations and its current attempts to enforce a blanket ban are arbitrary and capricious, stifle humanitarian use of model aircraft, and infringe on core liberties when applied to journalists and others engaged in First Amendment-protected activities with model aircraft. As such, the FAA should suspend enforcement of its 2007 policy statement until it can meet its congressional mandate or at least until the Pirker case is resolved. Attorney Cynthia Love and University of Utah journalism professor Avery Holton assisted in the writing of this post. Love and Holton are my co-authors on a forthcoming working paper for the Mercatus Center at George Mason University titled, "Eyes in the Skies: First Amendment Implications of the Federal Aviation Administration Domestic Drone Ban as Applied to Aerial Photography and News Gathering." http://www.forbes.com/sites/seanlawson/2014/04/08/its-time-to-halt-the-faas-arbitrary-and-expanding-domestic- drone-ban/ Back to Top First Air pilots fired after flying plane off course during Arctic trip A northern air carrier has fired two pilots after they flew a plane so far off course on a routine Arctic flight that it took about 20 minutes to get back. "We learned the pilots did not follow our standard operating procedures designed to eliminate navigational errors," First Air said in a release Thursday. "As a result, those pilots are no longer employees of First Air." The Boeing 737 left Rankin Inlet, Nunavut, on a routine flight to the territorial capital of Iqaluit on March 31. It was carrying 19 passengers and four crew when something went wrong. "We're still working to find that out," said Peter Hildebrand of the Transportation Safety Board. "There were a number of things working together here." The airplane was being guided by a GPS system, which fed data into a flight management system. In turn, the system directed the plane's autopilot. "There seems to have been some problem somewhere and that led to an airplane that drifted off track," Hildebrand said. The plane drifted so far to the north, he said, that its landing was about 20 minutes late. Those aboard were not in danger, said the company. Hildebrand said the plane had enough fuel to make it all the way to Goose Bay in Newfoundland and Labrador. Hildebrand added that the plane involved is the only one in First Air's fleet with that particular model of flight management system. First Air said procedures have been changed as a result of the mistake. "We have gone to great lengths to update and strengthen our standard operating procedures to ensure our pilots have the tools they need to fly safely," the airline said. "We have also increased in-flight oversight using data monitoring tools." Hildebrand said no formal investigation has been launched. "We're gathering data and working with the company. If we see at any time there's a need for a system-wide response on this, we can change our stance." First Air flies throughout the Canadian North and into some southern cities. It is wholly owned by Makivik Corp., which manages land settlement money from the James Bay Agreement for the Inuit of northern Quebec. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/the-canadian-press/140410/first-air-pilots-fired-after-flying-plane- course-during-arct Back to Top What the airlines say about their MPL pilots by David Learmount The airlines, approved training organisations (ATO) and regulators have agreed that the MPL (multi-crew pilot licence) has potential, but it is a work-in-progress. We have discussed MPL before in this blog - vigorously - but since then the ICAO has held an MPL Symposium that reviewed data on nearly 600 human products of the MPL system. These are MPL pilots who have been working in airlines all over the world. Our report on symposium findings is here. The piloting competency standards defined and specified by ICAO are about the only aspect of the MPL system that's not in contention, because everything else is: how best to teach to those standards, how best to assess and report on them, and how to prepare instructors for teaching to competency (compared to presenting students with a sequence of prescribed exercises). Now the MPL is a reality in many countries, what has surprised observers is just how different the approved MPL courses are turning out to be, even if the end product is the same. The UK CAA even admits that it has approved a different MPL course for each of the British ATOs because they all fit the bill in terms of quality control and the final product. Even ICAO admits to feeling that there must be a set of best practices that could at least guide the structure of an MPL course, and that these best practices need to be identified over time so that, while structural variations in training delivery might remain, they are not quite as wide as they are at this early stage in the MPL's practical implementation. But on the other hand, if the final product is good, and if continued validation at airline level shows it to be durable (ICAO already has plans to hold further MPL symposia), it should not matter how the goal was reached. One suspects, however, that whatever form "MPL best practice" turns out to be at ATOs, it will be related to efficiency as well as output quality. One of the truly brilliant things about the existence of the MPL is that the exercise of going back to the drawing board on pilot training has thrown into sharp relief the failings of the existing system, so in the long term the commercial pilot licence (CPL) training methodology will change for the better under this scrutiny. After all, it was pilots produced under the traditional CPL/ATPL system that were at the controls in recent (and historic) accidents in which pilot misjudgement or error have been deemed a causal factor. The end result of the soul-searching that the MPL system has prompted is that both training routes will improve. The industry needs them both because the single-pilot demands of the general aviation industry cannot be met by fresh-from-training MPLs, and airlines who prefer one concept to the other will remain free to choose. Despite the fact that ATOs everywhere admitted they found setting up MPL courses to be an incredibly steep learning curve, the product seems to be meeting with approval. China's CAAC says: "MPLs on the line now have about 1,500h. They are good to very good without exception." Lufthansa says: "Yes, it is working! However, MPL should now be further developed in the areas of theoretical training, instructor qualification and employment flexibility for MPL holders to cope with the volatility of the airline industry." The only weakness found consistently was that new MPLs are initially nervous about ATC communication, because the simulation of ATC in FSTDs is one of simulation's weakest points, and MPLs get proportionately more time than in FSTDs and less airborne time than CPLs. However the much-feared lack of handling ability resulting from less airborne time does not appear to be showing up in reality. Swiss Aviation Training says: "No significant differences exist regarding quality and performance between ATPL and MPL students," and on the other side of the world Dragonair says it cannot tell the difference either. Right now the industry should just concentrate on ensuring that both routes to modern professional flying are not only fit for purpose, but as good as they can possibly be in terms of the quality of output. ICAO does not consider the MPL validation process complete, and maybe it never should be. How about the idea that the product of the world's professional pilot training system should remain under review indefinitely? http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/learmount/2014/04/airlines-say-mpl-pilots/#sthash.Za7biC0K.dpuf Back to Top Back to Top FAA responds to Alaskan pilots' concerns The FAA has begun a rule making process to allow certain pilots to use their driver's license to demonstrate readiness to fly. This is in direct response to a letter sent by Sen. Mark Begich two weeks ago citing concern that some Alaskan pilots are forced to get a FAA third-class medical certificate, which Begich says is unnecessary red tape preventing them from flying. "Alaskan pilots agree that for certain types of flying, having a FAA third-class medical certificate doesn't improve safety, and is really just an unnecessary piece of red tape," said Begich. "One of the reasons I founded the Senate General Aviation Caucus was to help ensure Federal agencies responded to common-sense ideas like this from the general aviation community. I encourage the agency to work through this process quickly and consider offering relief to some pilots earlier if it can be done safely." Recent studies have shown that under a similar set of FAA rules for "Light Sport Aircraft," where a driver's license is enough to show a baseline of health, there have been no accidents attributed to pilot medical problems. The AOPA petition asks that this approach to medical certification of pilots be expanded to other types of low-risk, non- commercial flying. Eliminating the need for periodic renewal of an FAA medical certificate is estimated to save affected pilots $241 million and the FAA $11 million over 10 years. http://www.thetundradrums.com/story/2014/04/10/alaska/faa-responds-to-alaskan-pilots-concerns/1217.html Back to Top TransPac Aviation Academy Graduates Newest Class Of Chinese Pilots Twenty Five Chinese Students Master the Rigors of Year-Long US Pilot Training Program Concentrating on Safety PHOENIX (April 8, 2014) - After 12 months of books, homework, aviation English lessons, and flying under all kinds of conditions and flight simulations at TransPac Aviation Academy, 25 Chinese students have earned their way to become pilots in China and worldwide. On April 10th at 10 am, the Chinese students will receive their graduation certificates and their wings from TransPac, one of the largest schools of its kind, at 530 W Deer Valley Road, Ste. 100. "The students have worked hard to learn in a new country and a foreign language - all with the hopes of being among the leaders in flight in their home country of China," said TransPac Aviation Academy Chief Executive Officer Stephen Goddard. "These students could fly the same route as taken by the unfortunate Malaysian Airlines flight MH 370, so for this class and as always, safety is at the top-of-mind for all TransPac graduates." Greg Feith, a former National Transportation Safety Board Lead Investigator and current international media commentator on the missing Malaysian flight, has recently audited TransPac's program for safety and instructional integrity and said, "TransPac is a top-tier facility and provides the best training of it's kind, anywhere." The 25 graduating students came to the United States eager to earn their pilot licenses and were carefully preselected according to their potential in China. TransPac Aviation Academy has up to 400 graduates each year, mostly from China. The training program is amongst the most demanding of any flight school considering the school's approximate hundred-thousand-flight-hour-per-year activity. The program involves polishing students' aviation English skills, flight simulations, reacting to all challenging flight conditions such as bad weather, and much more. TransPac uses a combination of classroom, flight simulator and hands-on inflight training to prepare their graduates for the real world of aviation. The planes the students train in include the Piper Archer III (PA28-181), the Piper Seminole (PA44-180), and the Beechcraft King Air (BE-90). The King Air gives students the chance to learn airline-style operating procedures and manuals. It is the ideal transition aircraft with advanced electrical, hydraulic and pressurization systems. The licenses the graduating students received include PPL - Private Pilot License, IR - Instrument Rating, CPL - Commercial Pilot License, ATP - FAA Knowledge Test Endorsement, and the High Performance Certificate from TransPac for advanced turbine systems. Students will go on to fly Airbus, Boeing, and Gulfstream, which are used by most domestic airlines in China. The vast majority of students are already sponsored by commercial airlines waiting to hire them when they return with their licenses. "The great weather, high aircraft availability and superior instructors at TransPac mean a lot to students," said Lingtong Kong, a graduating student also know as "Harvey" by his instructors. "They allow us to be able to maximize our aviation training every day. We go from having zero experience to becoming a fully qualified commercial pilot in 12 months. Other schools cannot do this." TransPac Aviation Academy offers a variety of programs, including the Career, VA, ATP, Self-Paced and Degrees. Financing is available through numerous means giving all national and international prospective students outstanding opportunities to pursue their aviation careers and dreams. Regional representatives from around the world are available to answer questions about the program. More information is available at www.transpacacademy.com. http://www.aviationpros.com/news/11391981/transpac-aviation-academy-graduates-newest-class-of-chinese-pilots Back to Top American Airlines' Boeing 777-200ERs will lose first class section, gain 13 seats By Terry Maxon American Airlines plans to retrofit the interiors of its Boeing 777-200ER fleet, including this new look for its business class seating. (American Airlines) American Airlines is touting the coming changes to the interiors of its fleet of Boeing 777-200ER airplanes, of which it operates 47. They'll get new seats, new configurations, new entertainment systems - a bunch of new stuff - when the rework begins later in 2014. Let's summarize the changes on the seating configuration as we understand them. - Each airplane will have 260 seats after the retrofit work, compared to 247 now. - The airplane loses its first-class cabin with 16 lie-flat seats. - Its business class increases from 37 angle-flat seats to 45 lie-flat seats. Each seat will have aisle access - no stepping over a neighbor to get out. The current configuration is 2-3-2, meaning people sitting in the window seats and the middle seat in the center section have seatmates between them and the aisle. - The 777-200s will get 45 "Main Cabin Extra" seats - six inches of extra legroom seating in the coach section, for sale or for high-value customers flying in coach. - The regular coach section will have 170 seats, compared to 194 standard seats now. Your question, from those of you who sit in the non-Main Cabin Extra seats, is: what is the legroom with the reconfiguration compared to now. Our answer: We don't know. That last question isn't simple because the thin profile seats that are replacing traditional seats can allow the same legroom even if the spacing of rows is tighter. Again, we don't know. You may wonder why American Airlines is doing away with the first-class cabin in the Boeing 777-200, which flies a number of international routes. American gave an answer in its weekly "Arrivals" newsletter for employees. "American's new 777-300ERs offer three classes of service, and we are using these planes in markets with a great customer demand for a First Class product. The 777-200ERs will be retrofitted to better match capacity and demand of the markets they will serve," the carrier said. "In addition, our decision to move to a two-class configuration on our 777-200ERs allows us to better align ourselves with our competitors, many of whom offer a two-class configuration today," American said. For the coach seats, American said that "Both the Main Cabin Extra seat and the Main Cabin seat will be replaced with the same seats offered on our 777-300ER fleet. Each Main Cabin Extra and Main Cabin seat holds an 8.9-inch HD-capable touchscreen including up to 250 movies, 180 TV programs, 350 audio selections and 20 games. Main Cabin Extra and Main Cabin seats will also offer individual 110v AC power outlets and USB ports at every seat." http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2014/04/american-airlines-boeing-777-200ers-will-lose-first-class-section-gain- 13-seats.html/ Back to Top Calls for Application for The ISASI Rudolf Kapustin Memorial Scholarship DEADLINE for filling application 15 April, 2014 The 2014 ISASI Seminar will be held in the Stamford Hotel in Glenelg, near Adelaide, Australia 13-16 October 2014. INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF AIR SAFETY INVESTIGATORS 2014 The ISASI Rudolf Kapustin Memorial Scholarship (In memorial to all ISASI members who have died) Purpose: To encourage and assist college-level students interested in the field of aviation safety and aircraft occurrence investigation. Funding: The ISASI Rudolf Kapustin Memorial Scholarship fund will be established through donations and will provide an annual allocation of funds for the scholarship if funds are available. Eligibility: Applicants must be enrolled as full time students in a recognized (note ISASI recognized) education program, which includes courses in aircraft engineering and/or operations, aviation psychology, aviation safety and/or aircraft occurrence investigation, etc., with major or minor subjects that focus on aviation safety/investigation are eligible for the scholarship. A student who has received the annual ISASI Rudolf Kapustin Memorial Scholarship will not be eligible to apply for it again. Administration of the Fund: The President of ISASI will appoint a two person committee to be executors and administrators of the fund. The ISASI Treasurer will oversee all expenditures. The Scholarship Fund Committee will check that the education program is at a recognized school and applicable to the aims of the Society, assess the applications and determine the most suitable candidate. Donors and recipients will be advised if donations are made in honor of a particular individual. Annual Scholarship: Funded attendance at ISASI Annual Seminar An award of $2000 will be made to each student who wins the competitive writing requirement, meets the application requirements and will register for the ISASI annual seminar. ************ The award will be used to cover costs for the seminar registration fees, travel, and lodging/meals expenses. Any expenses above and beyond the amount of the award will be borne by the recipient. ISASI will assist with coordination and control the expenditure of funds. In addition, the following are offered to the winner(s) of the scholarship. 1. A one year membership to ISASI 2. The Southern California Safety Institute (SCSI) offers tuition-free attendance to ANY regularly scheduled SCSI course to the winner of the ISASI Scholarship. This includes the two-week Aircraft Accident Investigator course or any other investigation courses. Travel to/from the course and accommodations are not included. More information at http://www.scsi-inc.com/ 3. The Transportation Safety Institute offers a tuition free course for the winner of the Scholarship. Travel to/from the course and accommodations are not included. More information is available at http://www.tsi.dot.gov/ 4. The Cranfield University Safety and Accident Investigation Centre offers tuition-free attendance at its 5-day Accident Investigation course which runs as part of its Masters Degree program at the Cranfield campus, 50 miles north of London, UK. Travel to/from the course and accommodation are not included. Further information is available from www.csaic.net/ Application requirements: 1. A full time student who meets the Eligibility requirement stated above and has been enrolled for a duration of one year 2. The student is to submit a 1000 (+/- 10%) word paper in English addressing "the challenges for air safety investigators" 3. The paper is to be the students own work and must be countersigned by the student's tutor/academic supervisor as authentic, original work 4. The papers will be judged on their content, original thinking, logic and clarity of expression 5. The essay and application must be submitted in a format that can be opened by Microsoft Word. 6. The student must complete the application form with their paper by April 15, 2014 and submit it to ISASI by mail, fax, oremail to isasi@erols.com. ISASI contact information - Ann Schull, International Office Manager 107 E. Holly Avenue, Suite #11 Sterling, VA 20164 703 430 9668 (Main) 703 430-4970 (FAX) Some advice to those applying: 1. Late submissions are not advisable 2. Handwritten applications are not advisable 3. Make sure to include your email address as indicated above ****************** Application Form 2014 INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF AIR SAFETY INVESTIGATORS The ISASI Rudolf Kapustin Memorial Scholarship (In memorial to all ISASI members who have died) Name: Date: Address: Course enrolled for: Year /Subjects Studied: Academic Institute: Address: Email: Telephone number: Student Signature:_____________________________________________________________ Tutor/Academic Supervisor title and signature:________________________________________ 1000 Word Paper ""the challenges for air safety investigators" NOTE: Students who wish to apply for the scholarship should visit www.isasi.org or send email to isasi@erols.com. The ISASI office telephone number is 1-703-430-9668. www.isasi.org Back to Top Embry-Riddle Worldwide to offer UAS workshop in San Diego April 24, 25 Daytona Beach, Fla., - Professionals looking to gain a better understanding of the emerging unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) industry can take advantage of a two-day course being offered in San Diego April 24 to 25 by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Worldwide. Topics to be discussed include: introduction and impact of UAS; UAS designs; legislation, certification and regulation; industry concerns; applications; operational profiles; business opportunities; and the future of UAS. The course is developed and taught by Embry-Riddle Worldwide faculty with UAS operations and research experience. The cost of the course is $550, and continuing education units are available. For more information, click here or email training@erau.edu. About Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, the world's largest, fully accredited university specializing in aviation and aerospace, is a nonprofit, independent institution offering more than 60 baccalaureate, master's and Ph.D. degree programs in its colleges of Arts and Sciences, Aviation, Business and Engineering. Embry-Riddle educates students at residential campuses in Daytona Beach, Fla., and Prescott, Ariz., and through the Worldwide Campus with more than 150 locations in the United States, Europe, Asia and the Middle East. The university is a major research center, seeking solutions to real- world problems in partnership with the aerospace industry, other universities and government agencies. For more information, visit www.worldwide.erau.edu , follow us on Twitter (@ERAUworldwide) and www.facebook.com/EmbryRiddleWorldwide , and find expert videos at http://www.YouTube.com/EmbryRiddleUniv. Back to Top Upcoming Events: Middle East Air Cargo and Logistics Exhibition & Conference 2014 April 9-10, 2014 Abu Dhabi National Exhibition Centre (ADNEC) http://cargomiddleeast.com Flight Safety Foundation Business Aviation Safety Summit 2014 April 16-17, 2014 San Diego, CA http://flightsafety.org/files/doc/2014FSF_Prospectus.pdf Embry-Riddle Worldwide to offer UAS workshop San Diego April 24, 25, 2014 www.erau.edu Airport Show Dubai May 11-13, 2014 Dubai International Convention and Exhibition Centre (DICEC) www.theairportshow.com/portal/home.aspx International Humanitarian Aviation Summit 12-14MAY Toledo, Spain wfp.org National Safety Council Aviation Safety Committee Annual Conference Savanah, GA - May 14-15, 2014 Contact: tammy.washington@nsc.org http://cwp.marriott.com/savdt/artexmeeting/ Asia Pacific Aviation Safety Seminar 21-22 May 2014, Bangkok, Thailand http://bit.ly/APASS2014 Curt Lewis