Flight Safety Information May 1, 2015 - No. 085 In This Issue ICAO satisfied with Thailand's aviation safety improvement Pilot shuts down aircraft's engine during emergency over North Sea FAA Warns 787s Can Lose All Electrical Power in Certain Circumstances US aviation authority: Boeing 787 bug could cause 'loss of control' 747s to replace stricken A380 on Qantas LA route Pilot in fatal crash may have lacked enough training Irish pilots save plane and 46 passengers during landing Every Question You've Ever Had About Flying Answered by a Pilot Stick of dynamite left out by Los Angeles airport police after training The Indian Air Force's Big Problem: Not Enough Pilots! PROS 2015 TRAINING Large Air Force jet engine contract awarded Battle joined (The B-3 ?) Malaysia Airlines 'selling off fleet of aircraft' after Flight MH370 and MH17 tragedies Airplane De-Icing Agents Linked To Reduced Oxygen In Groundwater Dulles Airport to host emergency exercise Saturday Research Request GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY REQUEST Upcoming Events JOBS AVAILABLE (New Position) ICAO satisfied with Thailand's aviation safety improvement BANGKOK, 30 April 2015 (NNT) -The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has expressed satisfaction with the solutions to Significant Safety Concerns (SSC) by the Department of Civil Aviation, says Transport Minister Air Chief Marshal Prajin Juntong. Speaking after a meeting with Mr.Arun Mishra, Regional director, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, ACM Prajin said the ICAO was particularly pleased with the country's newly-improved regulations regarding transport of hazardous material, which has been improved in line with the ICAO's requirements. Regarding the issuance of Air Operator Certificate (AOC), the Minister advised the ICAO that the country was in the process of producing manuals of training and inspection, upon which the issuance of AOC would be based. The ICAO, meanwhile, suggested that airlines' representatives be included in the training. According to ACM Prajin, the ICAO will continue to support the country's aviation safety improvement until June 15, when Deputy Transport Minister Akom Termpitayapaisit leaves for Canada to report to the agency on the progress of the air safety revamp. The ICAO will next year send its experts to Thailand under Universal Security Audit Program to observe security in all areas of aviation including airplanes' entry into and departure from territorial sky, authentication of passengers and airport security. The Airports of Thailand (AOT) has planned to set up a working group to address concerns raised by the ICAO after the inspection. http://news.thaivisa.com/thailand/icao-satisfied-with-thailands-aviation-safety-improvement/56716/ Back to Top Pilot shuts down aircraft's engine during emergency over North Sea Saab 340 flybe aircraft operated by loganair quality image creative commons uploaded april 1 2015 A plane has landed safety after the pilot shut down one of its engines over the North Sea. The aircraft was carrying 31 people between Shetland and Edinburgh when an oil pressure alarm went off in the cabin at 8.15am on Friday. An emergency was declared and the Loganair Saab 340 diverted to Aberdeen, where it landed at around 8.40am. A Loganair spokesman said: "The flight, carrying 28 passengers and three, crew left Sumburgh at 7.40am for Edinburgh Airport. "A warning indicator light came on and the captain took the decision to shut down one engine as a precaution and divert to the nearest airport. http://news.stv.tv/north/319076-emergency-as-shetland-to-edinburgh-loganair-aircraft-lands-in-aberdeen/ Back to Top FAA Warns 787s Can Lose All Electrical Power in Certain Circumstances Issue can occur after Boeing Dreamliners remain connected to power source for extended periods By ANDY PASZTOR and JON OSTROWER Nearly four years after Boeing Co.'s 787 Dreamliner entered commercial service, federal regulators are moving to combat a potentially dangerous software glitch they said can cause a total loss of electrical power that would endanger the aircraft. A Federal Aviation Administration safety directive that became public on Thursday reveals that Boeing's laboratory tests discovered that under certain circumstances, all of the 787's power systems can suddenly shut down entirely during a flight. Such a problem, which the FAA said risks loss of control of the airplane, can occur after a jetliner remains connected to on-board or ground-based electric power without a break for a stretch of 248 consecutive days, the agency said. The FAA is ordering airlines to shut down power systems periodically to alleviate the hazard. Boeing said such shutdowns are part of regular maintenance, and it would be rare for a jet to have power uninterrupted for so long. The plane maker roughly a week ago recommended that airlines voluntarily turn off power systems at least every four months. During the early stages of the plane's introduction, Boeing drafted an internal report concluding that Dreamliners experienced most of their reliability problems just after being powered up. The company recommended adding additional time before flights to deal with erroneous "nuisance" messages. As a result, many airlines made efforts to keep aircraft powered over unusually long stretches to avoid some nagging technical headaches and keep their Dreamliners flying on schedule. According to the FAA document, a 787 "that has been powered continuously" for about eight months can trip software causing all four of its main generator control units "to go into fail-safe mode at the same time." The result, according to the FAA, can be "a loss of all AC electrical power regardless" of the phase of flight. Such a scenario can develop if the control units were powered up at the same time. In the event of such a failure, the aircraft would revert to battery power momentarily before deploying its ram air turbine, a wind-driven propeller that generates a small amount of emergency power. The FAA's move is a minor headache for Boeing and its global 787 operators, but underscores the turbulent journey to maturing the jet's advanced electrical systems. The FAA's move is the latest complication for Boeing and its global 787 operators involving the jet's electrical systems. In January 2013, after two Japanese carriers experienced fire or smoke emergencies with advanced lithium batteries, the FAA pressured Boeing and all 787 operators to ground the planes for several months until design changes were made to the batteries and their containers. In its latest directive, which isn't related to those battery problems, the FAA is requiring mechanics to temporarily turn off electrical systems on aircraft to briefly "deactivate" them. For some 787s, that could be required by the end of next week. Released on the Federal Register's website Thursday, the directive applies to more than two dozen Dreamliner aircraft currently flown by U.S. carriers. But foreign regulators are expected follow the FAA's lead and apply it to about 230 other 787s flying world-wide. Longer-term fixes to revise the problematic software are expected later this year. The Dreamliner's need for power is extraordinary: its advanced electrical system generates nearly twice as much juice as Airbus's double-deck A380 superjumbo jet despite being half its size. United Continental Holdings Inc., the largest 787 operator in the U.S. and an early customer for the jet, last year replaced many ground power units where the aircraft was operating, including its Houston hub. The earlier units, which sit at the gates and connect to the power-hungry aircraft, were unexpectedly switching off, causing a loss of power on the aircraft. When the aircraft was repowered, nuisance messages would have to be cleared before a flight could be operated. Boeing and United said that software and hardware changes to the aircraft have now significantly reduced those messages. But previously, United said its ground crews would leave a small onboard generator, known as the auxiliary power unit, running as an "alternate power source for [the 787] to ensure stable electrical power while on the ground." On other aircraft, such units typically are only operated in an emergency or immediately after landing and just before pushing back from the gate. A Boeing spokesman said the laboratory testing that revealed the potential shutdown problem was unrelated to the earlier nuisance messages or any reliability or other in-service issues with the Dreamliner fleet. In a statement, Boeing said all airplanes have performed a power cycle as part of maintenance activities, eliminating the risk of losing power from all the generators at the same time. Boeing said a software update to solve the issue would be provided to airlines starting in the fourth quarter of this year. http://www.wsj.com/articles/faa-warns-787s-can-lose-all-electrical-power-in-certain-circumstances- 1430434917 Back to Top US aviation authority: Boeing 787 bug could cause 'loss of control' More trouble for Dreamliner as Federal Aviation Administration warns glitch in control unit causes generators to shut down if left powered on for 248 days The Boeing 787 has four generator-control units that, if powered on at the same, could fail simultaneously and cause a complete electrical shutdown. The US air safety authority has issued a warning and maintenance order over a software bug that causes a complete electric shutdown of Boeing's 787 and potentially "loss of control" of the aircraft. In the latest of a long line of problems plaguing Boeing's 787 Dreamliner, which saw the company's fleet grounded over battery issues and concerns raised over possible hacking vulnerabilities, the new software bug was found in plane's generator-control units. The plane's electrical generators fall into a failsafe mode if kept continuously powered on for 248 days. The 787 has four such main generator-control units that, if powered on at the same time, could fail simultaneously and cause a complete electrical shutdown. "We are issuing this AD [airworthiness directive] to prevent loss of all AC electrical power, which could result in loss of control of the aeroplane," said the Federal Aviation Administration directive. "If the four main generator control units (associated with the engine-mounted generators) were powered up at the same time, after 248 days of continuous power, all four GCUs will go into failsafe mode at the same time, resulting in a loss of all AC electrical power regardless of flight phase." Should the electrical shutdown happen at a critical phase in flight such as take-off or landing, or while manoeuvring in the air, the loss of control could be catastrophic. The FAA considered the situation critical and issued the new rule without allowing time for comment. Boeing is working on a software upgrade for the control units that should rectify the bug. "The airworthiness directive action addresses a condition that only occurred in the lab. Simulated testing determined that this condition is possible in cases where an aeroplane's power is left on for more than eight continuous months. No airplane in the fleet experienced that condition," a Boeing spokesman told the Guardian. According to Boeing's records, all of the 787s currently in service have been turned off and turned on again as part of maintenance. The FAA's directive mandates action recommended by Boeing on 19 April. "If there is a definitive record of a powercycle within the last 120 days, no operator action is immediately required. Operators will perform periodic power cycling at scheduled intervals until incorporating a software update. Boeing will issue in the fourth quarter of 2015," said the Boeing spokesman. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/01/us-aviation-authority-boeing-787-dreamliner-bug-could- cause-loss-of-control Back to Top 747s to replace stricken A380 on Qantas LA route A Qantas Airbus A380 damaged during maintenance in Sydney is expected to be out of action for six weeks and has prompted the airline to replace some Los Angeles superjumbo services with Boeing 747s. The Boeing 747s are configured to A380 standards in business, premium economy and economy but do not have first class. The plane was damaged when it slipped off a jack in a Qantas (QAN) hangar and the airline has called in manufacturer Airbus to get it back in the air as quickly as possible. Flights from Sydney or Melbourne will be affected on selected dates and first class passengers will be given the option of flying on another day or connecting by an A380 leaving from the other city. They will also be able to travel from Sydney to Dallas-Fort Worth, downgrade to business class or get a refund. The Dallas-Fort Worth, Dubai and London A380 services are not affected. "We've engaged Airbus technical support to get the aircraft repaired as soon as possible," a Qantas spokeswoman told Australian Business Traveller. "Due to the complex technical nature of the repair, we expect the aircraft will be out of service for about six weeks." http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/s-to-replace-stricken-a380-on-qantas-la-route/story- e6frg95x-1227317659417 Back to Top Pilot in fatal crash may have lacked enough training A Piper Cheyenne crashed a quarter mile short of the runway at Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport on April 12. The NTSB will investigate all aspects of an April 12 plane crash but pilot experience will be a focus. Pilot John Patrick Van Ommeren completed an initial training course to fly a Piper Cheyenne just one week before his plane crashed near Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport, killing all four on board. That was one of the details in a National Transportation Safety Board preliminary report released Thursday. Although NTSB will investigate all aspects of the April 12 accident, pilot experience likely will become a primary focus. Also killed in the accident were Monique Van Ommeren, 49, Sacha Van Ommeren,15, and Sharissa Van Ommeren, 13, all residents of Paramaribo, Suriname. John Patrick Van Ommeren, 51, initially mentioned no problems to air traffic controllers after taking off from Orlando. While approaching Fort Lauderdale, he reported smoke in the cockpit and was told he could use any runway. After lining up to land on the diagonal runway, he called out "mayday" several times before the plane plummeted. It crashed a quarter mile short of the runway into a nature preserve, broke apart and erupted into flames at about 4:25 p.m. on that Sunday. Records showed Van Ommeren had 1,221 hours of total flight time and was authorized to fly multi-engine airplanes and on instruments, the NTSB report said. Although that is a fair amount of experience, investigators will try to determine how many hours of training Van Ommeren had in the seven-seat Cheyenne, a complex aircraft. Records also showed the twin-engine Cheyenne, built in 1979, had received a comprehensive maintenance inspection on April 3, nine days before the accident. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/fl-plane-crash-report-20150430-story.html Back to Top Irish pilots save plane and 46 passengers during landing - AAIU A quick-thinking Aer Lingus Regional pilot and co-pilot saved their plane and 46 passengers by flying into a rain shower to clear sea salt which had completely caked their aircraft windscreen. The revelation came as an Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) report praised "the good airmanship" of the crew of the ATR-72 flight from Manchester to Cork whose skill averted a potential accident at 10.50pm on January 2 2014. The AAIU described it as "a serious incident." The build-up of sea salt on the windscreen, caused by stormy conditions during their flight over the Irish Sea, is one of the rarest challenges faced by pilots. In the case of the seven-year old ATR turbo-prop attempting to land at Cork Airport, the 40-year old female pilot and her co-pilot were shocked to realise a thick layer of white sea salt had caked over their windscreen as they were attempting to land. The condition of the windscreen was only apparent to the pilots, whose entire flight was conducted in darkness, when they had to abort their first attempted landing at Cork due to a significant increase in indicated airspeed because of the stormy conditions. "The aircraft then positioned under radar control for a second approach to the same runway," the AAIU report revealed. "Its track brought it south of (Cork), close to the coast and at times over the sea. During this time, a thick layer of sea salt formed on the front windscreens, obscuring the flight crew's forward visibility." Contamination on windscreen of Aer Lingus Regional flight. Credit: Air Accident Investigation Unit "As it was not possible to acquire the necessary visual references for landing, a second go-around was flown." The AAIU report found that such a salt build-up can occur in specific weather conditions. However, it was particularly severe in the case of the Manchester-Cork flight that evening. The bulk of the salt is believed to have gathered on the windscreen when the plane had descended to a height of 1,000 metres (3,000 feet). "The flight crew were faced with a very rare but significant issue when the forward visibility through their windscreens was obscured due to sea salt accretion on the windscreens, while attempting a night landing at (Cork) during a winter storm." But the quick-thinking pilot and co-pilot immediately flew into an area of heavy shower activity - and used the rain in an attempt to wash clear the windscreen. The pilot has over 5,000 hours flying experience and, critically, over 4,700 hours have been logged on the ATR- 72 type. "A small portion of the commander's windscreen was cleared. A third approach was flown to a successful landing," the AAIU report added. The AAIU investigation was unstinting in its praise of how the Aer Lingus Regional crew reacted. "Following the second go-around, the flight crew showed good airmanship and crew resource management in seeking to fly to areas of shower activity which were visible on their weather radar." "They were facilitated in this by Air Traffic Control and they found areas of moisture which, although not active enough to completely clear the windscreen, did clear a small area of the windscreen on the commander's side." The pilot commenced her successful final approach to Cork peering through "this small gap (washed) in the salt residue." "At the time, the first officer still had no visual reference," the AAIU report pointed out. Two other planes reported similar sea salt build-up on their windscreens that night but none as severe at the Manchester flight. The AAIU pointed out that it was "noteworthy" that the flights of two of the aircraft involved that night, both French-built ATR-72s, found that the windscreen wipers were ineffective in clearing off the salt. "The commander of (the Manchester flight) also stated that she believed that the windscreen heat had exacerbated the issue by drying out the salt and enabling a thick layer to form." http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-pilots-save-plane-and-46-passengers-during-landing-aaiu- 31186623.htm Back to Top Every Question You've Ever Had About Flying Answered by a Pilot Let's just put it right out there: flying is a king-sized pain in the ass. The cramped seats, the recycled air, the turbulence, the mysterious noises, and whaaaaaaaaaaat's the deal with the food? If you can identify with the fourth of the population that gets freaked out from flying, you know there's little one can do or say to quell the anxiety associated with being tens of thousands of feet high in the air. Determined to conquer my own personal fear, as well as the rest of America's, I sought out Tom Bunn -- an experienced airline captain and licensed therapist who's specialized in the treatment of fear of flying for over thirty years. We sat down for thirty minutes and went over every single ridiculous thought that goes through your mind as you wait out the 90-minute delay before takeoff. 1. Will my plane crash? No, because crashes have to have something go wrong. And for everything that you need on a plane, you need to supply the plane with two, three, or four of them. The wings can't break, so you only need two of 'em. But, for hydraulics, you need a backup to the main system and a backup for the backup. For navigation, you have the same thing -- the primary system, you have your backup system, another system behind that. So, you don't just run out of what you need. So, that's why we don't have planes crashing in the U.S. We've gone 14 years without a fatality on a major U.S. airline. 2. What happens if a bullet is shot through the fuselage? First, what would it not do: It would not cause the plane to come apart. The fuselage penetration area would not spread enough to threaten the plane. For the plane to be threatened, the bullet would have to damage a hydraulic system or an electrical system. Yet, even in that case, the plane should be alright, due to those backup systems and the backups' backups. 3. What if the landing gear failed? The first level of failure would be that the gear does not indicate 'down and locked' when the pilots attempt to extend it with the gear handle. Using the gear handle, hydraulic pressure moves the gear down and locks it. If that doesn't work, the pilots unlock the 'uplocks,' which are the latches that keep the gear stowed in the up position during flight. After unlocking the 'uplocks,' gravity can extend the gear. If that doesn't work, the gear can be extended by hand with a crank. 4. What if there was something on the wing? You know, I haven't met many people who've seen that other than in The Twilight Zone. But people do see things and they're afraid they're the only people who've seen it. For example, under certain conditions, you'll get some vapor along the wings that looks like fog. And it will just pop up and go away. 5. Will turbulence ever bring down a plane? I would say no, but there was one plane brought down by turbulence back in the beginning of the jet era when a British Airlines plane was making a sightseeing pass of Mt. Fuji and there was a very strong jet stream going by Mt. Fuji -- and it's a very uniquely shaped mountain -- and they got into some turbulence situation that broke the plane apart. Basically, the learning experience there is, don't go sightseeing near Mt. Fuji. We haven't had any further planes taken down by turbulence. 6. If a window broke, would you get sucked out? In the cabin, there are two windows. One is structural, one is there to keep your hands off the structural one. It's plexiglass and it's just not going to break. The cockpit glass is not plexiglass, it's actually glass, but very strong glass. The glass is actually heated -- if the heating system malfunctions, you could have a fracture of the cockpit glass. Once again, pretty rare. 7. Is it safe to fly during a thunderstorm? Well, yes and no. You don't want to land when you're right under one because there's a thing that happens called a downburst, where there's a thunderstorm and it just dumps the air straight downward. If you're 5,000 feet high, you're fine, but you don't want to be 50 feet off the ground. So, that's why we don't do any landings if there's a thunderstorm over a runway. 8. What happens when lightning hits a plane? Not much. The statistics are really interesting. The average airplane gets hit twice a year. In the cockpit you hear a "bang" and you see a flash. Here's what you don't know -- you don't know if it's static discharge or lighting until you land. When an airplane flies through clouds, it picks up static electricity. When you get on a ground and if there are marks on the wing or nose, which looks like a cigarette burn, then you'll know it was lightning. 9. Where shouldn't you fly over? First thing that comes to mind is getting shot down over the edge of Ukraine. That was a situation where the airline should have figured that out right away. In previous days, there have been military personnel there operating anti-aircraft missiles. No airliner should have flown through there. Those missiles could supposedly go up to 60,000 feet. 10. What happens if you leave your phone on during takeoff? Nothing. It doesn't matter, it never did. This was the FAA covering their ass. The FAA did not want to get into the business of testing every electronic device that could have possibly caused a problem. I guess it was smart, because if a plane went down and some lawyers sued the FAA saying it was because of an electronic device, they could have potentially tried to blame them, so the FAA just said you can't use them. They were never a threat, they don't operate on frequencies similar to the frequencies used in aviation. 11. Have you ever flown through the Bermuda Triangle? Oh yeah, sure! There's not anything to it, somebody just came up with this idea that it's like a Stephen King novel. Planes have gotten lost there, planes have gotten lost everywhere. There's nothing special about it. 12. What are pilots afraid of? I don't know... not much. The thing about flying is, airplanes have gotten so safe that there's really nothing to worry about. There's the concern that something might happen that you can't handle. You have a sense of responsibility that you have hundreds of lives you're taking care of, I think the main problem pilots worry about is that they will somehow fail. 13. What happens if one engine goes out? Well, a plane flies fine with one engine; you have to land, though, because you won't have a backup anymore. The FAA is very strict about that, you can't fly with one engine. You have to land at the closest airport possible. 14. What happens if both go out? Then you become a glider, but it's only happened twice. There was a case, many years ago, in Canada with a 767 when both engines went out. Air Canada had some problems with their fuel gauges -- and this was in that period of time when the English-speaking people and the French-speaking people weren't getting along too well. They planned the flight using metric measure, but used English measure when they fueled the plane, so they only had half as much fuel in the plane than they thought. So they're flying along and it gets very quiet -- the engines quit. So, they found an airport, only problem was the airport had been closed and was being used as a drag strip. Didn't take very long for the people drag racing to realize something was wrong and they got the hell off the drag strip. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/supercompressor/every-question-youve-ever_b_7171290.html Back to Top Stick of dynamite left out by Los Angeles airport police after training A live stick of dynamite was accidentally left on an old plane at an airport museum for four days, a law enforcement officer at Los Angeles International Airport said Thursday. The official, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak publicly, said workers on the tarmac found the dynamite Tuesday when they noticed the bright colors on the stick. The stick was left behind after a Saturday training exercise for K9 officers and their dogs who work at the airport. Though live, the dynamite would have required a detonator or explosive to be set off. Sgt. Belinda Joseph, a spokeswoman, said the object was a training aid and "there was a certain amount of TNT contained in it" but denied that it was a stick of dynamite. She said airport police are investigating and have notified the Transportation Security Administration. The stick was checked out from a TSA explosive storage container for training. The stick was left in a compartment underneath the "Spirit of Seventy Six" plane, the official said. The plane was featured at the Flight Path Learning Center and Museum on the airport's southern edge. The plane is outside the museum and is run by volunteers and frequently hosts school groups and other visitors. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/01/stick-dynamite-left-out-by-los-angeles-airport-police-after-training/ Back to Top The Indian Air Force's Big Problem: Not Enough Pilots! New Delhi faces a critical shortage of both planes and pilots a parliamentary panel revealed this week. This week, a parliamentary committee attacked the Indian Ministry of Defense (MOD) over the poor state of the Indian Air Force (IAF) in comparison to its Chinese and Pakistani counterparts. The committee's concern? New Delhi faces a critical shortage of both planes and pilots (for additional background see: "Indian Air Force Still Plagued by Poor Procurement Process"). The report of the Indian government's 35-member Standing Committee on Defence noted that "even the slight edge over rival neighboring nations" would be lost if "complacency" remains. The Indian officials particularly lamented that the number of current active fighter squadrons (35) is seven below the sanctioned strength of 42. However, the number of squadrons may even further decline over the next seven years. "With regard to this, representatives of air force deposed before the committee that a drawdown has already begun and, by 2022, air force will have around just 25 squadrons, thereby losing even the slight edge over rival neighboring nation," the panel's report emphasized. Furthermore, the IAF's current fighter aircraft to pilot ratio is 1:0.81."Our sanctioned strength for [combat] pilots is less than that of our adversaries," the report said, adding that the Pakistan Air Force's fighter to pilot ratio was 1:2.5, IHS Jane's Defence Weekly reported. In the U.S. the cockpit to pilot ratio is 1:2. Jane's further summarized: This was far less than the authorised figure of 1:1.25 and was responsible for depreciating the force's operational capabilities, the report stated. The sanctioned cockpit to pilot ratio for the IAF's transport aircraft is 1:1.5 and 1:1 for its helicopters. The report of the panel, headed by Major General (retd.) B.C Khanduri, expressed its deep concern over the operational readiness of the IAF: The committee takes serious view of the fact that our squadron strength is already short of what has been authorised by the Government and moreover, insufficiency in number of available pilots in the Air Force further deteriorates our operational capabilities. Additionally, the report also highlighted the high number of accidents (83 between May 2007 and January 2015) in the IAF: "From the above information, it is evident that there is either lacuna in training that is being imparted to our pilots and support officials or the systems installed are technically ill equipped." India is still pursuing the perspective multi-role fighter (PMF) project (see: "What's the Status of the Indian- Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Jet?") and has not entirely abandoned plans for the acquisition of medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA), although prospects for its successful completion are slim (see: "India Makes if Offical: 'The Mother of All Defense Deals' is Dead"). New Delhi also remains confident in the induction of the indigenous-produced Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), Tejas. Nevertheless, "if all the procurements fructify, IAF is likely to achieve the authorised strength of 42 squadrons only by the end of the 15th Plan, or in 2032," the panel said, "however, despite all the efforts in this regard, the committee is perturbed to note that no concrete results have so far come from MMRCA negotiations and LCA has certain design/development issues that need a relook." In April 2015, while in Paris, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that New Delhi would purchase 36 Dassault Rafale multi-role fighters off-the-shelf in a government-to-government deal (see: "India Will Buy 36 Ready-to-Fly Dassault Rafale Fighters from France"), a stopgap solution to overcome some the critical shortages facing the IAF as highlighted in the parliamentary committee report. http://thediplomat.com/2015/04/the-indian-air-forces-big-problem-not-enough-pilots/ Back to Top Back to Top Large Air Force jet engine contract awarded The Air Force has awarded a $325 million contract to Pratt & Whitney to develop an advanced jet engine. The East Hartford, Conn.-based manufacturer will develop the next phase of the Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engine, an Air Force Research Laboratory project, under an agreement through April 2023, according to the Department of Defense. The VAATE aims to increase turbine engine affordability and propulsion, according to the department. AFRL's Aerospace Directorate, which absorbed the former Propulsion Directorate, is at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The work will be performed at Pratt & Whitney facilities in Connecticut, the Defense Department said. http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/business/large-air-force-jet-engine-contract-awarded/nk6jx/ Back to Top Battle joined (The B-3 ?) Three of the world's biggest defence companies are locked in a contest that could reshape the industry WITHIN the next few months, the biggest defence contract for what will probably be many years to come will be awarded by the US Air Force, to build a new long-range strike bomber. The B-3, as it is likely to be named, will be a nuclear-capable aircraft designed to penetrate the most sophisticated air defences. The contract itself will be worth $50 billion-plus in revenues to the successful bidder, and there will be many billions of dollars more for work on design, support and upgrades. The plan is to build at least 80-100 of the planes at a cost of more than $550m each. The stakes could not be higher for at least two of the three industrial heavyweights that are slugging it out. On one side is a team of Boeing and Lockheed Martin; on the other, Northrop Grumman. The result could lead to a shake-out in the defence industry, with one of the competitors having to give up making combat aircraft for good. After the B-3 contract is awarded, the next big deal for combat planes-for a sixth-generation "air-dominance fighter" to replace the F-22 and F-18 Super Hornet-will be more than a decade away. So Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group, an aviation-consulting firm, believes it will be hard for the loser to stay in the combat-aircraft business. If Northrop were to miss out, its investors may press for it to be broken up. If Boeing were to lose, Mr Aboulafia thinks it may seek to buy Northrop's aircraft-building business, to ensure it gets the job after all. The production line in St Louis that makes Boeing's F-18 (the US Navy's mainstay fighter until it starts to get the carrier version of the new F-35 in numbers) is due to close in 2017. If Northrop were to depart the field, that could leave Lockheed Martin as the only American company with the ability to design combat planes, and thus the biggest winner of the three. Usually in a contest of this kind, particularly this close to its end, a clear favourite emerges. Industry-watchers rate this one as still too close to call. That is partly because the degree of secrecy surrounding what is still classified as a "black programme" has remained high. Only the rough outlines of the aircraft's specification have been revealed. It will be stealthy, subsonic, have a range of around 6,000 miles (9,650km) and be able to carry a big enough payload to destroy many targets during a single sortie. The best clues to what it will look like are from earlier "flying wing" design concepts the aircraft-makers have displayed, and from the shrouded "mystery plane" that Northrop showed in a recent television commercial (pictured). But most of all, picking a winner is hard because both competitors are highly credible-and each has different strengths. Boeing and Lockheed first joined forces in 2007 to build what was then known as the Next-Generation Bomber- a project cancelled two years later because its excessive technological ambition was causing costs to soar. They decided to team up again in 2013 to prepare for a new request for proposals that the air force quietly released last summer. Boeing is the team leader and will build the aircraft if their bid is successful; Lockheed will take the main responsibility for its design. That should be a winning combination. Boeing is as good as it gets when it comes to the efficient construction of large aircraft, and has painfully and expensively acquired expertise in carbon-fibre composites as it developed its 787 Dreamliner, a civil airliner. Lockheed can draw on its "skunk works", an autonomous design team that works on radical new aircraft technologies; and on its experience developing radar-beating stealth technologies for the F-22 and F-35 fighter planes. Northrop, on the other hand, built the revolutionary B-2 stealth bomber that entered service in the early 1990s. It was conceived as a deep-penetration nuclear bomber at the height of the cold war. But when the Soviet Union dissolved, the need for America to have 132 of the planes went with it. Only 21 were eventually built, leading the programme into a "death spiral" in which declining orders pushed up the unit price of an aircraft to absurd levels. Once its development, engineering and testing costs were added, each B-2 ended up costing more than $2 billion. But it was hardly Northrop's fault that the cold war ended sooner than expected. The plane it built has since proved its capabilities in numerous conflicts, from Kosovo to Libya. Updated versions of the once-radical technologies that made the B-2 so expensive (both to buy and to operate) will find their way into the new bomber. Another possible advantage for the air force in choosing Northrop is that it might be better able to focus on the programme. Boeing is not only grappling with its hugely demanding, and rapidly expanding, civil-aviation business; it is also struggling to deliver the K-46 tanker plane by the target date of 2017. (It snatched that big order from a consortium of Northrop and Airbus, after protesting at the air force's initial decision to award it to its rivals.) Lockheed, for its part, also has its hands full ramping up production of the late and over-budget F-35. The target for the plane to come into operation is the mid-2020s-if possible, even earlier. In part this is because of fast-emerging new threats and in part because the average age of America's current bomber fleet, consisting of 76 geriatric B-52s, 63 B-1s and 20 B-2s, is 38 years. Keeping such ancient aircraft flying in the face of metal fatigue and corrosion is a constant struggle: just 120 are deemed mission-ready. None of these, except the B- 2s, can penetrate first-rate air defences without carrying cruise missiles-and the missiles are of little use against mobile targets. In the kind of one-sided wars that America and its allies fought in the years after the September 11th 2001 attacks, such deficiencies were not a problem. But during that period China, in particular, has invested heavily in "anti-access/area-denial" (A2/AD) capabilities. These include thousands of precision-guided missiles of increasing range that could threaten America's bases in the Western Pacific, and any carriers sailing close enough to shore to launch their short-range tactical aircraft. Critics of the huge F-35 programme (the Pentagon is planning to buy 2,457 aircraft at a cost of around $100m each) argue that its limited range was a growing problem even before it entered service. A new long-range bomber that can penetrate the most advanced air defences is thus seen as vital in preserving America's unique ability to project power anywhere in the world. If getting the new bomber into service fast is a priority, so too is keeping the price low enough to be able to build it in sensible numbers, and thus keep it safe from political ambush. Budget caps imposed by Congress in 2013 have ushered in a decade of defence-spending austerity, and the B-3 will be the first major weapons system to be designed and produced in this new era. To stay on budget and avoid the risk of having its orders cut, the programme will have to rely on technologies adapted from earlier projects; and any temptation to "gold-plate" its specification with showy but not strictly necessary features will have to be resisted. The B-3 will be a bit smaller than the B-2, and be able to use the same engines as the F-35. The option of being able to fly the bomber pilotlessly, by remote control, seems to have been dropped, as have some highly sophisticated surveillance sensors that were proposed earlier. The risk of this cautious approach is that the new bomber might quickly lose its technical edge if faced with new threats or relentlessly improving air-defence systems (thanks to ever faster processors and sensors). But this danger is being seen off in two ways. The first is by designing the planes with what the Pentagon's acquisitions chief, Frank Kendall, describes as an "open architecture and modular approach", in which companies will compete to provide future upgrades that can be easily plugged in as and when needed. The other is that, despite its stealthiness, the B-3 will be fully connected to a range of "off-board capabilities", such as electronic countermeasures and the collection of targeting data, provided by other aircraft and orbital reconnaissance satellites, instead of having to carry everything on board. In keeping with the secrecy surrounding the plane, neither of the two competing teams is prepared to discuss their bids or why they should prevail in any detail. Such reticence may not survive the awarding of the contract. Although the air force is striving to make its decision as protest-proof as possible, neither Boeing nor Northrop is likely to take defeat quietly. Northrop is still smarting from Boeing's lobbying triumph over the K-46 tanker programme, in which a plane that many military analysts considered superior ended up losing. The Pentagon likes to share work around so as to ensure there is continued competition for contracts to provide military gear, especially complex ones such as this. In the case of the B-3 it has explicitly ruled out taking such concerns into account when choosing between the two contenders. That may be because it realises that whichever it selects, it will deal a devastating blow to the other. The days when America had a choice of combat-plane suppliers are coming to an end. http://www.economist.com/news/business/21650144-three-worlds-biggest-defence-companies-are-locked- contest-could-reshape Back to Top Malaysia Airlines 'selling off fleet of aircraft' after Flight MH370 and MH17 tragedies MALAYSIA AIRLINES is reportedly selling off a fleet of its aircraft as the company seeks to recover from a disastrous year, which saw one of its flights disappear without trace and another shot down. The Asian aviation group lost two Boeing 777-200ERs last year, when Flight MH370 disappeared while en route to Beijing from Kuala Lumpur and Flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine. But now the company is attempted to restructure its fleet by offering 16 of its aircraft for sale or lease, according to an aviation blog. The company will reportedly be selling off all six of its Airbus A380s, two Boeing 747-400Fs, four A330-200Fs and four Boeing 777-200ERs. Reported on the respected aviation website Leeham News and Comment, the page read: "The disposal of all six A380s presents an opportunity to test the market for used A380s and whether a key component to Airbus' strategy for the super jumbo going forward will work: allow airlines to try out the airplane without having to spent the huge amount of money required to buy new. "After experiencing the A380, the theory goes, other carriers will understand how this can spur sales. "This theory was created in anticipation of A380s coming off lease from Singapore Airlines and later Emirates Airlines for airplanes that are 12 years or older. The MAS A380s are considerably younger." Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 disappeared on March 8 last year, leaving behind no trace of wreckage of any sign of the 239 passengers and crew on board. The search area was narrowed down to a vast section of the Indian Ocean which teams scoured for months on end to no avail. Following a four-month hiatus, the hunt resumed in October with teams armed with equipment to scour the sea floor. Investigators believe the aircraft ran out of fuel and crashed somewhere in a 23,000 square mile region. Flight MH17 was shot down on July 7 last year - resulting in the deaths of all 298 people on board. It is widely believed that the plane was blown out of the sky by Vladimir Putin-backed militia during the ongoing Ukraine conflict. Both Moscow and the Russian president have denied responsibility. http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/574107/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-MH17-selling-off-tragedies Back to Top Airplane De-Icing Agents Linked To Reduced Oxygen In Groundwater Spring is here and that means fewer airplanes need to be de-iced. That may be good, according to a new study which finds that de-icing agents accumulated during the winter, which end up on unpaved areas and infiltrate into the soils during snowmelt, could end up in groundwater. This is not news. Airports in the developed world are required to keep groundwater levels safe and the de-icing agents are filtered by the natural self cleaning capacities of soil. Chemicals such as propylene glycol and potassium formate are degraded by micro-organisms and don't get into the groundwater. But a new paper finds they could still have an impact, because the microbes use oxygen to degrade the pollutants. As a consequence iron and manganese oxides, which stabilize the intergranular cement of the structure of the soil, dissolve. For the study, researchers analyzed the soil around the airport of the Norwegian capital Oslo. There, every winter about 1,000-1,500 tons of de-icing agents are used. "At the same time, the airport is situated directly next to the largest superficial aquifer in Norway, the Romerike-Aquifer," explains PD Dr. Markus Wehrer from the Friedrich Schiller University Jena. The geoscientists took soil core samples close to the runway of the airport and examined them and graduate student Heidi Lissner explains loaded soil cores with water that contained de-icing chemicals and thus simulated a "thawing event". She collected the seepage water after it passed through the soil cores, followed by an examination for de-icing chemicals as well as the oxygen content and additional parameters. It's not a panic situation and there are a number of solutions. Airports could install specific areas which allow the thawing water to seep away in a controlled manner, making for more controlled use of bacteria in the soil that degrade the chemicals. Also, alternative substances, which can be used for the degradation of pollutants similar to the way in which oxygen works, may be supplied. And the texture of the soil could be shaped in a way that delays the seepage of the polluted soil water. By using a longer interval, which is then available for the degradation of the substances, a lack of oxygen could be avoided, because atmospheric oxygen is transferred slowly but continuously into the soil. http://www.science20.com/news_articles/airplane_deicing_agents_linked_to_reduced_oxygen_in_groundwater- 155199#ixzz3YtCadMGh Back to Top Dulles Airport to host emergency exercise Saturday If you see smoke and flames at Dulles International Airport on Saturday, don't panic. It's only a drill. The airport is holding an emergency preparedness exercise to give personnel from across the region a chance to practice their response to a large-scale plane crash. More than 125 volunteers will pose as victims, moulaged to simulate injuries, including broken bones. As part of the elaborate drill, participants will battle a fire. Others will rescue, treat and transport injured passengers. The drill will run from 8:30 a.m. to approximately noon. The exercise is being held on a closed runway at the airport and is not expected to impact regular airport operations. Airport officials, however, note that people in nearby communities, particularly those near Routes 606 and 28, and the Dulles Access Road, may see elements of the exercise and should not be alarmed. The Federal Aviation Administration requires airports across the country to hold such exercises to test emergency readiness and response. The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, which manages Dulles as well as Reagan National Airport, is overseeing the exercise. MWAA last hosted drills at Dulles and National in 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/04/30/dulles-airport-to-host-emergency-exercise- saturday/ Back to Top Research Request Research Request for Pilots Assistance in Validating a Prototype Knowledge & Competency Exam The Center for Aviation Safety Research (CASR) at Saint Louis University in St. Louis, MO (USA) requests your help recruiting volunteers to validate a new exam they have just created to test pilot's knowledge in certain topic areas. Professional Aviation Board of Certification (PABC) is a recruiter and registrar for this research effort and we hope you will: (1) take the exam yourself, (2) invite your fellow pilots to take it, or (3) both. Please note: All testing must be completed by May 29, 2015. * Qualifications to Participate - Pilots who hold current Commercial Licenses / Certificates with Instrument Ratings and higher, including: o A Multi-crew Pilot License (MPL) or ATP-level license with type ratings on modern jet transport aircraft o Retired ATP-holders who currently serve as Type Rating Instructors/Evaluators or Simulator Instructors/Evaluators. * This Exam is: o For research by CASR, with the pilots' answers kept anonymous and the study findings only showing data in aggregate form. o Conducted on a computer in testing centers located around the world. o Taken at a time and place that are convenient for each individual pilot. o Free - no cost to the pilot. o Expected to be completed in 1-3 hrs, but allow 4 hrs if needed. o To support follow-on research on aviation training, testing and safety. * In Return - Volunteers will not be paid, but will be given a letter of appreciation by PABC for their contribution to the vital air safety study. If you are willing to serving as a volunteer, please email the Registrar at: pjwolfe@pabc.aero If you know of other pilots who might be interested and willing, please pass this notice on to them. Thank you in advance for considering this request Pete Peter J. Wolfe, PABC Executive Director & Exam Registrar PO Box 58250, Houston, TX 77258 (O) +1 281-326-3938 Skype: pjwolfe pjwolfe@pabc.aero Back to Top GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY REQUEST Hello, you are receiving this message as a courtesy to Mr. Hussain Alhallaf, a Ph.D. candidate at Florida Institute of Technology's doctoral program in Aviation Sciences in the College of Aeronautics. He is examining the relationship between factors affecting the aviation profession and the concept of aviation professionalism, specifically understanding aviation professionalism, and is seeking your assistance to complete an online questionnaire, which would take 10-15 minutes to complete. Mr. Alhallaf endeavors to understand why the aviation profession is such an important career and how can we improve ourselves as professionals within the aviation profession. In addition to taking the survey we also are seeking your generosity in distributing the survey's link. Your assistance and participation are totally appreciated. To participate, you may access the online survey via the following link: http://questionpro.com/t/ALRnkZSa9Y If you have any questions or are unable to distribute the email to your members, please do not hesitate to contact me via e-mail at halhallaf2014@my.fit.edu or by Cell phone at (386) 847-7671. Thank you for your cooperation. Yours faithfully, Hussain Alhallaf Ph.D. candidate in Aviation Sciences Back To The Top Upcoming Events: ERAU Advanced Aircraft Accident Investigation Seminar Prescott Campus, AZ May 4-8, 2015 www.erau.edu/cmas IATA Cabin Operations Safety Conference May 5-7, 2015 Paris, France www.iata.org/cabin-safety-conference ERAU Aviation SMS Seminar Daytona Beach, FL May 12-14, 2015 www.erau.edu/sms Aircraft Accident Investigation - Fire and Material Failures New course offered by BlazeTech Corp. Woburn MA USA 19-21 May 2015 www.blazetech.com Fundamentals of IS-BAH June 15, 2015 St. Hubert, Quebec Canada https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?eventid=1659069 IS-BAH Auditing June 16, 2015 St. Hubert, Quebec Canada https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?eventid=1659079 6th Pan American Aviation Safety Summit June 22-26th Medellin, Colombia http://www.alta.aero/safety/2015/home.php Fundamentals of IS-BAO April 23, 2015 PCAT Safety Smackdown, San Antonio TX USA https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?eventid=1657525 IS-BAO Auditing April 24, 2015 PCAT Safety Smackdown, San Antonio TX USA https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?eventid=1657526 Fundamentals of IS-BAO May 12, 2015 Toluca, Mexico https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?eventid=1698113 IS-BAO Auditing May 13, 2015 Toluca, Mexico https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?eventid=1698115 Back to Top JOBS AVAILABLE: Managing Director, Safety Airlines for America http://airlines.org/careers/ Curt Lewis