Flight Safety Information November 3, 2015 - No. 220 In This Issue Join Our Mailing List Infrared Satellite Detects Flash Near Site Of Russian Metrojet Crash Russian plane crash: Theories on why jet disintegrated in midair Downed Russian Jet Suffered Prior Damage Linked to Other Crashes Pakistani jet comes off runway after hard landing Several booted from flight in L.A. claim discrimination One year in jail for Gardena man who pointed laser at airplane, helicopters Flatulence from 2,186 sheep forced plane to make emergency landing after gas set off smoke alarms E-Cigarettes, Deemed Flight Safety Risk, Banned From Checked Bags How Pilots Intuitively Make Critical Decisions Taxiway under repair after jet fire PROS 2015 TRAINING Stop By and Visit At NBAA - Booth N812 Google: Our Drones Will Deliver Packages By 2017 Combined LIDAR and GPS System Improves Air Safety ISS Crew Celebrates 15 Years Of Human Habitation In Space Upcoming Events JOBS AVAILABLE (New Positions) Infrared Satellite Detects Flash Near Site Of Russian Metrojet Crash The new evidence suggests an onboard explosion may have downed the airliner, killing 224. New evidence suggests an onboard explosion may have caused a Russian Metrojet airliner to break apart and crash in Egypt's Sinai peninsula over the weekend. Infrared satellite images released by U.S. officials to NBC News show a heat flash near the location of the crash that killed all 224 passengers, the network reported. The sign of a flash contradicts speculation that the commercial airliner was downed by a missile. Instead, intelligence analysts told NBC, it suggests that the explosion may have originated on board the plane. "The speculation that this plane was brought down by a missile is off the table," the official told NBC. Russian officials expressed doubt after an Islamic State affiliate claimed responsibility for the crash, arguing that the terrorist organization likely lacks sophisticated weaponry needed to shoot down a plane from an altitude of 31,000 feet. "It's unlikely, but I wouldn't rule it out," the U.S. director of national intelligence, James Clapper, said of terrorist involvement. Meanwhile, the Russian airline on Monday denied that mechanical failure or pilot error could have caused the crash. "The only possible explanation could be an external impact on the airplane," said Alexander Smirnov, Metrojet's deputy director. Russia's top aviation official chided the company for "jumping the gun" on ruling out mechanical or pilot error. Some airlines, including Emirates, Lufthansa and Air France-KLM, have rerouted flights to avoid flying over Egypt's Sinai Peninsula until the investigation determines a cause. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/metrojet-crash-infrared-satellite_56380b8de4b00a4d2e0ba8d7 Back to Top Russian plane crash: Theories on why jet disintegrated in midair Investigators do not know why the plane carrying 224 people broke apart midair (CNN)The theories on what may have brought down Metrojet Flight 9268 run the gamut, from a fuel tank explosion to a missile from the ground. Russian officials say it's too soon to tell what made the passenger jet plunge to the ground Saturday, killing all 224 people on board. Aviation experts agree, and officials have downplayed an apparent claim by Islamic militants that they brought down the Airbus A321-200, saying technical failure is the most likely reason for the crash. Here's the latest on what we know: The flight Flight 9268 was on its way from the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh to St. Petersburg early Saturday when it dropped off radar about 23 minutes into the flight, Egyptian officials say. Air traffic controllers apparently didn't receive any distress calls. "There was nothing abnormal before the plane crash," Egyptian Civil Aviation Minister Hossam Kamel said Saturday. "It suddenly disappeared from the radar." The website Flightradar24, which tracks aircraft around the world, said it had received data from the Russian plane suggesting sharp changes in altitude and a dramatic decrease in ground speed before the signal was lost. The crash A U.S. satellite that was over Sinai at the time of the crash detected a heat flash, according to a U.S. official directly familiar with the latest information in the investigation. U.S. intelligence and military officials are analyzing the data to determine whether the flash occurred in midair or on the ground and what that can tell them about what happened to the plane, the official said. Analysts say heat flashes could be tied to a range of possibilities: a missile firing, a bomb blast, a malfunctioning engine exploding, a structural problem causing a fire on the plane or wreckage hitting the ground. "The number of heat signatures is crucial," said CNN aviation analyst Miles O'Brien. "If, in fact, only one was detected, that in some respects might steer one away from a missile launch and onto some idea of an explosion onboard the aircraft." A top Russian aviation official has said the plane broke apart in midair. Metrojet official Alexander Smirnov said the airline had ruled out technical problems and human error. Protection systems on the plane would have prevented it from crashing, he said, even if there were major errors in the pilot's control equipment. CNN aviation analyst Peter Goelz said the disaster could have resulted from "some sort of catastrophic failure, perhaps caused by an earlier maintenance problem. It could have been a center fuel tank that might have exploded." The plane The A321-200 was built in 1997, and the airline company Kogalymavia, which flies under the name Metrojet, had been operating it since 2012, Airbus said. The aircraft had clocked around 56,000 flight hours over the course of nearly 21,000 flights, the plane maker said. And so far, officials have said all its inspections were in order. The aircraft passed a routine inspection before takeoff, Egyptian Airports Co. chief Adel Al-Mahjoob said Saturday. According to the Aviation Safety Network, which tracks aircraft incidents, the same plane's tail struck a runway while landing in Cairo in 2001 and required repair. At the time, the aircraft was registered to the Lebanese carrier Middle East Airlines, registration records show. Kogalymavia's Andrei Averyanov said the plane had been damaged in 2001, but had most recently been thoroughly checked for cracks in 2013. Not enough time had passed for major cracks to develop to a critical size since then, he said. Smirnov said that he had personally flown the plane in recent months and that it was "pristine." The victims There were 217 passengers and seven crew members on board Flight 9268. Of the passengers, 209 were Russian, four were Ukrainian and one was Belarusian. The citizenships of three other passengers are unknown. Russian media reported that the disaster created a large number of orphans in Russia, as a lot of parents left their young children with relatives while they took vacations in Sharm el-Sheikh. 'Tragedy to lose so many children' Most of the bodies retrieved at the crash site are intact, a medical source in Sinai told CNN on Monday, and showed no major burns. The investigation Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has promised Russian President Vladimir Putin that he will allow "the broadest possible participation of Russian experts in the investigation," according to the Kremlin. Russian officials have joined their Egyptian counterparts at the crash scene. Putin has also ordered a Russian investigation, the Kremlin said. Aviation investigators from France and Germany, the countries where the plane was manufactured, are also taking part. The aircraft's engines were manufactured in the United States. If the plane's engines become a focus of the investigation, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board will likely dispatch a team to Egypt as well, a U.S official with knowledge of the investigation said. The plane's black boxes, which were recovered at the crash site Saturday, have not yet been read or decoded, Smirnov said. The Region Sharm el-Sheikh, where Flight 9268 began its journey, is a beach resort dotted with palm trees at the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula. The plane crashed about 300 kilometers (185 miles) farther north, near a town called Housna, according to Egyptian authorities. The Sinai Peninsula has been a battleground between ISIS-affiliated militants and Egyptian security forces. The conflict has killed hundreds of people. Is it safe to fly over war zones? How low can planes go? The militants appeared to claim responsibility for bringing down the Russian passenger jet in a statement posted online Saturday, but officials in Egypt and Russia disputed it. Mahjoob, the airport official, said there was no evidence of a terrorist attack. And Russian Transport Minister Maxim Sokolov said the claim that terrorists brought down the plane with an anti-aircraft missile "cannot be considered reliable," according to RIA Novosti. The Egyptian military said militants in Sinai have shoulder-fired, anti-aircraft weapons that shoot only as high as 14,000 feet, far short of the more than 30,000 feet at which Flight 9268 was flying when it dropped off radar. Metrojet executives also said Monday that it was too early in the investigation to speculate or draw any conclusions. But Smirnov referred to purported footage of the crash posted by militants, saying: "Those images you have seen on the Internet; I think they are fake." http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/03/africa/russian-plane-crash-egypt-sinai/ Back to Top Downed Russian Jet Suffered Prior Damage Linked to Other Crashes Alan Levin An airplane part is seen as the Egyptian officials inspect the crash site of Russian Airliner in Suez, Egypt. More than a decade before it burst into pieces mid-air, the Russian jetliner that crashed in Egypt on Saturday scraped its tail on a runway during landing and needed to be repaired. Investigators poring over wreckage of the Metrojet Airbus Group SE A321 in Egypt's Sinai peninsula will be taking a close look at a 2001 repair to the plane's tail because it is one of the few things known to cause the type of sudden midair breakup that occurred Saturday, said John Goglia, a former airline mechanic who served on the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. Metrojet tail section remains "If the engineering is done right, it's not an issue. If the repair follows the engineering data, it's not an issue," said Goglia, who isn't involved in the Metrojet investigation. "But a breakdown in any one of those can and has resulted in catastrophic failures." Impacts between the rear of a plane and the ground during landing and takeoff -- known as "tail strikes" - - occur with some regularity, according to National Transportation Safety Board data. Since 2000, there have been at least 22 tail strikes that caused severe enough damage to warrant an investigation by the safety board, according to its online accident database. Goglia estimates there were 10 times more tail strikes than listed in the NTSB database but the cases weren't reported to the accident-investigation agency because they were minor. In a small number of cases, however, such repairs have failed so violently that planes split at the seams and crashed. If it's found that the 2001 repair on the Metrojet aircraft played a role in the accident, investigators will want to ensure that there are no repairs on other aircraft at risk of failing, Goglia said. They would typically review the plans for repairs and may even seek inspections of other repairs, he said. 224 Dead All 224 people aboard the Metrojet, flying from Sharm el-Sheikh to St. Petersburg, died when it went down. Because debris was spread over an area as much as 8 kilometers (5 miles) long, officials believe it had to have broken up in flight, Alexander Neradko, head of the Russian Federal Aviation Authority, said in an interview with Rossiya-24 state television. Part of the tail section on the Metrojet plane landed apart from other wreckage, indicating it broke off from the rest of the fuselage. The plane's tail had been properly repaired, Andrey Averyanov, deputy general director for engineering at Kogalymavia, which operates under the Metrojet brand, said at a briefing in Moscow Monday. The plane, which was operated by another airline at the time, was repaired by Airbus in Toulouse, France, said Averyanov. Other Factors It's too early to focus on a single possible cause, Steve Wallace, former chief of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's accident investigation division, said in an interview. Investigators will be looking at factors including bombs, missiles, other on-board explosions and structural corrosion, Wallace said. If the dome-shaped rear pressure bulkhead, which holds in air behind the plane's cabin, is damaged, it's typically repaired by adding an additional layer of aluminum sheet metal, Goglia said. Because the pressure within the cabin exerts huge stresses while a plane is at cruising altitude, the new metal is layered over a large area of the existing structure and riveted in place so it will hold, he said. Damage to the bulkhead can occur because of an impact with the ground or as a result of cracking that occurs over time, he said. "I've been around airplanes in the several hundreds that I've personally touched that have had bulkhead repairs done," Goglia said. "It's a non-event if it's done right." Violent Explosions While it may take years for a repair to eventually crack enough to fail, that can lead to a violent explosion damaging an aircraft, according to accident reports. Such a failure occurred in 2002 when China Airlines Flight 611 flying from Taiwan to Hong Kong broke apart at the spot where the Boeing Co. 747's tail was repaired 22 years earlier. Japan Airlines Flight 123 hit a mountain in 1985 after a similar repair came apart, claiming 520 lives. When the repair let loose, it blew off the vertical fin rising out of the tail. Without that fin, the plane couldn't be controlled. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-02/downed-russian-jet-suffered-prior-damage-linked- to-other-crashes Back to Top Pakistani jet comes off runway after hard landing 112 passengers on board were reported to be safe, ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) - Passengers on board a Pakistani commercial jet were evacuated after the plane made a hard landing and came off the runway in the city of Lahore. Shaheen Air Flight 142 was arriving from the southern Pakistani city of Karachi on Tuesday when the plane slipped off the runway, an airport official told CNN. Photos from the scene obtained by CNN affiliate Geo News showed the jet sat in a grassy field with its emergency ramps deployed, the engines partially pulled off and the landing gear collapsed. Emergency vehicles came out to the plane shortly after the incident, the airport official said, adding that a full investigation was being opened. The plane's tire appears to have burst as it was touching down, Geo News reported, citing unidentified sources at the airport. All 112 passengers on board were reported to be safe, Geo News said. Officials at Shaheen Air weren't immediately available for comment on the incident. The jet is an Boeing 737-400. http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/pakistani-jet-comes-off-runway-after-hard-landing/36225006 **************** Status: Preliminary Date: Tuesday 3 November 2015 Time: ca 09:27 Type: Boeing 737-4H6 Operator: Shaheen Air Registration: AP-BJO C/n / msn: 27166/2410 First flight: 1992-12-10 (22 years 11 months) Engines: 2 CFMI CFM56-3C1 Crew: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 7 Passengers: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 112 Total: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 119 Airplane damage: Substantial Location: Lahore-Allama Iqbal International Airport (LHE) ( Pakistan) Phase: Landing (LDG) Nature: Domestic Scheduled Passenger Departure airport: Karachi-Jinnah International Airport (KHI/OPKC), Pakistan Destination airport: Lahore-Allama Iqbal International Airport (LHE/OPLA), Pakistan Flightnumber: NL142 Narrative: A Boeing 737-400, operating Shaheen Air flight 142 from Karachi, sustained substantial damage in a landing accident at Lahore-Allama Iqbal International Airport (LHE), Pakistan. At least ten people received minor injuries. Photos from the scene show the airplane on the grass besides the runway with the rear fuselage and engines resting on the ground, at a position to the left of runway 36L, about 2500 m from the runway threshold and about 200 m before the end of the runway. A fractured main gear leg with both both tyres slashed was found on a taxiway. At the time of the accident visibility was about 1500 meters and preceding flights used runway 36L for landing and takeoff. While runway 36R offers ILS approaches, runway 36L only offers VOR/DME and RNAV(GNSS) approaches. After the accident a Notam was issued stating: "SECONDARY RWY 36L/18R NOT AVBL DUE DISABLED ACFT POSITIONED WI OBSTACLE FREE ZONE I.E RWY SIDE CLEARANCE AREA" http://www.aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20151103-0 Back to Top Several booted from flight in L.A. claim discrimination LOS ANGELES -- Several passengers kicked off a Spirit Airlines plane at Los Angeles International Airport Monday night accused a flight attendant of discrimination, reports CBS Los Angeles. The travelers said they were singled out and booted off the aircraft because they are black. "I'm really humiliated just for the simple fact that you hear about this type of stuff happening in America, discrimination issues and stuff like that, but to actually experience it first-hand... " said passenger Alexandria Wright. Witnesses told CBS Los Angeles the passengers were removed from Flight 868 after a white flight attendant accused a member in the group of being a threat. But cell phone video provided by Wright shows the man involved in the dispute over the seat telling police there were witnesses to prove the flight attendant had been rude. In a statement to CBS News, Spirit said, "Four passengers became unruly and were causing trouble with other passengers. Flight crew asked them to stop. When they did, not law enforcement was called and they were removed from the flight." CBS Los Angeles put the number of passengers shown the door at 6, as did one of the irate passengers. It started with confusion over a seat, which the travelers claimed was double-booked. Then police came and escorted three couples, all black, off the plane. "It was more than just us having the conversation. Why is that six black people got kicked off the plane?" Wright asked. The flight left for Dallas at 8 p.m. local time Monday without those six passengers, who said they were had not been rebooked as of 11:30 p.m. After arriving at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, witnesses from the flight told reporters the banned passengers were being disruptive. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/6-booted-from-spirit-airlines-flight-in-l-a-claim-discrimination/ Back to Top One year in jail for Gardena man who pointed laser at airplane, helicopters A 19-year-old Gardena man who pointed a laser at an airplane and two helicopters near Hawthorne Municipal Airport on Valentine's Day was sentenced Monday to a year in jail and three years probation. Enrique Felix Gomez pleaded no contest Sept. 14 to discharging a laser at an occupied aircraft. On Feb. 14, Gomez pointed the high-powered green laser at a private plane that was preparing to land at the Hawthorne airport on Feb. 14 - the pilot's girlfriend and family were also on board - and at Los Angeles County fire and sheriff's helicopters, prosecutors said. Two of the pilots said they were temporarily blinded. The FBI offers rewards of up to $10,000 for information on people pointing lasers at aircraft and estimates that thousands of dangerous attacks go unreported every year. The light from a small handheld laser is not a pinpoint when it reaches the cockpit of an aircraft, but "equivalent to the flash of a camera if you were in a pitch-black car at night," according to an FBI website. http://mynewsla.com/crime/2015/11/02/one-year-in-jail-for-gardena-man-who-pointed-laser-at-airplane- helicopters/ Back to Top Flatulence from 2,186 sheep forced plane to make emergency landing after gas set off smoke alarms * Smoke was later identified as the gas and manure of 2,186 sheep on board * The 747-400 freighter plane made the emergency landing in Bali Denpasar * Flight SQ-7108 re-departed and reached Kuala Lumpur two hours later An aeroplane was forced to make an emergency landing after the gas of 2,186 animals was mistaken for smoke in the cargo hold. The Singapore Airlines Boeing 747-400 freighter plane, which was en-route from Sydney, Australia to Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia, was diverted to Bali Denpasar on October 26 following the urgent announcement. Upon landing, emergency services boarded the aircraft - which was carrying four crew members and the flock of sheep - however reported that there was no trace of fire, heat, or smoke. Sheepmagazine.com reported that the animals become bloated and gassy when in stressful situation According to the Aviation Herald, The smoke indication alarm sounded as the result of exhaust gasses and manure produced by the animals on the plane. Flight SQ-7108 re-departed after the two and a half hour stop in Indonesia and reached its final destination two hours later than scheduled. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3301682/Flatulence-2-186-sheep-Singapore- Airlines-plane-forced-aircraft-make-emergency-landing-excess-gas-set-smoke- alarms.html#ixzz3qQvWNW9r Back to Top E-Cigarettes, Deemed Flight Safety Risk, Banned From Checked Bags A new safety rule that prohibits air travelers and crew members from carrying e-cigarettes and other battery-powered portable electronic smoking devices in their checked baggage was announced earlier this week. "We know from recent incidents that e-cigarettes in checked bags can catch fire during transport," U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said in a statement. "Fire hazards in flight are particularly dangerous. Banning e-cigarettes from checked bags is a prudent safety measure." The interim final rule, issued on Monday by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration, applies to e-cigarettes, battery-powered devices that simulate tobacco smoking by producing heated vapors, which resembles smoke, as well as similar items like e-cigs, e-cigars, e-hookahs, e-pipes, personal vaporizers, and electronic nicotine delivery systems. No electronic cigarettes in checked baggage The new rule, which also prohibits the charging of such devices and their batteries on board the aircraft, aims to prevent putting the flying public at risk and is partially in response to recent smoke and fire incidents involving e-cigarettes in passenger baggage, Marie-Therese Dominguez, PHMSA's administrator, wrote this week on Fast Lane, the official blog of the U.S. Department of Transportation, citing several examples: -On August 9, 2014, at Boston's Logan Airport, an e-cigarette in a passenger's checked bag in the cargo hold of a passenger aircraft caused a fire that forced an evacuation of the aircraft. -On January 4, 2015, at Los Angeles International Airport, a checked bag was found to be on fire in a baggage area. Emergency responders attributed the fire to an overheated e-cigarette. These and several other incidents "have shown that e-cigarettes can overheat and cause fires when the heating element is accidentally activated or left on," Dominguez said. Passengers may continue to carry e-cigarettes for personal use in carry-on baggage or on their person, but may not use them on flights, the department said, noting that the current federal regulatory ban on smoking of tobacco products on passenger flights includes the use of electronic cigarettes. The new rule does not prohibit airline passengers from carrying other devices containing batteries for personal use, like laptop computers, cell phones, and cameras in checked or carry-on baggage and it does not restrict passengers from transporting batteries for personal use in carry-on baggage. http://www.forbes.com/sites/tanyamohn/2015/10/31/e-cigarettes-deemed-flight-safety-risk-banned- from-checked-bags/ Back to Top How Pilots Intuitively Make Critical Decisions An invaluable process that helps keep pilots safe By: James Albright Making timely and correct decisions is an important part of many jobs, but few professions require this skill at the level of a pilot flying a large, transport category airplane. While it's true that a surgeon's decisions have a life and death weight to them, they are usually made dealing with one life at a time and without the split-second timing required of a pilot at V1 during a balanced field takeoff. Likewise, a police officer may have to make a critical split-second decision, but probably only a few times throughout a decades-long career. By contrast, a pilot might face dozens of such decisions in just one winter season of operations in the Northeastern U.S. Then, too, there are dozens of foggy nights in which two or perhaps three white lights masquerading as a runway beckon the pilot to land but allow a mere second to decide the fate of all on board. Credit: Daniel Oines/Creative Commons So how do we do it? Part of this success story is that thanks to modern simulator technology, we are tested on the fields of battle unlike any other profession. But the real mystery is how we seem to make these split-second decisions without all the necessary information in evidence. Is it some kind of super power? The typical business school model of optimized decision-making requires a brainstorming session during which options - the more of them, the better - are developed and considered. The evaluation criteria are constructed so that each option may be assessed, compared and prioritized. In the end a solution is proposed that promises to be the best possible choice after hours, days or even years of deliberation. Pilots don't have the luxury of such a process. There is another profession that offers a clue into the pilot's decision-making process. It's one in which quick and accurate decisions based on limited information also mean the difference between life and death: The firefighter. A Firefighter's ESP Research psychologist Gary Klein attempted to validate a long-held theory that firefighters accelerated the conventional decision-making process - one where multiple options are considered, ordered and a choice made - by simply narrowing the number of options to two. He discovered there was no real world evidence to support the laboratory theory. Firefighter training, U.S. Navy Perhaps the best example from his casework was of a firefighter lieutenant who claimed extrasensory perception (ESP) had once saved the day. The lieutenant's team was fighting what appeared to be a simple fire in a one-story house in a residential neighborhood. The fire was in back, in the kitchen. The officer led his hose crew into the building, to the back, to spray water onto the fire, but the fire just kept roaring back. He thought the water should have had more of an impact. He ordered his men back to the living room to regroup. Then, feeling that something wasn't right, he ordered his men to evacuate the building. As soon as they left, the floor they were standing on collapsed. Had they still been inside, they would have plunged into the fire below. The lieutenant said this kind of "sixth sense" was a tool of every skilled commander. He had no reason to suspect the house had a basement or to doubt the source of the fire was the kitchen. After close questioning, researchers were able to uncover the lieutenant's subconscious thought process. The fact the fire kept roaring back did not make sense for a small kitchen fire. The noise level in the kitchen was abnormally low; fires are usually noisy affairs. Once they retreated into the living room another oddity became apparent. The living room itself was hot. The entire pattern of events did not agree with the lieutenant's expectations. In hindsight the indicators make perfect sense. Because the fire was actually underneath the living room, the firefighters' efforts in the kitchen were fruitless. The floor itself muffled the noise from below. The lieutenant was using his wealth of experience to make the call, not ESP. Studying example after example of their experiences revealed firefighters rarely, if ever, approached situations by considering their options and making decisions with an aim of optimizing the results. Instead, they immediately selected a course of action and evaluated that single option with the thought, "Will it work?" They almost never had time to devise the perfect solution; they were only interested in a satisfactory solution. The Power of Intuition Klein calls this decision-making process a "singular evaluation approach," one that gets the job done as quickly as possible. Rather than deliberate over multiple options, a person with the necessary experience can immediately come up with a suitable course of action. It is, quite literally, the first thing that comes to mind. Then the person need only evaluate the course of action with a simple question: Will it work? Expert decision-making model based on the Recognition-Primed Decision model pioneered by Research Psychologist Gary Klein We see evidence of this decision-making approach by pilots in their day-to-day operations, not just during time-critical emergencies. When taking off behind a larger aircraft, for example, an experienced pilot can immediately assess that airplane's takeoff performance and conclude he or she will rotate before and out- climb the heavy. No deliberation was necessary. If the heavy unexpectedly leaps off the runway and the first theory proves false, the pilot can again immediately realize wake turbulence will be a problem and the takeoff must be delayed. In each case, the pilot relies on prior experience to propose and implement courses of action without the need to brainstorm through multiple options. Intuition allows us to bypass the conventional decision-making model and jump right into the singular evaluation approach. Of course this method only works when the decision-maker has the necessary background and experience. Those people can be accurately described as having an intuition: They recognize things without knowing how they do the recognizing. And Klein notes this intuition grows out of experience. Three Steps to Improving Intuition We've all known pilots who seem to have an intuition when it comes to flying or dealing with in-flight emergencies. And we've also known pilots who are helpless without a checklist. But knowing that firefighters and pilots alike are able to bypass conventional decision-making with the necessary experience, we can take steps to improve our intuition by improving our experience base. (1) Decide. The natural way to improve your decision-making ability is to practice making decisions. This was easier in the days when aircraft engines were prone to quitting for no apparent reason and having a stack of write-ups for the mechanic was just another day at the office. These days we save most of this trauma for the simulator, but an everyday flight is filled with many decisions to be made. But that is only half of the process. Before we get to the second step, a word to first officers and others without the four stripes on their epaulets. It is far too easy to sit back and be thankful the hard call is above your pay grade. Doing so is easy and natural, but it robs your subconscious of needed lessons. You should attempt to make the decision in real time, as if it were yours to make. Of course you need to apply your finest crew resource management skills before voicing any contrary opinions. But make the decision as if it were yours and keep track of the results. (2) Self-critique. Whether the decision was yours or you were practicing as if it was, keep a mental record of it. (A written record would be even better.) Track the decision against the results and don't discount your mistakes as a normal part of the job. The best way to learn from your critique is to place an emotional value on it. The secret to remembering something important is to learn it emotionally. Neurobiologists have come to call this the "modulation of memory storage." Emotional events are often remembered with greater accuracy than events that lack an emotional component. (3) Broaden your experience. It is said that it is better to learn from the mistakes of others than go through the trouble of making them yourself. You can do this when studying accident case studies such as those in Cause & Circumstance or reading other publications or websites with appropriate content. It is all too easy to read an aircraft mishap report and discount the chain of errors that led to the accident. "I would never have done that," is a common reaction but may not be entirely honest. You should read these reports in exacting detail with an eye toward the decisions made. Analyze more than just the decision; investigate the reason behind the decision. Put yourself in the shoes of the pilot and answer the question, "What would I have done differently given those same circumstances?" Let your blood run cold and your skin crawl with the realization that it could have been you. Only by making this emotional connection can you be sure your inner psyche will register the mishap crew's action into the mistake category. Years later, your subconscious might overrule an action you are about to take, simply because it remembers something from the mishap that is buried deep in your mind's recesses. A Case Study in Decision-Making On March 5, 2000, the pilots of Southwest Airlines Flight 1455 made several bad decisions on the way to destroying their Boeing 737-300 while failing to stop on Runway 8 at California's Bob Hope/Burbank- Glendale-Pasadena Airport (BUR). Until that day, the captain had an exemplary career that included nearly 10,000 hr. with the company and in type, of which more than half was as pilot-in-command. The first officer, while new to the company, also had a distinguished career. Most of his flight time was logged piloting U.S. Air Force fighters, but he had over 2,500 hr. in type. Thankfully they managed to stop their airplane without hurting anyone. Southwest airlines Boeing 737 (N6685W) Credit: Joe Pries You could read the NTSB report and conclude, "I would never have done that." But dismissing their misfortune robs you of the chance to learn, really learn, from their decision-making mistakes. Flight 1455 was vectored for a visual approach to Runway 8 with a restriction to maintain 230 kt. "until advised." The crew was cleared for the visual approach with a restriction to remain at or above 3,000 ft. MSL until passing the Van Nuys VOR, about 6 mi. from the runway. At that point they would have needed a 4-deg. glidepath, which the crew evidently decided was salvageable. (A decision with which most pilots would have agreed.) Their speed at the time would have made that more difficult, but the speed restriction was technically canceled once they were cleared for the approach. The crew missed this and kept their speed up for another minute before extending the speed brakes. An analysis of the previous 70 aircraft showed the vector to intercept the final approach course occurred between 9 and 15 nm from the runway. Flight 1455's vector was at 8 nm. The accident report cites the controller for positioning the airplane "too fast, too high and too close to the runway to leave any safe options other than a go-around maneuver." The current ATIS indicated the winds were 240/6, giving them a 5-kt. tailwind. Their computed approach speed was 138 kt. The crew did not use their onboard performance computer, as required by the airline for tailwind conditions or when landing performance was in question. Passing through 1,800 ft., the aircraft's vertical speed was above 2,900 fpm and the ground-proximity warning system (GPWS) progressed from "sink rate" to "whoop, whoop, pull up" almost continuously. At 500 ft., the aircraft was in excess of company stable approach speed, altitude and sink rate limitations. The captain could not explain why he did not go around. Their average speed in the flare was 195 kt. (57 kt. above approach speed) and it took them 3,000 of the runway's 6,032 ft. to finally touch down. The aircraft departed the end of the runway at 32 kt. Once the airplane was stopped and the engines were shut down, the captain said, "Well, there goes my career." You would never have done that, right? Really? How often does a controller's "too fast, too high and too close" vector result in a go-around? When you salvage a bad approach, even one that's not of your own construction, do you pat yourself on the back and never reexamine the circumstances? Or do you sit down and diagram the approach and critically analyze the "would have, could have, should have" options? Remember that your subconscious thirsts for this kind of knowledge and studying the case of Southwest Airlines Flight 1455 should induce an emotional reaction in any pilot. "That could have been me." At what point would you have thrown in the towel and broken off the approach? When you were given the tight vector? Now you're too close. When given the 230-kt. speed restriction? You're now flying too fast, but you've seen that before. What about the 3,000-ft. crossing restriction? Seen that, too? Now you are too high. Your "can do" pilot attitude is well practiced at getting it done. Read this report and get upset: upset that air traffic control set them up; upset that the pilots failed to realize a stabilized approach was impossible the moment the altitude restriction was issued and that they forgot their stable approach rules. And get upset that this could happen to you. Do this, and your subconscious may someday overrule your "can do" spirit and tell you, "No you can't. Go around." The Firefighter of the Flight Crew As pilots we tend to be technically oriented and many of us are dispassionate. We can be excused for having ice water running in our veins. The cold, unemotional aviator has a role to play and can be a lifesaver at times. But all pilots can benefit from an extra boost of intuition. Just as the experienced firefighter is able to bypass conventional decision-making strategies, an experienced pilot can benefit from a singular evaluation approach. Call it "the sixth sense," "the right stuff" or even ESP. Whatever you call it, intuitive decision-making is a valuable tool in any firefighter's or pilot's arsenal. http://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/how-pilots-intuitively-make-critical-decisions Back to Top Taxiway under repair after jet fire Work crews are repairing the area damaged by last week's Dynamic International Airways jetliner fire. About 230 tons of asphalt are needed to repair a taxiway damaged by a jet fire last week. Work crews ripped up 11,700 square feet of asphalt on a taxiway Monday, the area damaged when a jetliner leaked fuel and caught on fire at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on Thursday. The taxiway actually was damaged in two separate areas, "equivalent to approximately the size of four tennis courts," said Greg Meyer, airport spokesman. About 230 tons of asphalt - spread three inches thick - will be needed to fill in the damaged areas. The repair job, costing a total of about $86,000, should be completed on Tuesday, Meyer said. The project didn't affect air traffic; both of the airport's runways remained open on Monday. The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating why a Dynamic International Airways Boeing 767 caught on fire while it was taxiing to the airport's north runway on Thursday. Of the 101 passengers onboard, about 23 suffered injuries. A the left engine and wing of a Dynamic International Airways 767 erupted into fire last week. A jetliner behind the Dynamic plane reported the 767 was leaking fluid, and airport workers subsequently cleaned up about 45 to 50 gallons of fuel from the taxiway. The safety board is expected to release a preliminary report on the accident this week. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/fl-jet-fire-damage-repairs-20151102-story.html Back to Top Back to Top Stop By and Visit At NBAA DATE Nov. 17 - 19, 2015 LOCATION Booth N812 Las Vegas Convention Center 3150 Paradise Rd. Las Vegas, NV 89109 Back to Top Google: Our Drones Will Deliver Packages By 2017 Internet giant Alphabet Inc , the new holding company for Google, expects to begin delivering packages to consumers via drones sometime in 2017, the executive in charge of its drone effort said on Monday. David Vos, the leader for Alphabet's Project Wing, said his company is in talks with the Federal Aviation Administration and other stakeholders about setting up an air traffic control system for drones that would use cellular and Internet technology to coordinate unmanned aerial vehicle flights at altitudes under 500 feet (152 meters). "Our goal is to have commercial business up and running in 2017," he told an audience at an air traffic control convention near Washington. Alphabet and Amazon.com Inc are among a growing number of companies that intend to make package delivery by drone a reality. But drone deliveries are not expected to take flight until after the FAA publishes final rules for commercial drone operations, which are expected early next year. Two years after initial research began, Project Wing was announced in August 2014 with a YouTube video showing a field test of its most viable prototype in Australia. The prototype flown in Australia, 1.5 meters (4.9 feet) wide and 0.8 meters (2.6 feet) tall, shares the same four-propeller quad copter design as popular consumer drones, but the company said consumers can expect to see new vehicle types and shapes as the project unfolds. Inside the United States, Project Wing has conducted testing with NASA. Vos, who is co-chair of an FAA task force charged with coming up with a drone registry, said a system for identifying drone operators and keeping UAV away from other aircraft could be set up within 12 months. "We're pretty much on a campaign here, working with the FAA, working with the small UAV community and the aviation community at large, to move things along," he said. Vos said a drone registry, which the Obama administration hopes to set in place by Dec. 20, would be a first step toward a system that could use wireless telecommunications and Internet technology including cellphone applications to identify drones and keep UAV clear of other aircraft and controlled airspace. He said Google would like to see low altitude "Class G" airspace carved out for drones, saying it would keep UAV away from most manned aircraft aside from low-flying helicopters, while enabling drones to fly over highly populated areas. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/google-drones-delivery-2017_56380649e4b00a4d2e0ba5b7 Back to Top Combined LIDAR and GPS System Improves Air Safety Modern aircraft have the technology to avoid crashing into one another in the sky, but what happens when they're back on the ground? Traffic collision avoidance systems (TCAS) were developed to handle the majority of aircraft collisions, which generally happen during the cruise phase of flight. These systems operate by using transponders to ping other aircraft repeatedly and create a trackable trend of the aircraft's flight. However, these systems can result in cluttered data when transponders are concentrated on the ground in airports. This can leave aircraft on the runway open to a collision. Improving Collision Avoidance The recently patented Aerial, Landing and Takeoff Aircraft Crash Avoidance System (ALTACAS) offers an update to current TCAS systems. It is designed to detect and monitor other aircraft, drones and vehicles at or near ground level in airports. What makes this system different is that unlike the existing TCAS system, ALTACAS does not use transponders. Check out how the ALTACAS system works: (Video courtesy of ALTACAS Technology.) The video highlights the combination of light detection and ranging (LIDAR) radar technology and GPS tracking used in the ALTACAS. Neither technology interferes with radio signals from air traffic controllers. Avoiding Runway Collisions By mounting multidirectional LIDAR housings on strategic areas of the plane such as the nose and wings, ALTACAS enables the plane to "see" other craft around itself. To monitor other craft, the system provides imagery and information about the oncoming vehicle's distance, speed and direction. ALTACAS is designed to alert pilots to issues and to provide courses of evasive action, such as evacuating a runway if another craft cannot be diverted. (Image courtesy of ALTACAS Technology.) It can also automatically open a three-way communication between both vehicles and the nearest air traffic controller when it senses an issue such as a potential collision. Like the TCAS, ALTACAS can monitor other craft in the cruise phase of flight. ALTACAS' main advantage is that its technology can be used on the ground without excessive interference. This, in combination with a runway lighting system reminiscent of traffic signals, could help reduce collisions on runways and during climbs and descents. Spotting Collision Hazards ALTACAS is also designed to detect oncoming vehicles even when the other vehicle is not equipped with the system. This is especially useful for unmanned vehicles such as drones and ground objects such as trucks or even humans. In addition to its ability to "see" other aircraft, ALTACAS can spot other vehicles including trucks and drones. (Image courtesy of ALTACAS Technology.) It also presents a possibility for greater visibility when landing or taking off at dusk, at night, or in inclement weather. The system was built to reduce the chances of human error in these situations. Pilot error has historically been a substantial contributor to aircraft crashes. To improve the safety of aircraft on the ground, the ALTACAS chief engineer Bryan Smalls believes the system can be retrofitted to update current aircraft. He also believes that the system could be useful for trains and ships in the future. For more information, check out the ALTACAS website. http://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticles/ArticleID/10899/Combined-LIDAR-and- GPS-System-Improves-Air-Safety.aspx Back to Top ISS Crew Celebrates 15 Years Of Human Habitation In Space International Space StationThe International Space Station celebrated 15 years of supporting human life in space. Since 2000, the orbiting complex has been home for astronauts from different countries. (Photo : NASA) On Monday, Nov. 2, the International Space Station (ISS) celebrated continuous human residency for 15 years. The celebration marked a glorious day in the history of human habitation on space. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, together with its international partners, celebrated the event on Earth, and so did the six astronauts aboard the ISS. The space crew, composed of American, Russian and Japanese astronauts, planned a special dinner - just one of the 26,500 meals served in the ISS so far - to celebrate. Human presence has been persistent at the ISS since the launch of Expedition 1, with a total of 5,478 days of habitation and counting. NASA said the ISS has expanded from three to 13 rooms since the year 2000. At present, it boasts a mass of approximately one million pounds and a pressure volume as high as a Boeing 747. The experiments performed at the ISS are said to be more than 1,760 over the years, according to NASA. A total of 189 spacewalks have occurred at the station, which aim to create and maintain the outpost since the station was first built in 1998. The 190th spacewalk is scheduled on Friday, Nov. 6, wherein astronauts Scott Kelly and Kjell Lindgren will again venture out. NASA is looking at keeping the complex up and running until the year 2024. With this, more maintenance work will be necessitated as the ISS continues to age. Humans have come and gone at the ISS since the first crew settled in. About 220 people from 17 different countries have already been to the station. Dr. John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said that the collaboration between international representatives that helps keep the ISS running is an outstanding sign of what humanity could grasp should people work together peacefully. "I congratulate all of the men and women at NASA and around the world who have worked so hard to keep the International Space Station operational these past 15 years," he said. Charles Bolden, administrator at NASA said that since the ISS launch in 2000, humans have been persistently inhabiting it. The space crew has been working outside the Earth enhancing scientific understanding, exhibiting innovative technologies and creating breakthroughs that will help both humans and robots engage in long-term deep space research. http://www.techtimes.com/articles/102355/20151103/iss-crew-celebrates-15-years-of-human-habitation- in-space.htm Back to Top Upcoming Events: Air Cargo Safety and Security Symposium ALPA Washington, DC November 5, 2015 http://aircargoconference.alpa.org Aviation Safety Management Systems (SMS) Seminar (ERAU) Nov. 17-19, 2015 Daytona Beach, FL www.erau.edu/sms Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Seminar (ERAU) Dec. 8-10, 2015 Daytona Beach, FL www.erau.edu/uas New HFACS workshop Las Vegas December 15 & 16 www.hfacs.com 2016 DTI SMS/QA Symposium January 3, 4, & 5 2016 Disney World, FL 1-866-870-5490 www.dtiatlanta.com BARS Auditor Training Washington DC? Tuesday-Thursday 5-7 April http://flightsafety.org/bars/auditor-training Back to Top JOBS AVAILABLE: Interdisciplinary Engineer (Mechanical or Aerospace Engineer) NTSB https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/419032300 Human Performance Investigator NTSB https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/413256600