Flight Safety Information September 13, 2016 - No. 180 In This Issue Engine failure led to foot-long hole in Southwest airliner Indonesia: Cargo aircraft skids at Wamena airport, major accident averted AirAsia in aviation crackdown after incidents Overreaching FAA rules crushing drone innovation? 11 Offbeat Airplane Certificates, Ratings, Endorsements and Checkouts China to spend $1 trillion on 6,810 new aircraft EASD: U.K. Airline Pilots Fit to Fly With Diabetes The $2 Million Personal Jet Up Close With the Jet That Could Train Tomorrow's F-35 Pilots Engine failure led to foot-long hole in Southwest airliner: agency (Reuters) - An engine failure on a Southwest Airlines Co jet on Aug. 27 released debris that tore a 5 inch by 16 inch (13 cm by 41 cm) hole in the plane before it made a safe emergency landing in Pensacola, Florida, U.S. crash investigators said on Monday. In an update to its probe of the Boeing Co 737's rare engine failure, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said a fan blade separated from the engine and was not recovered, except for the base of the blade that was still attached to the aircraft. The agency also said that during the accident engine debris impacted the plane's side to create the hole above the left wing. The debris did not penetrate into the cabin interior, the agency said. The plane, bound from New Orleans to Orlando with 99 passengers and five crew members aboard, lost cabin pressure and safely diverted to Pensacola. There were no injuries. The investigation update still leaves unanswered what exactly caused the "uncontained" engine failure, a rare and hazardous event in which components rapidly exit an engine and can collide with the aircraft. The NTSB said in a statement that it still must review the engine's maintenance records and examine blade surfaces for cracks. Representatives for Southwest and General Electric Co, which produced the engine with Safran SA in a joint venture known as CFM International, said the companies continue to work closely with the NTSB on the investigation. The aircraft has been released to Southwest, which has started the repair process, a spokeswoman for the airline said. https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/engine-failure-led-foot-long-204305298.html Back to Top Indonesia: Cargo aircraft skids at Wamena airport, major accident averted A cargo aircraft of Indonesia's Trigana Air's cargo aircraft barely escaped a major accident today while landing at the Wamena airport in eastern Papua province. The aircraft skidded on the runway but no injuries were reported. According to BBC Indonesia, the aircraft, which was travelling from Papua's Sentani airport, failed to land properly at the airport after one of its wheels broke. The aircraft was carrying 14 tonnes of fuel, rice and sugar belonging to Indonesian state energy firm Pertamina. The fuel load was safe, the marketing director for Pertamina Ahmad Bambang told later to online news portal detik.com. According to Ahmad, the aircraft skidded on runaway 33 and landed 2km away from its original landing position. He also said that the cargo will be transferred to another aircraft so that the supplies can reach its destination. The Wamena airport was shut down immediately in order to clear the runway, reported the news agency. The aircraft suffered severe damage on its left engine. The fire fighting teams were called to douse the fire. Trigana Air Service is based in Jakarta and started its operations in early 1991 but has a long history of safety issues. In 2015, a Trigana Air aircraft crashed in the mountainous region of Papua killing 54 people. But prior to that, the carrier has been involved in 19 serious safety incidents since 1992. In 2012, pilots of a DHC-6 Twin Otter lost control and veered the aircraft into an airport building after several shots were fired at it while landing in Papua's Mulia Airport. Out of eight passengers on board , one was killed and four others were severely injured. Several aircraft that were heavily damaged in these incidents include one Antonov An-72, one ATR 42-300, 13 Twin Otters, and three Fokker F27s. http://www.ibtimes.sg/indonesia-cargo-aircraft-skids-wamena-airport-major-accident-averted-3251 *************** Status: Final Date: Tuesday 13 September 2016 Time: 07:33 Type: Boeing 737-347 (SF) Operator: Trigana Air Service Registration: PK-YSY C/n / msn: 23597 / 1287 First flight: 1986-09-24 (29 years 12 months) Engines: 2 CFMI CFM56-3B1 Crew: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 3 Passengers: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 0 Total: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 3 Airplane damage: Substantial Airplane fate: Written off (damaged beyond repair) Location: Wamena Airport (WMX) ( Indonesia) Phase: Landing (LDG) Nature: Cargo Departure airport: Jayapura-Sentani Airport (DJJ/WAJJ), Indonesia Destination airport: Wamena Airport (WMX/WAJW), Indonesia Narrative: A Boeing 737-300 cargo plane operated by Trigana as flight TGN-7321 sustained substantial damage in a landing accident at Wamena. A video of the accident shows the aircraft skidding down the runway with both engines contacting the runway. Photos from the scene show at least one separated main landing gear leg. The aircraft came to rest on the side of the runway. The aircraft operated on a cargo flight fropm Jayapura, carrying 50 drums of oil weighing 8500 kg and 27 diesel drums with a weight of 5103 kg. In addition, the aircraft also carried 750 kg sugar, 40 kg of rice and 450 kg of other goods. https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20160913-0 Back to Top AirAsia in aviation crackdown after incidents The airline has come under increased scrutiny over the past 18 months. Photo: AAP The airline safety watchdog is performing increased checks on budget carrier AirAsia following a dangerous navigation bungle last year, it has revealed. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) began monitoring the airline more closely after a captain inadvertently entered the wrong longitude in a plane's navigation system taking off from Sydney in March 2015. The error placed the Kuala Lumpur-bound plane 11,000km away from its actual location, causing the plane to turn the wrong way after take off and cross the departure path of an adjacent parallel runway. The AirAsia plane went the wrong way and ended up in Melbourne. The plane was not fitted with an upgraded flight management system that would have prevented the data- entry error, according to a report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau published last week. "Following the incident in Sydney, CASA has conducted additional checks in recent times, and they continue," said Peter Gibson, spokesman for CASA. "They will continue for as long as we deem it necessary." When asked what conclusions passengers could draw about the safety of flying with AirAsia, the spokesman would not comment directly on the airline, but said travellers could be confident that the safety body was ensuring that the airline meets the applicable safety standards. Not an isolated incident The Sydney incident was not the first involving the budget carrier. The second involved a mid-air near miss between an AirAsia A330 and an Airbus A320 on the Gold Coast on July 21 that was still under investigation. The AirAsia group was reportedly also involved in an incident at Perth Airport in February when the pilots of an Indonesian AirAsia flight approaching the airport at night were told to abort their landing because they were 300m too low. Tragedy struck the Indonesian operation of AirAsia in December 2014 when AirAsia flight 8501 crashed into the Java Sea while travelling from Indonesia to Singapore, killing 162 people. An investigation found that the plane had been flying with a broken rudder for 12 months before the crash. The West Australian reported that it had found evidence that the plane had flown 38 return trips between Perth and Bali with the recurring fault. That same fault was blamed for the events that led to the plane crashing, killing everyone aboard. AirAsia X confirmed that it had upgraded flight management systems before the publication of last week's ATSB report and developed a training package for crew on correct operation and alignment of air data and reference systems. In a statement to The New Daily, the airline said "the safety of all guests and crew are our utmost priority at all times". "AirAsia X has in place robust management systems to monitor and prevent similar incidents from reoccurring," it said. "The airline has regularly passed safety and security audits conducted by various international and local regulators. We remain committed to ensuring our compliance to all safety and security regulations." http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2016/09/13/air-asia-crackdown/ Back to Top Overreaching FAA rules crushing drone innovation? With the sale and use of drones continuing to escalate over the past year, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has recently declared a new war on drone users. To curb the misuse of drones, the FAA has announced safety rules that the agency says are designed to protect safety without stifling innovation. Jason Snead of The Heritage Foundation contends that the FAA's new restrictions will indeed impede the industry's ability to produce cutting-edge technology. "What this actually represents is a doubling down of a piecemeal regulatory strategy which the FAA has adopted for several years now," Snead asserts. "That [strategy] really seeks to hold back and restrain the innovation in this industry, and try to control not only the direction, but also the pace of an industry so that it proceeds the pace which regulators are comfortable with - rather than one which the market is comfortable with." In other words, Snead stresses that by the FAA moving forward with its new safety rules, it would do more than good. "What we're really looking at is the potential for American drone companies to really lose a technological edge, and all of the heavily bureaucratic and hyper-cautionary rules which the FAA are imposing on this industry are pushing drone development overseas," Snead insists. "We've seen companies like Amazon and Google actually take their development to foreign countries, where they are actually quite accepting - by comparison to the FAA's standards." OneNewsNow asked Snead whether regulations are needed to prevent things such as a drone user causing a plane crash. "There are some valid concerns here, and I think we have to be cognizant of that," Snead answered. "I would like to stress that there is no incident that the FAA can point to where a drone has impacted a manned aircraft - much less caused one to crash. So, these really are - at the moment - hypothetical concerns." Meanwhile, Snead says that there are some reasonable rules that the FAA could impose, such as one stating that drones cannot fly within a certain reasonable radius of an airport or a national security installation ... or another one that declares that drones should ultimately be restricted from entering what is known as the navigable airspace - which is airspace generally above 500 feet. "Those - I would think - would be quite reasonable, quite rational and quite limited rules, but what the FAA is doing right now is they're essentially saying, 'Drones are so inherently dangerous that they need massive, federal regulations to make them safe ... [therefore,] we're only going to allow certain types of innovation to proceed ... we're only going to allow certain technologies to be developed and deployed." Overall, Snead believes the new rules are in furtherance of a design on the part of the FAA to assert regulatory control over this entire industry. "For most people at the moment, these rules are effectively set in stone, but there is one lawsuit which is proceeding which is challenging the recreational rules that were put in place, [and] those were the registry requirement that was set forth last December," Snead points out. "One interesting development that took place is that the latest round of rules ostensibly are commercial drone regulations, so they should not apply to recreational drone users - or at least that's what you might think. But the FAA has just clarified that this new rule - which just went into effect - might actually apply to a broad swath of recreational drone owners after all." As a result, Snead says that hobby flyers might have to submit to everything from a background check to an FAA knowledge exam. "And it's all because the FAA is not really telling you exactly how you can comply - in order to have these new rules levied against you," Snead concluded. http://onenewsnow.com/business/2016/09/12/overreaching-faa-rules-crushing-drone-innovation Back to Top 11 Offbeat Airplane Certificates, Ratings, Endorsements and Checkouts Upgrade your pilot bragging rights and broaden your knowledge and skill set. Air to Air Photography One way we love to use airplanes, of course, is capturing gorgeous air-to-air photography. Formation flight training is a must, as is learning to safely fly with the doors off. Ratings Man is a ratings collector. No matter how many ratings or hours anyone has, he has more. Many of us go after the more common upgrades to our private pilot certificates, such as an instrument rating or high-performance and complex aircraft endorsements. Out in the wild blue yonder, we put these skills to good use. But some argue it's expensive to collect signatures in our logbooks for stuff we'll rarely - or never - use. However, if your view is that additional training can make you a better pilot, then adding new skills makes sense. And if Ratings Man brags about his latest conquest, just mention your advanced ground-instructor rating or your night-vision-goggles endorsement. Chances are he's never heard of them. Commercial Certificate Without an Instrument Rating If you want to get compensated for your flying, such as getting paid to fly passengers or cargo, fly in an airshow, or accept fuel for bringing an airplane to a fly-in, you must have a commercial certificate. Most of us know this. But did you know that you don't have to have an instrument rating to get a commercial license? As you suspected, there's a catch: 14 CFR Subpart F, 61.133(b)(1) stipulates if you don't hold an instrument rating in the same airplane category and class as your commercial, you can't carry passengers for hire on cross-country flights more than 50 nautical miles or at night. Even with these limitations, you can enjoy jobs such as banner towing and aerial photography. These gigs are great to build time for aspiring airline pilots and a lot of fun for pilots looking for a challenge and a few extra bucks. Note that you must have a second-class medical with this certificate. If Ratings Man brags about his latest conquest, just mention your advanced ground-instructor rating or your night-vision-goggles endorsement. Ground Instructor Certificate Remarkably, you don't have to be a pilot to teach cool airplane stuff at flight schools or as a private tutor. Of course, it's probably better if you are. Either way, you'll have some pretty impressive credentials. Depending upon which ground-instructor rating you hold - basic, advanced, instrument or all three (14 CFR Subpart I, 61.211 to 61.217) - you can provide ground training in the aeronautical knowledge areas for FAA knowledge tests and flight reviews. Plus, you can give recommendations for knowledge tests. With the basic rating, you're only allowed to provide ground training in the aeronautical knowledge areas for sport, recreational and private pilots. It's better to get the advanced rating because you can teach applicants pursuing any certificate or rating (except instrument) issued under Part 61, including airplane, helicopter and glider - even balloon. Earning the instrument ground-instructor rating is tougher if you're strictly VFR or a nonpilot. Weight-Shift Control Aircraft Rating Telling folks you have a private pilot certificate with a weight-shift control (WRC) rating might evoke the response "That's cool. What's that?" First of all, a WRC aircraft is one in which the pilot uses the weight of the fuselage to deform the wing and make changes to pitch and bank. If you're yearning to experience the fun and freedom of these single-place ultralights or two-place light-sport aircraft, download FAA-H-8083-5, the Weight-Shift Control Aircraft Flying Handbook. It gives you the basics about flying them. Also refer to 14 CFR Part 61 Subpart J; it spells out what you'll need to earn a sport pilot certificate and obtain additional WRC privileges if you're already a pilot. Checking 14 CFR Subpart E, 61.109(j) specifically, you'll see a private pilot certificate with a WRC rating has many must-do's. Powered Parachute Powered parachutes are easy to fly and transport. Here's what you need to know about earning a powered-parachute rating. Powered-Parachute Rating Besides being easy to fly and a snap to transport, powered parachutes offer pilots the freedom of flying in the open air with plenty of time to enjoy the scenery. In fact, this might be the best reason to fly these colorful craft. If you'd like to test this concept by learning how to fly one, know what's required by downloading FAA-H-8083-29, the Powered Parachute Flying Handbook, for a good description of the types of powered parachutes and what you must do to fly one. As with WRCs, refer to Part 61 Subpart J and look up 14 CFR Subpart E, 61.109(i) in particular. You'll find to earn a private pilot certificate with a powered- parachute rating is no slam-dunk. Gyroplane Rating So, what's the difference between a gyroplane and a helicopter? A gyroplane has a free-spinning rotor for lift and an engine-powered propeller for thrust. A helicopter has rotors powered directly by the engine. A helicopter can hover; a gyroplane can't. Compared to a helicopter, a gyroplane is cheap to operate; it's also easy to store (usually in your garage) and unique - these whirly birds turn heads on airport ramps. Check out FAA-H-8083-21, the Rotorcraft Flying Handbook, for more information. Part 61 applies here too, especially 14 CFR Subpart E, 61.109(d), which describes the requirements for a private pilot certificate with a gyroplane rating. You'll see it has hefty requirements. Maybe that's one reason few people have it. Glider Flying There are three glider endorsements you can add on to your glider rating. Glider Endorsements Caveat: You must have a glider rating to get these endorsements. If you don't have one, check out the qualifications for a glider add-on rating in 14 CFR Subpart E, 61.109(f). Now that you're a glider guider, you can get your sailplane aloft by aero tow, ground tow or self-launch. All three are endorsements [14 CFR Subpart A, 61.31(j)]. In the U.S., aero tow is the most popular method. Being towed by a powered airplane is fast and efficient but usually more expensive than other methods. You're also dependent upon a commercial operator or a club to provide the tow. Many pilots want to add a ground-tow endorsement. A winch or vehicle will get you upstairs; however, these tows are a bit riskier than aero tows due to the glider's higher angle of attack, which increases the danger of a stall-spin if the towline breaks. On the plus side, winch and auto tows can be done off field, such as on a dry lake, and they're much less expensive. Even if you are a power pilot, you must get a self-launch or motor-glider endorsement. Don't complain - self-launchers have their own set of challenges, critical decision-making among them, such as when to shut down the engine for soaring flight and when to restart it (hopefully) in an emergency. Towing Endorsements Towing gliders and/or unpowered ultralight vehicles can be challenging and fun. In 14 CFR Subpart B, 61.69, the requirements are spelled out, but essentially you'll need a private or higher certificate and usually at least 100 hours of pilot-in-command time in the aircraft category, class and type with which you're towing the glider or unpowered ultralight vehicle. Glider tow pilots often tow with Piper Pawnees, which spent their previous lives as aerial applicators. These are taildraggers, so you'll need an endorsement in order to fly them if you're not already qualified. Among other things, you'll have to get experience at the other end of the rope - that is, make at least three flights in the glider or ultralight vehicle while being towed. You'll find out it's not easy to stay behind the tug, especially in rough air. Besides possibly making a few bucks, towing gliders or unpowered ultralight vehicles will also sharpen your landings because you'll make a lot of them in a variety of weather conditions. The record at our glider port is 52 tows in one day by one pilot. Among other things, you'll have to get experience at the other end of the rope - that is, make at least three flights in the glider or ultralight vehicle while being towed. Note that banner towing isn't an endorsement. To tow aerial messages and ads, you must be on the tow operator's waiver (14 CFR Subpart D, 91.311). But it's still no free ride. You can't make your first flight and be added to the waiver until you complete ground and flight training and are observed making a sample pickup by an FAA representative. High-Altitude Endorsement For an average person, the time of useful consciousness at 25,000 feet is about three to five minutes. At 35,000 feet, it's only about 30 to 60 seconds. That's not much time to don your oxygen mask and descend to a safer altitude, especially if the cockpit is obscured by fog or mist due to rapid decompression. Some pilots have run out of time, with fatal results. Currently, if you're transitioning to a pressurized aircraft that has a service ceiling or maximum operating altitude, whichever is lower, above 25,000 feet msl, you must have a high-altitude endorsement. According to 14 CFR Subpart A, 61.31(g), you'll need both a ground sign-off on the physiological hazards of high-altitude flight, such as hypoxia, and a logbook endorsement showing successful flight training. Not surprisingly, this training includes procedures for emergency descents. Many of us won't ever need this endorsement, but flying as low as 10,000 feet can still cause problems. I highly recommend the one-day physiological training course offered by the Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (for details, search "FAA airman education programs"). It's a must-do if you can get to Oklahoma City, the only place it's offered. The program is free to civil aviation pilots and others who have a medical and don't have a beard. (No kidding, your beard can interfere with the oxygen mask.) It provides both the basic academics as well as practical demonstrations of rapid decompression and hypoxia using an altitude chamber. You'll leave with a profound respect for the dangers of high-altitude flying and be aware of your own hypoxia symptoms. Night Vision Goggles Night-vision goggles - along with some training - could help you make your way through hazardous areas in the dark. Night-Vision-Goggles Endorsement What accessory do kids of all ages dream about wearing? Night-vision goggles (NVGs), for one. According to the regs, NVGs are "an appliance worn by a pilot that enhances the pilot's ability to maintain visual surface reference at night." It doesn't sound all that exciting when put that way. However, EMS helicopter pilots operating in remote areas at night, which can be highly hazardous, often use NVGs. NVGs are part of a system that includes an FAA-approved lighting system for the aircraft, training for the pilots and maintenance crew, and an FAA-accepted maintenance program for both the aircraft and the goggles. A good article in the November/December issue of FAA Safety Briefing on this subject ("Terrain Avoidance: What Does It Take to Use NVGs?") spells out what you'll need to find your way in the dark. Also review 14 CFR Subpart A, 61.31(k). Skiplane Checkout This isn't a snow job: the FAA doesn't require any specific training or sign-offs to fly a skiplane. The agency does, however, recommend training with a qualified flight instructor. The FAA publishes an informative manual (Seaplane, Skiplane and Float/Ski-Equipped Helicopter Operations Handbook, chapters 7 through 9) that should make you think twice about skipping instruction. You'll find there's a lot to know to safely operate a ski-equipped aircraft, such as how to taxi in strong winds, land on frozen lakes and stop - there aren't any brakes, by the way. Most skiplanes are taildraggers, so you'll want a tailwheel endorsement to work or play in the snow. Seaplane Skiplane If you're looking to challenge your flying skills further, consider a commercial seaplane rating. Electric Checkout As of this writing, the FAA is still struggling with the licensing of electric-powered aircraft. But that doesn't mean you can't have an electric experience. For example, you can fly electric-powered Part 103 ultralight vehicles (no N-number or flight training needed). As with any Part 103 vehicle, it's smart to get a verbal checkout and/or flight instruction in a similar nonelectric aircraft before pulling the plug and launching. Big differences: seeing fuel "burn" in volts rather than gallons, and when volts are low that means power is low, an important consideration for go-arounds. You're probably not a ratings collector, but should you get the itch for some additional know-how, you'll find many opportunities in addition to the ones described in this article. Always check exactly what's required before starting any training. Look up the FAA rules, talk to instructors, and discover how aviation is rich with ways to learn and have fun. http://www.flyingmag.com/11-offbeat-airplane-certificates-ratings-endorsements-and-checkouts Back to Top China to spend $1 trillion on 6,810 new aircraft Boeing says traffic in China to grow 6% a year for 20 years NEW DELHI (CNNMoney) -Chinese airlines will spend more than $1 trillion on new aircraft over the next two decades as they seek to meet booming demand for air travel, according to a new forecast by Boeing. The massive spending spree will pay for an estimated 6,810 aircraft, and turn China into what Boeing describes as "the first trillion dollar aviation market." Randy Tinseth, a marketing executive at Boeing Commercial Airplanes, said in a statement that he expects passenger traffic in China to grow by 6.4 percent a year over the next 20 years. The country's growing middle class and new visa policies "gives us every reason to expect a very bright future for China's long-haul market," he said. Boeing predicts that three-quarters of the new deliveries will be single-aisle aircraft that carry between 90 and 230 passengers, and cater to both business and holiday travelers. Demand for widebody planes will also increase, with 1,560 new planes helping to triple the country's fleet over 20 years. The category includes aircraft like the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and the company's classic 777 line. Boeing has played a major role in developing China's aviation industry and infrastructure, and the Chicago-based company estimates that it pumps roughly $1 billion a year into the country's economy though joint ventures and purchases from suppliers. In 2015, Boeing estimated that Chinese airlines would spend $950 billion over 20 years. http://www.wmur.com/money/china-to-spend-1-trillion-on-6810-new-aircraft/41642120 Back to Top EASD: U.K. Airline Pilots Fit to Fly With Diabetes Study finds just 0.2% of glucose reading in unsafe range MUNICH - Commercial airline pilots flying with insulin-controlled diabetes had no incidents of medical incapacitation in more than 18 months of study, researchers reported here. Of the 26 insulin-treated pilots flying planes under the U.K. flag, a total of 8,897 blood glucose monitoring values had been recorded during 4,900 flight hours with more than 96% of the cockpit glucose monitoring readings indicating pilots with diabetes were in the "Green Zone" for safety, reported Julia Hine, MD, of the Royal Surrey County Hospital in Guildford, England. In a presentation at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, Hine said that for short and medium haul flights -- those of less than 6 hours duration -- 96% of 7,829 blood glucose monitoring readings were within the safe range. For long haul flights, 97% of 1,068 readings were within that "green" range. She reported that 19 readings - 0.2% -- across short and long haul flights combined were in the "red" range and to date, no pilot medical incapacitation due to low or high blood sugar has been reported. The study was conducted by the medical staff at Royal Surrey County Hospital and the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), based at London's Gatwick Airport. That aviation agency defines the "green zone" as glucose levels between 5-15 mmol/l (90 to 270 mg/dL); "amber" as glucose levels from 4-5 mmol/l (72-90 mg/dL) through 15-20 mmol/l (270-360 mg/dL), and "red" as glucose levels of less than 4 mmol/l (less than 72 mg/dL) or greater than 20 mmol/l (360 mg/mL). U.S. pilots with a diagnosis of diabetes are not permitted to pilot commercial airlines. In 2012, the U.K. became the second nation, after Canada, to issue insulin-treated individuals with Class 1 Medical Certificates for Commercial Pilot Licences. Ireland has since joined the list that allows insulin- treated diabetics to pilot airliners. The U.K. now has the largest cohort of insulin-treated pilots, and, Hine said, is leading the way in Europe and beyond to create and maintain employment and leisure opportunities for people with insulin-treated diabetes. "A growing number of insulin-treated pilots have successfully applied for Commercial Pilots' Licences in the U.K. and most recently Ireland," she reported. "To date, the CAA protocol has [been] shown to work well in the cockpit, with no reported safety concerns, and without deterioration of diabetes control." She noted that a comprehensive protocol, developed by a panel of medical and aviation experts, governs the medical certification of insulin-treated pilots. Certificated pilots are subject to strict requirements, directly overseen by the U.K. CAA and Irish Aviation Authority medical departments, including pre- and in- flight blood glucose monitoring. "Regular blood glucose testing in the cockpit ensures that any variability in blood sugar is detected and can be corrected early," Hine noted. "If pilots are unable to test their blood sugar due to operational demands, the protocol dictates that they should consume 15 mg of carbohydrate as a precautionary measure and then test within 30 minutes." "Normal glucose levels are 70 to 140 mg/dL, and diabetics are well-controlled if their glucose levels range between 80 and 180 mg/dL," commented Spyros Mezitis, MD, PhD, an endocrinology consultant and clinical investigator at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. "Most studies have shown few diabetic complications with the 3-month HbA1c average being below 7%. "Acute diabetic symptoms are usually seen with glucose values above 300 mg/dL and neuroglycopenic symptoms implicating cognitive changes appear below 50 mg/dL," he told MedPage Today. "Considering the aforementioned blood sugar values, the United Kingdom pilot study results are reasonable with insulin- requiring pilots not having any problems with flying when their blood sugar values are in the green range of 90-279 mg/dL. "It is important to continue monitoring insulin-requiring pilots who are actively flying around the world," Mezitis said. For the study, with the pilots' consent, files for all insulin-treated, Class 1-certificated pilots were reviewed and data were collected, Hine reported. The researchers found that at the analysis date, 26 insulin-treated pilots had been issued with Class 1 medical certificates. All were men, with an average age of 41. The majority (85%) had type 1 diabetes, with an average diabetes duration of 8 years. U.K. commercial pilots who develop diabetes after getting their licence can also apply for a Class 1 Medical certificate under the protocol described for insulin-treated pilots. Average follow-up duration after license issue in the study was 19.5 months. The average pre-license issue HbA1c was 53.1 mmol/mol (about 7%); the average of the most recent HbA1c was 54.8 mmol/mol, thus showing no significant change (P=0.25), Hine and colleagues reported. She said the study is continuing. "There are a number of European states that have expressed interest in the program," Hine reported. "The American Diabetes Association's position is that individual assessment of people with diabetes is the appropriate approach to determining whether a person is qualified to perform certain activities." That association is developing recommendations to share with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration that would enable the FAA to identify pilots who are at no greater risk for incapacitation than any other pilot, she added. http://www.medpagetoday.com/clinical-context/diabetes/60174 Back to Top The $2 Million Personal Jet Cirrus Aircraft's new single-engine SF50 Vision plane will put the dream of owning your own jet within reach of an entirely new market. Cirrus Aircraft's new SF50 Vision puts the dream of owning a personal jet within reach of a new market. Photo: Courtesy of Cirrus By the end of this year, Cirrus Aircraft should have Federal Aviation Administration certification approval for its new, $2 million, single-engine SF50 Vision-a five-to-seven-seat personal jet- and will commence deliveries to some 600 eager, albeit long-suffering, deposit holders. I was in the hangar in Duluth, Minn., nine years ago when Cirrus first went public with the SF50, touting it as the slowest (300 knots), lowest (28,000 feet), and cheapest jet you could buy. They had been hard at work on the design at a secret off-site facility across town dubbed the Moose Works, in homage to Lockheed's Palmdale, Calif., Skunk Works, which cranked out legendary Cold War spy planes like the SR- 71 Blackbird. This is a big deal. Cirrus is best known, since the mid-1990s, for delivering some 6,000 of its SR20/22 single-engine piston airplanes. That series of aircraft was revolutionary for its glass cockpit displays, sidestick controls, all-composite construction, and whole-aircraft parachute systems credited with saving 134 lives to date. When a pilot runs out of options, he simply reaches up to the ceiling and pulls what is called the "oh s___ handle," and a ballistic rocket fires a parachute out of the aft fuselage and lowers the entire aircraft gently to the ground. The SR brought a level of situational awareness, robust construction, modern styling and ergonomics, and overall safety that had been largely absent from the small-plane market. Since 2004, the SR22 has been the world's best-selling single-engine, four-seat aircraft. Cirrus' founders-brothers Alan and Dale Klapmeier-began tinkering with their innovative designs in the basement of a Baraboo, Wis., barn in 1984. Their first effort was a slick, single-engine, pusher-propeller, V-tailed speedster called the VK-30. While the initial plan to offer this hot rod to kit builders flopped, and a subsequent idea to offer a beefier version as a certified turboprop also cratered, it is the basic VK-30 design that spawned the current jet. In the late 1980s, the Klapmeier brothers approached small-jet engine maker Williams with the idea of fitting into a VK-30 an FJ44 turbofan-basically the power plant for Cessna's line of CJ CitationJets. It would take another 20 years for the idea to take hold. Meanwhile, the mid-1990s saw the craze known as the very light jet-a new generation of jets weighing less than 10,000 pounds that needed only short runways to take off-and there was no shortage of dreamers willing to jump into the space: Comp Air, Diamond, Eclipse Aviation, Epic Air, Flaris, Maverick, Piper, Sport Jet, and Stratos. Most of these programs died long ago, and the same fate would have been Cirrus', had China Aviation Industry General Aircraft not bought the company in 2011 for an estimated $210 million, minus debt. China Aviation properly capitalized the SF50 program, and over the years Cirrus improved the design, built more prototypes and production tooling, and began building a new customer center in Knoxville, Tenn. THE SF50 RESEMBLES a bulbous VK-30 and is easy to fly for anyone competent in a Cirrus SR-20/22. That explains why many deposit holders for the SF50 are existing Cirrus customers, including Dallas Mavericks head coach Rick Carlisle. Pilots will need to complete a jet-type rating course before climbing into the aircraft. For a jet, the SF50 is slow and docile, and can actually be bested by some fast turboprops like the TBM 900. The maximum range of 1,250 nautical miles can be attained only by throttling back to 240 knots from the maximum speed of 300 knots, which will still take you 1,100 nautical miles. With full fuel (296 gallons), you can carry just 400 pounds, basically the pilot and one passenger or the pilot and a lot of gear. Carrying a load of four passengers and a pilot weighing 200 pounds each, the SF50 will take you an estimated 600 nautical miles at 300 knots. Still, the SF50 promises to be a good short-field performer, taking off in as few as 2,036 feet and landing in 1,721 feet. Like Cirrus' piston aircraft, the SF50 features a whole-aircraft parachute. The interior fit and finish is excellent, with luxury-automotive-style details and options, such as leather seats, zoned climate controls, and USB charging ports. This is a lot of jet for just $2 million, its low price point putting the dream of owning your own jet within reach of an entirely new market. http://www.barrons.com/articles/the-2-million-personal-jet-1473485407 Back to Top Up Close With the Jet That Could Train Tomorrow's F-35 Pilots The company's T-50A trainer could prepare pilots for the F-22, F-35. Lockheed Martin has just released a new video detailing its proposed jet trainer, the T-50A. Meant to modernize the Air Force's flight training programs, the T-X program will replace the 1960s-era T-38 Talon with a fleet of modern jets better capable of preparing pilots for their assignments flying the most advanced planes in the world. The T-38 Talon was first introduced into Air Force service in 1961. While an effective jet trainer in the 20th Century, the T-38 hasn't kept pace with technological developments. The advent of fly-by-wire flight controls, GPS and laser guided weapons, large LCD displays to convey information, and powerful onboard computers have left gaps in the tasks the T-38 can train a pilot for. The T-50A entered service with the Republic of Korea Air Force in 2005 to train pilots destined for the F- 15K and F-16. Known as the T-50 Golden Eagle, the aircraft was designed by Lockheed Martin and Korea Aerospace Industries.The company argues that the trainer shares many technologies with the F-22 and F- 35-which it also produces-making it a logical step in pilot training before either jet. In particular, the cockpit Large Area Avionics Display can simulate a number of weapons systems and capabilities the plane doesn't even have, but that pilots can expect to use operationally in frontline jets. In addition to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman are all expected to submit competing designs. The winner of the competition will build at least 350 planes for the U.S. Air Force. The T-X trainer program has been repeatedly delayed but the winning jet is expected to reach full operational capability by the early 2030s. http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/a22823/lockheed-martin-t-50a-video/ Curt Lewis