Flight Safety Information February 22, 2017 - No. 039 Incident: Saratov YK42 at Ufa on Feb 20th 2017, overran runway on landing Jet scare: Pilots told to adhere to ATC norms AOPA WELCOMES DRONE PILOTS...MEMBERSHIP OPTIONS CREATED Multi-Crew Pilot License Could Help Fill Industry Gap European Pilots Group Airs Concerns Over Flight-time Rules Essendon air crash: what will the investigators be looking for? Southwest, Frontier aircraft collide on ground at Phoenix airport Incident: Saratov YK42 at Ufa on Feb 20th 2017, overran runway on landing A Saratov Airlines Yakovlev Yak-42D, registration RA-42328 performing flight 6W-9548 from Novy Urengoy to Ufa (Russia) with 50 passengers and 7 crew, landed on Ufa's runway 14R at about 22:10L (17:10Z) during a severe snowstorm, but was unable to stop on the runway and overran the end of the runway by about 27 meters. There were no injuries, the aircraft sustained minor if any damage. Volga's Investigation Department opened an investigation into the occurrence. http://avherald.com/h?article=4a539e05&opt=0 Back to Top Jet scare: Pilots told to adhere to ATC norms NEW DELHI: Following the scare caused over European skies last week when one of its planes went incommunicado for a few minutes and led to rushing of fighter planes, Jet Airways sent a stern reminder to all its pilots on Tuesday over radio communication. "Radio communication is a critical link in the pilot - ATC (air traffic control) communication system. However, it can be broken with surprising speed and disastrous results," the mail says. The airline then went on to list vital do's as "mandatory compliance". "When instructed by ATC to change frequencies, select the new frequency as soon as possible unless instructed to make the change at a specific time, fix, or altitude. Maintain the previous frequency on the standby frequency window until positively in two-way contact with the new frequency. Undue delay in making the change could result in an untimely receipt of important information," it says. The confusion last Thursday was caused when the pilots had to switch over frequency during "change over" from the ATC of a region in one country to the ATC of another region in other country. Being a continent of mostly small countries, pilots flying over Europe have to change frequencies very frequently as they enter airspace of different countries in quick succession. "It is the responsibility of the pilot in command (PIC) to ensure that at least one crew member shall continuously maintain air-ground voice communication watch on the appropriate communication channel, and establish two-way communications as necessary with appropriate ATC unit." http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/jet-scare-pilots-told-to-adhere-to-atc- norms/articleshow/57283003.cms Back to Top AOPA WELCOMES DRONE PILOTS MEMBERSHIP OPTIONS CREATED Since AOPA was founded in 1939, aviation has gone through many changes, and the advent of drones has been among the most dramatic. Throughout the decades, we have been faithful to AOPA's core missions- promoting safety, preserving the freedom to fly, and building the next generation of pilots. On Feb. 21, AOPA stayed true to its values when it launched a new line of membership options created for drone pilots, a key part of an ongoing effort to unite manned and unmanned pilots for the common purpose of safe integration of all users within the airspace we share. AOPA has created membership options for drone pilots. Some might think there is a wide gulf between manned and unmanned pilots, but AOPA believes they are more alike than different. In fact, both groups are part of general aviation, and share a fascination for flight and a craving for new perspectives. Having long been recognized for leadership in aviation safety and advocacy, AOPA has been involved with drones and related matters for about a decade. We contributed to or commented on virtually every federal regulation and policy created since the drone boom began, always with an eye on the safe integration with manned aircraft. The FAA estimates that 1.3 million pilots will be certificated to operate drones under 14 CFR Part 107 by 2020. If that forecast remains accurate, a great many of them will have no prior connection to general aviation, nor any connection to a community of fellow aviators or exposure to a culture of safety, yet will share their passion for flight. Within just a few years, there will be two remote pilots for every one pilot certificated to fly manned aircraft. "Drone pilots are seeking their place in the larger world of aviation and looking for opportunities to expand their experience," said AOPA President Mark Baker. "This is an ideal time to embrace these pilots and welcome them into the GA family." Many of the "new" pilots certificated under Part 107 were flying manned aircraft (and were AOPA members) long before they considered obtaining a remote pilot certificate. All kinds of pilots have turned to the AOPA Pilot Information Center, AOPA.org, and other resources for guidance on a variety of matters. Members have asked how operating a drone for either recreation or commercial work might or might not affect their other pilot certificate; others have voiced concerns about safety and the risks posed by drones flown by uninformed or misguided operators. An overwhelming majority of AOPA members told us they support using AOPA's resources and expertise to counter unfamiliarity with education. AOPA has in recent years infused more drone expertise into much of what we do, with a combination of new team members who bring experience in many aspects of the fast-growing field, and developing expertise within the existing staff. In short, AOPA has learned a lot, and we are working hard to stay on top of an industry that creates new products and capabilities at a pace we have never seen in aviation. One of the new members of the AOPA team, Kathleen "Kat" Swain, joined the staff in April 2016 as AOPA's senior director of UAS programs. Swain, a CFI who has also played key roles building unmanned aircraft capabilities for the insurance industry as well as flying humanitarian missions, set to work on a plan. What took shape in the months that followed is a vision of shared effort and shared responsibility, an expectation that everyone will benefit when pilots of all kinds work together toward common goals, safety for all being the foremost of these. Benefits for drone members Remote pilots, many of whom are completely new to aviation, need many of the same types of support, services, information, and tools AOPA has expertly provided to the manned community for years. Baker added, "As newcomers to the skies, they have told us they are looking for a trusted source to help them get the most out of their flying, protect their license and their assets, and keep them up to date on regulations and issues affecting their kind of flying." Education-In addition to developing expertise and content from within, AOPA also has entered a formal agreement with DARTdrones, an emerging leader in the drone training industry whose instructors all have manned aircraft credentials and experience. The DARTdrones online course offered free to AOPA members introduces them to the drone world, and provides an overview of many different missions that drones can accomplish. It also answers some basic questions about which drones or types of drones work best for which missions. AOPA members who then wish to pursue certification will be eligible for a significant discount on an online Part 107 test preparation course, paying $150 for a course that retails for $350. This course prepares pilots and nonpilots alike to pass the Part 107 knowledge test and earn a remote pilot certificate. Members also will be able to experience drone demonstrations and live seminars at major airshows and at AOPA's Regional Fly-Ins. For those who want to learn on their own schedule, AOPA has a comprehensive series of drone webinars and podcasts in the works for 2017. Advocacy-AOPA remains actively involved in drone rulemaking and regulation, representing GA on the Drone Advisory Committee created by the FAA and composed of a broad cross-section of stakeholders. AOPA is also the co-chair of the 26 Coalition for UAS Safety, a group dedicated to safe integration of unmanned aircraft, and has served on various FAA task forces created to study and recommend regulations. AOPA was very much a part of the creation of Part 107, and continues to collaborate on proposed regulations to ensure the safe integration of drones into the National Airspace System. Pilot Protection Services-Enhanced membership options include legal counsel and representation from expert attorneys, if needed, and other services included in AOPA Pilot Protection and Pilot Protection Plus memberships. AOPA is the only place in the industry for drone pilots to receive this kind of legal protection. Details on those options and benefit comparisons can be found here. Insurance-Insurance is another important aspect of protection for pilots, and AOPA has long provided affordable aircraft insurance. As underwriters create new policies for unmanned operations in growing numbers, AOPA Insurance has begun serving customers seeking protection for recreational and commercial drone operations. There, too, the expertise of a staff with a long history serving aviation is no small advantage. News and Media-AOPA publications cover GA like no one else, and members will continue to see unmanned aircraft in the pages of AOPA Pilot and on AOPA Online. The new AOPA Drone Pilot email newsletter that led many readers to this story will be a regular biweekly publication. (An AOPA Drone Pilot subscription is automatically included with every AOPA Drone Membership; nonmembers who wish to receive it may also to subscribe to this biweekly email that will cover drone-related news, features, training, policy, and video from drones flown by hobbyists and commercial operators.) Safety-Many of the free courses, videos, quizzes, safety advisors, and other products of the AOPA Air Safety Institute are equally applicable to manned and unmanned aviation, and new content will be developed that is specific to drone operations. Members who join AOPA, along with those who make tax- deductible contributions to the AOPA Foundation, make it possible to provide this free safety education and training to all pilots. Swain said the proposition to drone pilots who are not already AOPA members is simple: "We're providing the community and resources all pilots need." By joining AOPA, drone pilots will support current and future efforts to make unmanned aviation safe and accessible, just as all AOPA members do for GA as a whole. (For those not familiar: AOPA refers to general aviation (GA) as all types of aviation outside of military and scheduled airline service.) Steady course AOPA and its members are committed to serve and grow GA, including the drone aircraft community, as they safely integrate into aviation. We will continue to serve as the chief advocate and supporter of all pilots, working to ensure the skies are safe and accessible to everyone who dreams of flying; that aviation is a subject of lifelong learning by all aviators; and that doors are opened to welcome so many new pilots to GA. "Dividing manned from unmanned aviators would rob both of many benefits, and create unnecessary conflict," said Baker. "AOPA is uniquely positioned, with the strength of nearly 350,000 members, as the long-recognized voice of GA, and represents all pilots. We believe we are stronger and safer as a united community, and welcome these new pilots with hope that our common goals of safety and freedom to fly will be achieved together." https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/february/21/aopa-welcomes-drone-pilots Back to Top Multi-Crew Pilot License Could Help Fill Industry Gap The Multi-Crew Pilot License is the type of innovation the industry should embrace. In the decade since it was first launched, the Multi-Crew Pilot License (MPL) has courted its fair share of skepticism and criticism. And yet, at a time when the demand for new pilots is more pressing than ever before, the success of the MPL could be integral to the future of the commercial aviation industry. We have been big advocates of the MPL at Alpha Aviation Academy, and have found it to be a hit with both cadets and airlines alike. Since we started using it as one of our training methods of choice in 2010 we have placed more than 200 pilots with leading low cost carrier Air Arabia. The main criticism aimed at the MPL since its inception is that it represents a reduction in practical flight time compared to the traditional training methods. There is an argument that MPL cadets do not gain enough practical flying experience and are subsequently lacking in the skill, experience and decision- making that are invaluable when problems arise in the cockpit. But in reality, the MPL is offering the sort of innovation that the wider industry should be striving to promote. By taking advantage of technological advancements to train fully capable pilots in less time, the MPL offers a path for continued adaptation and optimization of pilot training processes-whilst still ensuring pilots are fully equipped with the specific skills they need. Simulators and training technology are growing more sophisticated and opening up ever-increasing possibilities. Utilizing this technology to improve the training experience is a necessary step for sustained improvement. Technology is constantly changing the world around us, and is something the industry should embrace, rather than shy away from. Other arguments against the MPL stem from its shorter length (it can take as little as 128 hours to learn to fly via the MPL route), something which seems to unsettle some aviation professionals, particularly the old guard. Yet safety will always be the highest priority in air travel, and the MPL prioritizes specific safety measures to mitigate the risk of human factor errors in a flight, including threat and error management (TEM) and crew resource management (CRM) at every phase of training. The reality is that if we are overly cautious in developing new training methods then we risk stunting the opportunity for industry progress. The increased specialization the MPL allows for has doubtless played a part in its success. As cadets are trained according to the requirements of specific airlines, they are ready to hit the ground running when they graduate. The whole transition from cadet to pilot is more seamless. Some in the industry have raised doubts over the value of teaching pilots to work in a multi-crew environment, rather than focusing on building their experience from a more singular perspective. This is something of a straw-man. Airlines need first and second officers in the cockpit, and if the MPL is supplying them then it is doing what it is supposed to. The license exists to create capable pilots for commercial airlines, and if it is achieving this, then clearly it is serving its purpose. That is not to say that the MPL is without fault. It has evolved and improved over the last decade, and as with anything, we must continue to look for ways to keep fine-tuning it so that we give pilots the best possible start to their careers. Pilot training will be more crucial than ever over the decades to come, with demand for airline pilots on an upward trajectory, and licenses like the MPL could have a central role to play in finding a sustainable long- term answer. Victor Brandao is the General Manager of Alpha Aviation Academy, one of the leading pilot training providers in the Middle East. He started his aviation career with the Portuguese Air Force at age 17. He has subsequently worked as an Operations Manager, Instructor and Commercial Pilot in Europe and Africa, as well as a Flight Academy Manager over the last ten years. The views expressed here are the author's own. http://atwonline.com/training/multi-crew-pilot-license-could-help-fill-industry-gap Back to Top European Pilots Group Airs Concerns Over Flight-time Rules European flight-time rules that became effective one year ago are being "widely misinterpreted and incorrectly implemented," by airlines, the president of the European Cockpit Association (ECA) charged in a new column. The pilots' association calls on the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to more actively provide guidance to national authorities, airlines and aircrew. Many airlines and national aviation authorities are challenged to interpret and apply the year-old European Union Flight Time Limitations (FTL) regulations, ECA president Dirk Polloczek wrote in a column posted to the association's website on February 20. The EU implemented the amended regulation on Feb. 18, 2016, following a two-year transition period; it applies to commercial air transport scheduled and charter operations. Due to the complexity of the rules, airlines and national aviation authorities are struggling with translating them into flight operations and some "are opting for interpretations that simply fit their operations, schedule and productivity targets" without regard to the fatigue impact on aircrews, Polloczek said. "Particularly at risk are night flight duties of 10 hours or more, extended flights of 14 hours, and standby- flight combinations with pilots being awake for more than 18 hours-but being expected to land their aircraft and passengers safely after such duties," he said. "Although we have new rules, the old problem persists: many fatigued pilots in Europe's cockpits." The ECA is an umbrella group that represents some 38,000 pilot members of national pilot associations in 37 EU states. It called upon EASA to provide clear guidelines to aviation authorities and carriers to implement the FTL rules and also for airlines to adopt complementary fatigue risk management systems. As of the first anniversary of the FTL regulation, a consortium of research institutes will begin a scientific review of the rules leading to a planned final report in February 2019. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2017-02-20/european-pilots-group-airs-concerns- over-flight-time-rules Back to Top Essendon air crash: what will the investigators be looking for? The Conversation By Geoffrey Dell from Central Queensland University Emergency services personnel are seen at the scene of a plane crash in Essendon, Victoria, Australia. PHOTO: Five people were killed when the light plane crashed into a Melbourne factory outlet. (AAP: Joe Castro) Just before 9:00am on Tuesday, a twin-engined Beechcraft B200 Super King Air turbo-prop aircraft took off from runway 17 at Essendon Airport outside Melbourne in Victoria. Shortly after take-off, the pilot declared an emergency and reported an engine failure to air traffic control. The plane then banked to the left and crashed into the nearby DFO shopping centre, killing the pilot and four passengers. In the wake of the crash, investigators from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), the lead investigation agency, and Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) will be trying to determine why the aircraft lost power and was unable to be flown to a safe landing. As part of the aircraft's type certification it is required to be able to maintain a minimum 5 per cent climb gradient following the failure of the critical engine on take-off. This means it should have been able to at least climb over local obstacles, and circle around for a landing. So a key question in the minds of investigators will be the reasons why this particular aircraft on this occasion wasn't able to achieve this. If the malfunction was related to only one engine, there has to have been some other factor degrading the aircraft's single engine performance. Maybe the engine that failed did not auto-feather, or could not be feathered. This is where the prop blades on the failed engine are rotated to produce minimal drag, allowing the plane to perform better with only one engine operating. If the failed engine didn't feather correctly, it could have resulted in the windmilling propeller producing significant additional drag and seriously affecting aircraft controllability. Or perhaps a much more insidious problem occurred causing full or significant partial power loss on both engines, presenting the pilot with an extreme emergency situation to manage. If that were the case, there would have to have been a common failure mode failure affecting both engines, such as a fuel quality, fuel starvation or an engine management issue. Plane involved in DFO crash PHOTO: The Beechcraft Super King Air involved in a crash was owned by Corporate and Leisure Aviation. (Flight Aware) However, at this point in time, all of that is just conjecture. The investigators will no doubt be exploring these lines of enquiry and many others. They will be following standard ATSB investigation protocols that have been developed and honed over time based around the International Civil Aviation Organisation's Annex 13 and Manual of Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation methods. The investigators will be clearly interested in the engines, propellers and fuel systems. They will also be exploring all the aircraft's other systems, such as avionics, flight management computers, airframe and flight controls, looking for any evidence of malfunction or anomaly that could have contributed to the cause of the crash. Investigators will also have a focus on all the possible human factors issues. The pilot's response to the emergency will be examined and any factors, such as fatigue, illness or health issues that could have contributed will be explored. The investigation will be conducted as a systematic and scientific process. Everything that could have contributed to the cause of the crash will be considered. Many will be discounted. Some will inevitably be proven. The investigator's findings will be solely based on the evidence from the wreckage, and from analysis of evidence external to the aircraft, such as maintenance documentation, air traffic control recordings, available film footage and, not least, the observations of the witnesses. The investigation will be an arduous and exacting task given the apparent fragmentation of the aircraft and the post-crash fire. However, ATSB investigators are among the best in the world and I have no doubt they'll reveal the causal sequences that led to this accident, so that any lessons can be learned and corrective actions implemented to prevent recurrences. Aviation is the safest means of transport in no small part due to the work of air safety investigators who shed light on the causes of those accidents which do occur. This accident will continue that tradition, I'm certain. Dr Geoffrey Dell is a career safety and accident investigation specialist who has conducted countless investigations over 35 years. He currently leads Central Queensland University's accident investigation and forensics program. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-22/essendon-air-crash-what-will-the-investigators-be-looking- for/8292678 Back to Top Southwest, Frontier aircraft collide on ground at Phoenix airport A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-800 and a Frontier Airlines Airbus A320 were involved in a ground contact incident at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), the airlines and airport have confirmed. A PHX spokesperson told ATW that the two aircraft "clipped wing tips on a taxiway" at around 8 p.m. local time Feb. 16. The Southwest aircraft was taxiing after landing and the Frontier aircraft was pushing back from its gate when the incident occurred. There were no reported injuries on either aircraft. Damage to the two aircraft is unknown. FAA is investigating, according to PHX. A Southwest spokesperson confirmed the incident to ATW in an emailed statement: "Southwest flight 4182 was taxiing to the gate at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport when another airline's aircraft pushed back from another gate and made contact with our aircraft. There were no Southwest customer or employee injuries. Our aircraft is currently out of service for repairs and the customers who were traveling to Denver were accommodated on another aircraft, and arrived approximately an hour late." A Frontier spokesperson told ATW: "Frontier flight 765, an Airbus A320, scheduled to operate from Phoenix to Denver was cleared to push back from the gate in Phoenix. While the aircraft was being pushed back, an aircraft belonging to another airline made contact with our aircraft. No injuries have been reported. There were 163 passengers on board and a crew of six. Frontier is cooperating with the [US National Transportation Safety Board] and FAA in the investigation and is working with customers to accommodate them on other flights." http://atwonline.com/safety/southwest-frontier-aircraft-collide-ground-phoenix-airport Back to Top A Handful of Travelers Got Through Security at JFK Airport Without Proper Screening A handful of people were not screened properly at a security checkpoint at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport early on Monday morning, authorities said. A spokesman from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) said three passengers in the airport's Terminal 5 "did not receive required secondary screening after alarming the walk through metal detector." The TSA identified the passengers and conducted security measures at their arrival airport, the spokesman said. The spokesman added that the incident "presents minimal risk to the aviation transportation system."Earlier, a spokesman for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey told the Associated Press that up to 11 people were believed to have boarded various flights from Terminal 5 after going through an unattended checkpoint lane. http://time.com/4676846/unattended-security-checkpoint-jfk-airport/ Curt Lewis