Flight Safety Information June 5, 2018 - No. 113 In This Issue Incident: Virgin Australia B738 at Brisbane on Jun 4th 2018, burst tyre on departure Incident: American A319 near El Paso on Jun 3rd 2018, severe hail strike Incident: SCAT B735 at Kostanay on Jun 3rd 2018, runway excursion on backtrack Incident: Delta A333 over Atlantic on May 29th 2018, engine vibrations Prototype Electric Plane Built by Siemens and Magnus Aircraft Crashes in Hungary, Killing Both People LIBIK Fire Suppression Kits for the Cabin and Flight Deck. DRUNK AIRLINE PILOTS FIRED BEFORE FIVE-HOUR FLIGHT ACROSS SIBERIA TSB cites pilots and visibility for WestJet incident at St Martin Air Canada looks to stop gadgets from slipping into business seats Accident Probe: Maneuvering Speed "Lack of Reliable Data": GAO Says FAA Needs to Improve Management of Safety Risks for Drones Spurned by airlines, first A380s to be stripped for parts Commercial airlines may take delivery of over 1,900 new aircraft in 2018 Emirates confirms grounding of 20 aircraft Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection and Investigation, Course, Oct 31-Nov 1, Woburn MA USA 2018 SERC of ISASI HIGH ALTITUDE FLYING: WHAT EVERY PILOT NEEDS TO KNOW - New Online Course - Fall 2018 Human Factors in Accident Investigation from SCSI Flight Safety Officer Course from SCSI Call for Nominations For 2018 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY - 1 GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY - 2 GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY - 3 Incident: Virgin Australia B738 at Brisbane on Jun 4th 2018, burst tyre on departure A Virgin Australia Boeing 737-800, registration VH-VUG performing flight VA-474 from Brisbane,QL to Perth,WA (Australia), departed Brisbane's runway 19 but burst a tyre on departure. The crew stopped the climb at 8000 feet and decided to return to Brisbane, then climbed the aircraft to 10,000 feet to burn off fuel. The aircraft landed safely back in Brisbane about 3:30 hours after departure. The flight was cancelled. The airline reported the aircraft returned to Brisbane due to an engineering issue, the flight was cancelled. https://avherald.com/h?article=4b976305&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: American A319 near El Paso on Jun 3rd 2018, severe hail strike An American Airlines Airbus A319-100, registration N806AW performing flight AA-1897 from San Antonio,TX to Phoenix,AZ (USA) with 130 passengers and 5 crew, was enroute at FL340 about 115nm northeast of El Paso,TX (USA) when the aircraft encountered turbulence and a severe hail strike at around 01:08Z (Jun 4th) causing damage to both windscreens and the nose cone of the aircraft. The crew decided to divert to El Paso initiating a normal descent, entered a hold at 9000 feet to burn off fuel and landed safely in El Paso about 70 minutes after leaving FL340. Passengers reported there was lightning outside the aircraft windows, there was sound of hail pelting the aircraft. The sickness bags were needed, several passengers needed more than one and were handed such bags by other passengers not needing them. A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration N929AN reached Phoenix with a delay of 3 hours. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL1897/history/20180604/0000Z/KSAT/KPHX https://avherald.com/h?article=4b97224e&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: SCAT B735 at Kostanay on Jun 3rd 2018, runway excursion on backtrack A SCAT Airlines Boeing 737-500, registration LY-AWD performing flight DV-729 from Almaty to Kostanay (Kazakhstan) with 80 people on board, landed on Kostanay's runway 33 and slowed safely but missed the last available exit taxiway 3 (taxiway 4 at the end of the runway is currently closed). While attempting to turn around to backtrack the runway to taxiway 3 the aircraft went off the runway and became stuck with nose gear and left main gear on soft ground. The passengers disembarked onto the runway via the right hand forward door and mobile stairs and were bussed to the terminal. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Kostanay about 36 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=4b975de1&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Delta A333 over Atlantic on May 29th 2018, engine vibrations A Delta Airlines Airbus A330-300, registration N804NW performing flight DL-75 from Amsterdam (Netherlands) to Atlanta,GA (USA) with 293 passengers and 13 crew, was enroute at FL330 over the Atlantic Ocean about 400nm northeast of Goose Bay,NL (Canada) when the left hand engine (PW4168A) began to vibrate exceeding 10 units. The crew reduced the engine to idle thrust, the vibrations ceased. The crew kept the engine running, drifted down to FL240 and diverted to Goose Bay for a safe landing with the #1 engine at idle. The Canadian TSB reported maintenance found metal debris in the tail pipe and replaced the engine. The engine was sent for examination and failure analysis. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL75/history/20180529/1100Z/EHAM/KATL https://avherald.com/h?article=4b975755&opt=0 Back to Top Prototype Electric Plane Built by Siemens and Magnus Aircraft Crashes in Hungary, Killing Both People on Board Earlier this year the late pilot had taken our reporter up for a spin in same model, the Magnus eFusion Photo: Siemens The Magnus eFusion stores lithium-ion batteries in front of the cockpit. An experimental electric plane built by Hungary's Magnus Aircraft and Siemens crashed on Thursday near Budapest, killing the pilot and the passenger. Earlier this year the pilot took me for a 15-minute flight in this model, called the Magnus eFusion. The electric motor and the entire propulsion system are supplied by Siemens. "The pilot-who you were flying with-was a good friend of ours; he loved flying the electric aircraft," says Gergely György Balázs, head of Siemens's Budapest research outfit. The author shown with the pilot (right). Photo: Siemens The author (left) with the late pilot, János B. János B. (as his name has been given in the Hungarian press) was 61 years old. His passenger, Gábor K., was 41. Siemens and the Hungarian authorities are each conducting investigations, and according to regulations there will be no announcements until the analysis is further along. Meanwhile, Siemens is grounding the plane. A local news site report, translated by Google, reports that "The aircraft ignited during the crash, the flames were extinguished by professional firefighters in Pécs and Siklós within a few minutes...." However, AVWeb cites witnesses who saw the aircraft "maneuvering at low altitude before catching fire and crashing in a near vertical dive." If indeed the fire began in the air, and if the airplane was indeed a pure electric version of the eFusion, then one might speculate the problem could have started in the lithium-ion battery pack. Such batteries can undergo thermal runaway, in which one cell suddenly releases a lot of heat, causing neighboring cells to do the same in a chain reaction. Thermal runaway has plagued cellphones, laptops, and e-cigarettes. Magnus and Siemens are also working on a version of the plane that uses a hybrid diesel-electric design, which had its maiden flight in April. However, from the wording of the statements of Siemens and Magnus Aircraft, it would appear that the crash involved a pure electric version of the plane. The eFusion is a semiaerobatic plane, and aerobatics in general can be risky. Just six weeks ago an experienced aerobatic pilot was killed in a practice flight before an air show in China. https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/aerospace/aviation/prototype-electric-plane-built-by-siemens-and- magnus-aircraft-crashes-in-hungary-killing-both-on-board Back to Top Back to Top DRUNK AIRLINE PILOTS FIRED BEFORE FIVE-HOUR FLIGHT ACROSS SIBERIA Two airline pilots were pulled from duty and fired after turning up to fly a plane of passengers cross- country, while allegedly drunk. The men, both employed by Russia's budget Pobeda airline, arrived to work last week, scheduled to fly from the Siberian city of Surgut to the Caspian port city of Makhachkala-a journey that takes nearly five hours. After a mandatory medical test, authorities established that neither one of the pair was fit to fly. "At Pobeda we have an absolute zero tolerance policy and condemnation for employees who permit themselves alcohol even during their out-of-work hours," airline director Andrei Kalmykov said in a statement to the Interfax news agency on Monday. "They were suspended from the route and were immediately fired from the company ranks upon mutual party agreement," he added. After the pilots failed their respective sobriety tests they reportedly asked for a 30-minute break, after which medical officials gave them another chance to prove they were fit to fly, the Telegram news account Mash reported. Having first registered blood alcohol levels of 0.41 percent and 0.74 percent respectively, the men returned from their break with an even higher concentration of liquor in their systems, ticking up to 0.45 and 0.76, according to Mash. One of the pilots had drunk one bottle of beer, while the other, who was having more difficulty communicating, admitted to drinking a liter of beer, the outlet added. The airline has not officially confirmed anything about Mash's account of events, and the identity of the pilots is not public. However, Kalmykov said that the company will now request that lawmakers introduce more severe legal punishments for similar offenses in the future. Pobeda has denied allegations in the Mash reports that airline chiefs resorted to asking pilots and crew to work overtime, in order to cover for the drunk employees who remained grounded at Surgut. "The substitute crew had no increase in their work hours," a Pobeda official told state news agency Itar- Tass. "This would not be possible for any of the airline's routes" Air safety and overworked crews are a particularly thorny issue in Russia, where Pobeda's parent company Aeroflot once had a terrible reputation for crashes during Soviet times. In some of the most extreme examples, Aeroflot endured repeated tragedies such as in 1973, when the airline's fatalities amounted to almost half of the world's civilian plane crash deaths, The Times reported. Russian airlines have recovered greatly since then, partly because few now operate Soviet-made jets, as 2017 went down as the safest year for air travel globally. Nonetheless 2018 began with a fatal incident in Russia, when 71 people died in a mysterious plane crash by Saratov Airlines, outside of Moscow. http://www.newsweek.com/drunk-airline-pilots-fired-five-hour-flight-across-siberia-957281 Back to Top TSB cites pilots and visibility for WestJet incident at St Martin Unexpected rain and inadequate flight path monitoring caused a WestJet Boeing 737-800 to drift off course and descend to only 39ft above water during approach to Saint Martin in 2017, says Canada's Transportation Safety Board (TSB). Low visibility runway lighting also played a role, the TSB says. The incident, which the TSB calls a "risk of collision with terrain", involved WestJet flight 2652, a flight from Toronto to Saint Martin's Princess Juliana International airport on 7 March of that year. "The sudden and unexpected poor visibility during the final approach increased the flight crew's visual workload and led to inadequate altitude monitoring," says the TSB. "The crew did not notice that the aircraft had descended below the normal angle of descent... until the enhanced ground proximity warning system issued an alert." Air traffic controllers cleared the aircraft to land when it was 4.5nm (8.3km) from the runway, and the aircraft descended at a rate of 700-800ft per minute (213-244m per minute), says the TSB's final incident report. Then, after the 737's pilots saw a rain shower to their left, the aircraft's descent rate increased to 1,150ft per minute and the aircraft deviated below the standard approach path. After passing through 700ft altitude, the first officer, who was flying the aircraft, rolled the 737 left because he thought a hotel building was the airport. "The features of a hotel located to the left of the runway, such as its colour, shape and location, made it more conspicuous than the runway environment and led the crew to misidentify it as the runway," says the report. The TSB notes that Princess Juliana airport's runway lights and visual guidance system lights had been set to "low intensity" at the time. As a consequence, the 737 deviated 250ft left of the proper approach. It then entered the rain shower, where visibility reduced further. When 1nm from the runway the aircraft exited the rain shower and visibility improved. Now at 190ft altitude, the pilots realised their mistake and turned to align to the runway, but the aircraft continued descending at 860ft per minute, the report says. The ground proximity warning system sounded when the aircraft was 63ft above the water, and the crew initiated a go-around when the aircraft was 0.3nm from the runway and just 40ft above water, the TSB says. The altitude slipped to 39ft altitude before the aircraft began ascending, according to the report. "Both the shower and the low lighting limited the visual references available to the crew to identify the runway properly until the aircraft had exited the rain shower," says the TSB. In response, Calgary-based WestJet developed a "corrective action plan" that included giving pilots more information about operational challenges at Princess Juliana airport. The airport will also add airport lighting system guidance to its operations manual, says the TSB. WestJet did not immediately response to a request for comment. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/tsb-cites-pilots-and-visibility-for-westjet-incident-449196/ Back to Top Air Canada looks to stop gadgets from slipping into business seats Personal electronic devices have a way of slipping out of passengers' hands and into the crevices of business class seats, which can create a headache for airline staffers, who must retrieve the PEDs; and in worst-case scenarios, a fire hazard if they are crushed within the seating mechanism before being detected. Grappling with this common problem, Air Canada has launched an internal project to study ways to catch passengers' gadgets when they disappear into the carrier's lie-flat business class seats, Runway Girl Network has learned. The airline is looking to add nets to the underlying structures of the seats "without impacting the product", said Air Canada VP, products Andrew Yiu. "It's easy to say, 'get the flight attendants and they'll get it'. But in most cases, it's still very difficult to do so." Indeed, when your author was traveling last week in Air Canada's Signature Class cabin on a Boeing 777- 300ER as a guest of the airline, the chief steward warned passengers to hang onto their devices, or place them in the cubby where the wired touchscreen remote resides. He said some devices that slip into the seats cannot be retrieved until post-flight, at which point mechanics must be called in. Rotation The risks associated with Lithium batteries are well documented, particularly when it comes to fires. And industry has observed several high-profile events - including involving Qantas and Air France's prior- generation business class product - where PEDs were crushed in seats. Instructions on how to handle a dropped PED situation are now part of the pre-flight safety videos on a number of carriers. However, one of the reasons why aircraft seatmakers have not produced a universal solution to the problem, said Yiu, is because there is no standard seat "because everyone has a customized seat" so whatever Air Canada decides to do in terms of adding safety nets, for instance, "we have to get it certified from Transport Canada". He added: "I think it makes it a little more difficult for seat suppliers to say, 'you know what, everyone is suffering, let's do this'." That's why Air Canada is taking the initiative to find a solution that works for the airline, and its lie-flat business class seats. https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2018/06/04/air-canada-looks-to-stop-gadgets-from-slipping-into- business-class-seats/ Back to Top Accident Probe: Maneuvering Speed Combining the loads imposed by maneuvering with those encountered in turbulence can exceed structural limits. Early in our primary training, we encountered the concept of maneuvering speed (VA), or design maneuvering speed as it's sometimes called. We're basically told it's the speed at below which we should fly in turbulence and when entering advanced maneuvers, hence its name. If we're lucky and have a good ground-school instructor, we'll also learn that VA changes with weight: As the airplane's weight decreases, so will maneuvering speed. Although VA isn't marked on our airspeed indicators, there should be a placard listing it at the airplane's gross weight, with the admonition to not make full control deflections above it. Out in the practice area, VA often is used as the target speed for en-tering maneuvers like accelerated stalls, chandelles and lazy eights, although some manufacturers may publish a different speed. Basically, when we're engaged in maneuvers imposing additional loads on the airframe, we should be flying at or below the airplane's weight-ad-justed VA. But that's not the full story. Some of the things we're not told about VA in ground school are learned the hard way. Background On December 10, 2015, at about 1347 Mountain time, an experimental Van's RV-7 homebuilt experienced an in-flight breakup and impacted terrain in Hurricane, Utah. The airline transport pilot and passenger were fatally injured; the airplane sustained substantial damage. The airplane was registered to the pilot. Visual conditions existed. Several witnesses heard the air-plane's engine make what sounded like power changes. One witness observed the airplane spiraling and descending in a corkscrew-type maneuver. Other witnesses report-ed observing pieces of the airplane "floating in the air." The accident site was located between a cold front to the north-west and a high-pressure area to the southwest, in an area of strong pressure gradients. The wind profile of a weather model for the accident site estimated the surface horizontal wind was from 220 degrees at eight knots, with winds increasing in speed with height and veering west. The model supported light-to-moderate clear air turbulence from 6,400 feet MSL through 8,000 feet, and mountain wave development from 10,000 to 12,000 feet MSL. Pilot re-ports noted mountain wave activity in the region with moderate-to-severe turbulence near the accident site. An Airmet for moderate turbulence below 18,000 feet was active over the accident site at the accident time. Investigation The debris path was about 1,460 feet long and 450 feet wide. All major components of the airplane were located in the debris path. The main wreckage included the fuselage, engine, right wing, half of the left wing, a majority of the left and right elevators and the lower half of the rudder. The vertical stabilizer with the upper half of the rudder still attached was located about 1,420 feet away. The left and right horizontal stabilizers were located about 850 feet and 790 feet, respectively, from the main wreckage. The left aileron was about 430 feet away from the main wreckage; the left outboard wing was located about 320 feet from the main wreckage. The engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The outboard half of the right wing was deformed downward about 15 to 20 degrees at the flap/aileron junction. The upper and lower wing skins were buckled around the area where the wing was deformed downward. The outboard half of the left wing also had separated at the flap/aileron junction. The left wing's main spar had fractured where the upper and lower spar caps undergo a net section decrease from inboard to outboard. The outboard half of the left wing was mostly intact with minimal damage noted. Examination of the wing fracture locations revealed damage and deformation consistent with the separation of the outboard portion of the wing in a downward direction. The horizontal stabilizer for-ward spar fractured about two inches outboard of the fuselage on both sides. Both of the horizontal stabilizer spar caps were deformed down and aft at the fracture location. The elevators were deformed down and aft matching the spar deformation. There was buckling damage on the lower skin of both horizontal stabilizers consistent with the stabilizers separating downward. All fractures exhibited a dull, grainy appearance consistent with overstress separation. There was no evidence of progressive or pre-existing fractures on any of the parts. No data for the accident flight was recovered from the electronic de-vices found in the wreckage. How- ever, a video camera contained two files recorded on previous flights in which the accident airplane per- formed an aileron roll to the right. Commercially available radar data revealed two tracks consistent with the accident airplane. One track was 17 minutes long and end-ed at 1332 when the airplane was at 6,150 feet MSL. Altitudes through-out the track varied from 6,150 to 9,350 feet, and groundspeed varied between 24 and 168 knots. Although the airplane's most recent weight and balance records were not located, an estimated weight and balance was calculated using the airplane kit manufacturer's data. Presuming a total fuel load of 42 gallons, the airplane would have been about 128 lbs below its maximum gross weight of 1,800 lbs at the time of the accident. Probable Cause The NTSB determined the probable cause(s) of this accident to include: "The pilot's abrupt flight control inputs, likely above the maneuvering speed, in severe winds and turbulence conditions, which resulted in an in-flight breakup." Based on the aircraft's radar track, the pilot was maneuvering the airplane, perhaps including aerobatics. The NTSB's probable cause finding combines the G-loading effects of those maneuvers with the atmospheric conditions forecast to exist and concludes the aircraft encountered a wind gust that combined with the G-loading to impose on the airframe loads in excess of its design. In other words, abrupt maneuvering in turbulent conditions can risk exceeding the airplane's structural limitations. According to the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3B), VA is based on the wing's response to a 50-fps gust or elevator movement. Combining turbulence and high G loading induces even greater stress on the aircraft. Aircraft Profile: Van's RV-7 Experimental Engine: Lycoming IO-360 (Typical) Empty Weight: 1,100 lbs. Max Gross T/O Weight: 1,800 lbs. Typical Cruise Speed: 170 KTAS Standard Fuel Capacity: 42 gal. Service Ceiling: 23,000 feet Range: 674 nm VSO: 50 KIAS American Airlines Flight 587 On November 12, 2001, an Airbus A300 operating as American Airlines Flight 587 departed John F. Kennedy International Airport for the Dominican Republic. Shortly after takeoff, it encountered wake turbulence from a 747 that took off ahead of it. The first officer/pilot flying made a series of aggressive, alternating rudder inputs in an attempt to stabilize the airplane. However, his control inputs were so aggressive that the airplane's vertical stabilizer, pictured at right, broke off the airframe and fell into Jamaica Bay. The NTSB determined the vertical stabilizer failed, in part, after loads beyond its ultimate design were created by the first officer's rudder input, even though the airplane was well below its maneuvering speed (VA) at the time. Prior to the AAL587 crash, pilots had been trained that any abrupt control input made below VA would not break the airplane. After that accident, definitions like the following from the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8023- 3B) were revised to reflect that design requirements do not consider repeated control inputs: "The structural design requirements do not cover multiple control inputs in one axis or control inputs in more than one axis at a time at any speed, even below VA. Combined control inputs cause additional bending and twisting forces." https://www.avweb.com/news/features/Accident-Probe-Maneuvering-Speed-230922-1.html Back to Top "Lack of Reliable Data": GAO Says FAA Needs to Improve Management of Safety Risks for Drones The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released a report suggesting that the FAA needs to improve its management of safety risks for drones. The 92-page document, published in response to growing concern in Congress and other government agencies over the unsafe use of drones, says that the FAA lacks good data on drone safety and doesn't go far enough in "following key principles of risk management." Lack of Reliable Data The report says that the current data available on identified drone risks - i.e., "sightings" that indicate drones are flying to close to manned aircraft or "incidents" - are unreliable. FAA says, GAO reports, that "most of the reports cannot be verified," and that reports are rarely validated or investigated. Additionally, the FAA acknowledges that many of the reports may not actually indicate that a drone was flying unlawfully. The report also points out that other entities, like the AMA and the Bard College Center for the Study of the Drone, reach different conclusions about the number of significant incidents when analyzing the same data. "FAA officials told us that they are aware that the agency's data on potential unsafe use of small UAS have limitations," says the report; and the agency is "making efforts" to improve the quality of information. Risk Management Principles That lack of reliable data means that the FAA only "partially follows" risk management principles. "... FAA's policy on safety risk management requires FAA to follow a process for managing risk that includes identifying hazards; analyzing and assessing associated safety risks; and developing and monitoring safety risk controls to reduce the risks to an acceptable level," says the report. When it comes to breaking down the tasks involved in accurately "analyzing and assessing associated safety risks" and "monitoring safety risk controls" the FAA's lack of reliable incident data means that they don't get full marks. That's significant for the drone industry, because it means that the FAA may be writing new regulations based on incomplete information. Conclusion "FAA's actions to expand the safe use of small UAS in the national airspace system have helped enable an increase in the number of commercial and recreational uses," the report concludes. "...However, FAA's ability to perform effective safety oversight is limited by FAA's lack of reliable data on unsafe use of small UAS and deficiencies in FAA's risk management approach." https://dronelife.com/2018/06/04/lack-of-reliable-data-gao-says-faa-needs-to-improve-management-of- safety-risks-for-drones/ Back to Top Spurned by airlines, first A380s to be stripped for parts SYDNEY (Reuters) - A German investment company said on Tuesday it would strip two unwanted Airbus A380 superjumbo passenger jets for parts after failing to find an airline willing to keep them flying following a decision by Singapore Airlines to return them to their owner. FILE PHOTO: General view shows an Airbus A380 at the final assembly line at Airbus headquarters in Blagnac near Toulouse, France, March 21, 2018. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau/File Photo The decision by Dortmund-based Dr Peters Group deals a fresh blow to the European planemaker's efforts to maintain market interest in the double-decker jet, barely 10 years after it went into service, hailed by politicians as a proud European symbol. Airbus had no immediate comment. Despite its ample space and excellent reviews for a quiet cabin, demand for the 544-seat jet has crumbled as airlines ditch the industry's largest four-engined aircraft in favor of smaller but ultra-efficient twin-engined models. Singapore Airlines launched A380 services in December 2007, but returned the first two aircraft to their German financiers some 10 years later after deciding not to extend their lease. The two discarded aircraft were flown to Tarbes in the French Pyrenees to be stored, and since then their fate has been uncertain as their owner looked in vain for other takers. "After extensive as well as intensive negotiations with various airlines such as British Airways, HiFly and IranAir, Dr Peters Group has decided to sell the aircraft components and will recommend this approach to its investors," the company said in a statement emailed to Reuters. The planes will not be scrapped entirely, but their huge frames will be combed for valuable components such as landing gears and electronics, a Dr Peters official told Reuters. Their engines are still useful and have been leased back to their manufacturer Rolls-Royce for use as spares. Dr Peters aims to extend this arrangement, the official added. U.S. company VAS Aero Services will be responsible for extracting and selling parts, but will do so in Tarbes. Dr Peters said the deal would yield a positive result for equity investors in the jets. It operates a number of boutique funds said to be targeted at well-off German retail investors. The planes now in the mortuary are not typical of models in service, experts caution. Early examples of a new type tend to be less efficient and Singapore Airlines recently ordered some new A380s. However, overall demand is thin and Airbus recently agreed to cut production while renewing a search for new buyers. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-a380/spurned-by-airlines-first-a380s-to-be-stripped-for-parts- idUSKCN1J10R2 Back to Top Commercial airlines may take delivery of over 1,900 new aircraft in 2018 Commercial airlines are expected to take delivery of over 1,900 new aircraft in 2018, with half of this year's deliveries replacing the existing fleet, IATA said in a report released here yesterday. This, the International Air Transport Association said will make a significant contribution to increasing fleet fuel efficiency. About the "substantial" investment by the industry on aircraft purchases this year, IATA said, "The trend improvement in average returns (ROIC) has given the industry the confidence to invest on this scale. Sustained high fuel costs had also made it economic to retire older aircraft at a higher rate, but that effect has weakened." The fleet is forecast to increase by more than 1,000 aircraft to end this year at almost 30,000 aircraft; expansion continues as markets have expanded strongly and the outlook remains positive. The average size of aircraft in the fleet is continuing to rise slowly. So by the end of 2018 there will be around 4.4mn available seats. These seats are also being used more intensively, which is critical for profitability in a capital intensive industry - and it also reduces environmental impact. Passenger load factors are expected to rise from 2017 levels to 81.7% on average in 2018. Aircraft are also being flown more intensively. The number of scheduled aircraft departures is forecast to reach 39mn this year. That's an average of 74 aircraft departing each minute of 2018. According to IATA, debt providers to the airline industry are well rewarded for their capital, usually invested with the security of a very mobile aircraft asset to back it. On average during previous business cycles the airline industry has been able to generate enough revenue to pay its suppliers' bills and service its debt. Credit metrics have improved with recent significant free cash flows, particularly in North America, and a decline in debt ratios. IATA said, "Until 2015 equity owners had not been rewarded adequately for risking their capital in most years, except at a handful of airlines. Investors should expect to earn at least the normal return generated by assets of a similar risk profile, the weighted average cost of capital (WACC). "Such has been the intensity of competition, and the challenges to doing business, that average airline returns are rarely as high as the industry's cost of capital." Equity investors have typically seen their capital shrink. But this year we forecast the industry to generate a return on invested capital (ROIC) of 8.5%, which does, for the fourth consecutive year, adequately reward equity owners. On invested capital of over $600bn, IATA said the industry is forecast to generate $5.9bn of value for investors next year. But the $33.8bn net profit, while exceptional for the airline industry, is only a little higher than a 'normal' return for risking their capital. Moreover, above-WACC returns have only started to be generated outside North America in the past year or two and are still not widespread across all regions. http://www.gulf-times.com/story/595188/Commercial-airlines-may-take-delivery-of-over-1-90 Back to Top Emirates confirms grounding of 20 aircraft President Tim Clark says grounding due to lower demand in summer period Dubai: Emirates airline president Tim Clark on Monday confirmed that the carrier has grounded about 20 aircraft due to lower demand, with plans to re-deploy those aircraft again by September or October. "We've got about 20 aircraft grounded. Why? Because it's Ramadan, it's May, and May is the lowest month for any international travellers ... so demand for travel is down significantly in the Muslim world; it's down by about 50 per cent," said Clark, on the sidelines of an aviation summit in Syndey. Asked whether that move had anything to do with pilot shortage or a large number of pilots reportedly leaving the airline, Clark denied those claims, saying that Emirates remains "an extremely good entity that retains our pilots." "The difficulty is getting the pilots and we're working on that ... so by the winter of this year, we'll have as many pilots as we're going to need," he said, without providing more details. Clark was speaking on the sidelines of the International Air Transport Association's 74th annual general meeting in Sydney on Monday. https://gulfnews.com/business/aviation/emirates-confirms-grounding-of-20-aircraft-1.2231433 Back to Top Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection and Investigation Course presented by N. Albert Moussa, PhD, PE October 30-November 1, 2018 BlazeTech Corporation 29 B Montvale Ave, Woburn MA 01801 USA. Dear Colleague, While commercial air transport is very safe, the advent of new technologies poses fire safety challenges that will be treated in this course. This offering draws upon Dr. Moussa's work in this area since 1971 as well as related courses that BlazeTech has been teaching since 1998. Lectures will include Li and Li-ion battery fires, flammability of carbon fiber and glass fiber composites, emerging aviation fluids, engine fires, fuel tank fire/explosion, fire extinguishment methods, protection methods, aircraft accident investigation, and fire/explosion pattern recognition. Recent accidents are continuously added to the course. For each type of fire, this course will provide a cohesive integrated presentation of fundamentals, small- and large-scale testing, computer modeling, standards and specifications, and real accident investigation - as outlined in the course brochure. This integrated approach will enable you to address safety issues related to current and new systems and circumstances, and to investigate one of a kind fire and explosion accidents. The course will benefit professionals who are responsible for commercial aircraft, helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles including design, equipment selection, test, operation, maintenance, safety management system, hazard/risk assessment, and accident investigation. View Brochure for course content and registration form (also embedded below). View Testmonials of previous attendees and their Companies. View some of the technical references discussed in this course. We also offer this course at the client site as well as customized courses on fire and explosion in other areas. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Albert Moussa, Ph.D., P.E. Sign Up For Our Course Announcement BlazeTech Corporation 29B Montvale Ave. Woburn, MA 01801-7021 781-759-0700 x200 781-759-0703 fax www.blazetech.com firecourse@blazetech.com LinkedIn Back to Top Back to Top Back to Top Back to Top Back to Top FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 25, 2018 CONTACT: Philip Barbour, 205-939-1700, 205-617-9007 Call for Nominations For 2018 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- The Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Foundation is now accepting nominations for the 2018 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award, honoring a leader in global aviation safety. The award will be presented during the 71st Annual International Air Safety Summit, taking place Nov. 12-15 in Seattle, Wash. Presented since 1956, the Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award recognizes notable achievement in the field of civil or military aviation safety in method, design, invention, study or other improvement. The award's recipient is selected for a "significant individual or group effort contributing to improving aviation safety, with emphasis on original contributions," and a "significant individual or group effort performed above and beyond normal responsibilities." Mechanics, engineers and others outside of top administrative or research positions should be especially considered. The contribution need not be recent, especially if the nominee has not received adequate recognition. Nominations that were not selected as past winners of the Award can be submitted one additional time for consideration. Please note that self-nominations will not be considered. The Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award's story dates back 70 years. On April 14, 1945, after visiting family in Pittsburgh, Laura Taber Barbour was aboard a Pennsylvania Central Airlines DC-3 when it crashed into the rugged terrain of Cheat Mountain near Morgantown, West Virginia. All passengers and crew were killed. In the years following, her husband, Dr. Clifford E. Barbour and son, Clifford E. Barbour, Jr., established the Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award in her honor. The Award Board, composed of leaders in the field of aviation, meets in June of each year to conduct a final review of nominees and selection of the current year's recipient. Please help us honor this year's most deserving recipient. Nominations, including a 1-2-page narrative, can be submitted via the Laura Taber Barbour Foundation website at http://ltbaward.org/the- award/nomination-form/. Nominations will be accepted until June 14, 2018. For more information, including a complete history of Award recipients, see www.ltbaward.org. ABOUT THE LAURA TABER BARBOUR AIR SAFETY AWARD: The Award was established in 1956 through early association with the Flight Safety Foundation and from its founding has enjoyed a rich history of Award Board members, nominees and Award recipients. In 2013, the Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Foundation was formed from members of the Award Board, the aviation community and the Barbour family. As the foundation plans to broaden the scope of its intent, with great purpose, the Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award will continue to spotlight those champions who pioneer breakthroughs in flight safety. Back to Top GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY - 1 Dear Aviation Colleague, My name is Nicoletta Fala, and I am a Ph.D. candidate working with Prof. Karen Marais at the School of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Purdue University. We are seeking your input on post-flight debrief feedback in this survey. The motivation behind this research is the unacceptably high number of general aviation accidents. Our overall goal is to use flight data of various sources to help improve general aviation safety. We are trying to understand how different kinds of safety feedback affect risk perception among general aviation pilots. During the survey, you will be asked to review flight data from four flights and answer specific questions on the safety of each flight. We will then ask you a few demographic questions. The survey should take approximately 20 minutes to complete. During the survey, you will not be able to go back to the previous flight safety questions. You will, however, have the opportunity to review and change the demographic questions as you wish. You may choose to not answer some questions and you may stop the survey at any time without any repercussion to you. If you do not wish to complete the survey in one sitting, you may save your progress and return where you left off if you use the same computer to re-access the link. No personally identifiable information is being asked, analyzed or reported. All responses will be anonymous and in aggregate at the end of the study. Your participation in this survey is voluntary. You must be at least 18 years old to participate in this research. Thank you for your time and your cooperation. Your responses are greatly appreciated and will hopefully enable the general aviation community to improve their safety record. If you have any questions regarding the survey or the information contained within, please feel free to contact the researchers directly either at nfala@purdue.edu or kmarais@purdue.edu. Survey Link: www.nicolettafala.com/survey Nicoletta Fala Purdue Pilots, Inc. President Ph.D. Candidate School of Aeronautics and Astronautics Purdue University || College of Engineering http://nicolettafala.com/ Back to Top GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY - 2 Dear pilots, My name is Koen Scheers, First Officer and postgraduate student 'Air Transport Management' at City, University of London. Currently, I am working on my research project, which is the final part of my studies at City to gain a Master of Science (MSc) degree. My research project, entitled 'A sustainable model for pilot retention', aims to establish a model of organisational practices to keep pilots in the airline they are working for. To support my research project with data I have created a web survey for pilots, and via this way, I kindly ask your help by participating in the survey. The survey is not affiliated with any airline, training organisation, or any other. Participation in the survey is voluntary and anonymous. The survey will take about 10 minutes of your time to complete and is open for participation until 15 July 2018. Also, I would be very grateful if you could forward this message to other pilots in your contact list or spread the word in the airline you are working for. Please click the link below to enter the survey: SURVEY WEB LINK: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/pilotretention Your participation is highly appreciated, kind regards, Koen Scheers +32 486 85 07 91 Koen.scheers@city.ac.uk Back to Top GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY - 3 Dear fellow professional pilots, As part of my Masters Degree in Aviation Management, I am conducting a survey on 'Operator Conversion Courses' (A Course taken by pilots in a new airline when moving from one airline to another but remaining on the same aircraft type) May I ask that commercial pilots amongst you take just 5 minutes to answer this short survey; it is only 10 questions. I would also ask that you pass on the link to as many of your professional pilot colleagues around the world who might also be able to provide valuable data to the survey. The survey is open until the 15th June 2016 and all data is de-identied and shall only be used for the purposes of this paper. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/VJFHRSK If you have any questions, please feel free to email me on guy.farnfield.1@city.ac.uk Thank you Guy Farnfield Curt Lewis