Flight Safety Information April 2, 2019 - No. 068 In This Issue FAA expects Boeing update for troubled jet 'in coming weeks' The battle over the future of Boeing's 737 Max is heading to US courts Incident: Atlantic Airways A319 at Vagar on Mar 30th 2019, bird strike Incident: Azul A20N at Belem on Mar 30th 2019, rejected takeoff due to bird strike Incident: Aeroflot A320 at Budapest on Mar 30th 2019, unsafe gear Incident: Spring Airlines A320 at Shanghai on Mar 31st 2019, rejected takeoff due to bird strike Singapore Airlines grounds two 787-10s citing Rolls-Royce engine problem Air Travel in Africa Is Safer Than Ever, Despite the Ethiopia Crash Asia's Airlines Are on Course for More Disasters Should Airlines Consider Banning Alcohol On Aircraft? Flight management system crash causes airline delays across US Bombardier's Safety Standdown Moving To Fort Worth United Arab Emirates to Host Blockchain Aviation Conference in Abu Dhabi Qatar Aeronautical College starts aviation safety programme British startup looking to build 18-seat bioelectric hybrid airplane How to ice-proof the next generation of aircraft ANALYSIS: How Cape Air is recruiting pilots at both ends of the age scale The Largest Aircraft Ever Built: Meet the H-4 Hercules (Or the Spruce Goose) Israeli Moon Lander Tweaks Orbit to Prep for Thursday Lunar Arrival Positions: Director of Audit Programs & Manager of Quality Control HOT-STOP 'L' Helps You Check All the Boxes Call for Nominations For 2019 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award Call For Papers Deadline April 1 2019 - CHC Safety and Quality Summit 2019 Certificate Courses in Slovenia from SCSI FAA expects Boeing update for troubled jet 'in coming weeks' U.S. aviation regulators say Boeing needs more time to finish changes in a flight-control system suspected of playing a role in two deadly crashes. The Federal Aviation Administration said Monday it anticipates Boeing's final software improvements for 737 Max airliners "in the coming weeks." Boeing was expected to complete the work last week, but FAA spokesman Greg Martin said the company needs more time to make sure it has identified and addressed all issues. Chicago-based Boeing did not immediately comment. Once completed, Boeing's plan will need approval from the FAA and other regulators including those in Europe and China, who have indicated they will conduct their own reviews. The planes have been grounded around the world since mid-March. The news from the FAA suggests that airlines could be forced to park their Max jets longer than they expected. Airlines that own Max jets are scrambling other planes to fill some Max flights while canceling others. "We are aware that the resumption of service for our 737 Max aircraft may be further delayed, and our team will work with all customers impacted by any flight cancellations," said American Airlines spokesman Ross Feinstein. American Airlines had been pointing toward a late-April return of its 24 Max 8s. Over the weekend, Southwest Airlines announced that its 34 Max 8s will be removed from the schedule through May instead of mid-April. United Airlines has idled its 14 Max 9s through June 5. Separately, U.S. regulators and Boeing are awaiting a preliminary report from Ethiopian investigators into the March 10 crash of an Ethiopian Airlines Max 8 jet shortly after takeoff from Addis Ababa. The report will be scrutinized for information from the plane's data recorders that might suggest similarities between the doomed flight and the Oct. 29 crash of a Lion Air Max 8 in Indonesia. The two crashes killed 346 people. Data from the Indonesian plane indicates that pilots unsuccessfully fought the automated anti-stall system for control of the plane, which plunged into the sea shortly after takeoff. According to published reports, the same system activated on the Ethiopian Airlines flight. Boeing is making changes in an automated system that is designed to prevent the plane's nose from rising, which can lead to a dangerous aerodynamic stall. The changes include relying on readings from more than one sensor before the anti-stall system activates and pushes the nose down, and making the system's actions less severe and easier for pilots to handle. Boeing has said it will pay to train pilots on the technology. Two American Airlines pilots who attended a session with Boeing experts last week expressed satisfaction with the manufacturer's changes. American's chief 737 pilot, Roddy Guthrie, said Boeing added "some checks and balances in the system that will make the system much better." http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2019/apr/01/faa-expects-boeing-update-for-troubled-jet-in-comi/ Back to Top The battle over the future of Boeing's 737 Max is heading to US courts As the world awaits the preliminary report into the crash of Ethiopian Airlines jet last month, lawyers across the world say they are firming up their cases against both the carrier and the aircraft manufacturer Boeing. The ET 302 flight crashed on Mar. 10 outside Addis Ababa, killing 157 people from over 30 nations just months after a similar aircraft model crashed off the coast of Indonesia, killing all 189 people on board. Since then, questions have swirled around the 737 Max 8's automated anti-stall system, whether Boeing prioritized commercial deadlines over safety issues, and if the state airline trained and alerted its crew more explicitly to the possible risks of the 737 Max series. The cases could present an obstacle for Ethiopian, a fast-growing airline that hauls almost 11 million passengers annually. But the lawsuits seem a bigger risk for Boeing, especially if investigations conclude defective technology or maintenance processes were in any way to blame for the crashes. Following the grounding of the 737 Max 8 globally, the US government is conducting a criminal investigation while the US department of transportation is probing the regulator Federal Aviation Administration with respect to the certification of the 737 Max. A number of airlines globally like Indonesia's flag-carrier Garuda have also canceled their orders, while Vietnam's Bamboo Airways announced plans to purchase Airbus planes reversing an earlier decision to buy 100 737 Max aircraft. And as Boeing finalizes a software patch and new training module for the series, more families from the October Lion Air crash in Jakarta continue to file cases against it in the United States. "This is clearly a Boeing safety issue and all the relevant information concerning that safety issue is in the US," says Daniel Rose, a partner at Kreindler & Kreindler firm in New York who specializes in litigating airline crash cases. Rose's firm has so far been contacted by families of Ethiopian crash in Kenya, Ethiopia, Italy, Israel, and the United States. With two crashes involving new jets of the same models, Rose says "the intervening five months is the critical time period when safety decisions were made and that is what makes ET 302 a stronger claim, especially for non-US families." Searching through the debris of ET 302. However, suing Boeing in the US might prove challenging given the trend in courts have favored the manufacturer in the past. To minimize eventual costs and reputational loss, the company previously used the doctrine of "inconvenient forum" to request US courts dismiss or send cases filed in US courts to countries which they argue are better connected to a particular air accident or those the accident affected, says Joseph Wheeler, the founder and legal practice director of the Brisbane firm International Aerospace Law & Policy Group (IALPG). For instance, a US judge last year ruled that a case seeking compensation against Boeing and its insurer for the loss of the flight MH370 belonged in Malaysia and not in the United States. Yet that could change this time around, Wheeler argues, given that the suit might focus "on a number of design elements where evidence about the safety or efficacy of those designs would solely be found in the US, including relevant witnesses." The US would also have a strong interest in resolving these safety issues, he stated, given that lawsuits could examine the interrelation between Boeing, the FAA, and other regulators. The case is also compounded by the fact that eight American nationals died on ET 302-even though US courts, Wheeler said, have dismissed cases where US citizens were involved in a crash outside US territory. Suing Ethiopian Airlines While most of the cases are piling against Boeing-including one from Rwanda-lawyers say they aren't ruling out making claims against Ethiopian Airlines. Wheeler says they will do all that's necessary "to extract the maximum lawful entitlements" including potentially liable entities like "product component manufacturers, training organizations, or regulatory bodies." IALPG was involved in resolving the cases for the families of 38 of the 55 passengers killed onboard Flydubai 981 that crashed in Russia in 2016. Both Wheeler and Rose, however, admitted it would be hard to pursue a case against the FAA since they enjoy unique legal protections and defenses not to mention the complex legal obstacles to suing a government agency. Lawyers say under the Montreal Convention for victim compensation, Ethiopian could be liable to pay the deceased's family up to $157,000 without any proof of fault on its part. But for any higher amounts claimed, Wheeler said carriers usually defend themselves through litigation or negotiation especially if they can prove the damage was not due to their own negligence. In the case of the Ethiopian crash, Rose says that families might not sue the airline, especially outside the US, given the risk that could pose to the much more significant compensation of a successful US claim against Boeing. Besides, since "there will almost certainly be an agreement between the insurers for Boeing and Ethiopian Airlines," that "means that a resolution of claims against Boeing will also resolve claims against Ethiopian Airlines." The black boxes of the crashed Ethiopian Airlines. And while compensation will depend on individual circumstances, Rose says rewards in the lower end in this scenario could be between $1 million to $3 million and could go as high as $5 million to $10 million if the deceased was a significant earner and supporting a family. At least 19 United Nations staff, as well as academics and business executives, were killed on the Ethiopian crash. Recovering costs In the case that Ethiopian pays up, legal experts say the airline will seek to recoup those losses from Boeing. Rose says this is why families shouldn't start legal proceedings against Ethiopian abroad since Boeing might ask the court to send the litigation overseas and even "accept fault if the case is transferred to a foreign country. This could significantly reduce the value of the families' claims against Boeing." Asked if they might sue Boeing, Ethiopian chief executive Tewolde GebreMariam told Quartz Africa in Kigali, Rwanda last week that, "All these things are at a very early stage. And we are long-time partners with Boeing so we will discuss on a lot of issues." Grounded 737 Max 8. As the probe over the Ethiopian crash concludes, the families of the crash victims are asking governments and lawyers for assistance. Don Worley, of the McDonald Worley firm in Texas, says several people have reached out to him with regards to assessing individual cases. Wheeler also said he's due to visit Kenya soon to reach out to families. The cases are drawing global attention as liability claims related to the crash in addition to the grounding of the 737 Max are expected to be the largest non-war aviation reinsurance claim on record, according to insurance firm Willis Re. "Yes, there will probably be claims against Boeing's insurers for the loss of the plane," Rose noted, "but there will also likely by claims by all the airlines who were grounded against Boeing for lost revenue." https://qz.com/africa/1584662/boeing-and-ethiopian-airlines-face-lawsuits-over-737-max-crash/ Back to Top Incident: Atlantic Airways A319 at Vagar on Mar 30th 2019, bird strike An Atlantic Airways Airbus A319-100, registration OY-RCG performing flight RC-450 from Vagar (Faroe Islands) to Copenhagen (Denmark) with 122 people on board, departed Vagar's runway 30 when an engine (CFM56) ingested a bird prompting the crew to stop the climb at 4000 feet and return to Vagar for a safe landing on runway 30 about 21 minutes after departure. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Vagar about 62 hours after landing back, the engine is being replaced. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c6248d3&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Azul A20N at Belem on Mar 30th 2019, rejected takeoff due to bird strike An Azul Linhas Aereas Airbus A320-200 Neo, registration PR-YRX performing flight AD-4186 from Belem,PA to Macapa,AP (Brazil), was accelerating for takeoff from runway 02 when the crew rejected takeoff at high speed after an engine (LEAP) ingested a bird. The aircraft slowed safely and came to a stop on the runway about 1000 meters/3300 feet down the runway. The flight was cancelled. The aircraft is still on the ground about 55 hours after the rejected takeoff. Ground observer video: A320neo Da Azul Sofre 'Bird Strike' No Aeroporto De Bel้m-PA http://avherald.com/h?article=4c624787&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Aeroflot A320 at Budapest on Mar 30th 2019, unsafe gear An Aeroflot Airbus A320-200, registration VP-BLL performing flight SU-2030 from Moscow Sheremetyevo (Russia) to Budapest (Hungary), was on final approach to Budapest's runway 31R when the crew initiated a go around due to an unsafe gear indication. The crew worked the related checklists and managed to extend and lock the gear in the third attempt. The aircraft subsequently positioned for another approach to runway 31R and landed safely. The aircraft remained on the ground in Budapest for about 14.5 hours, then positioned to Moscow Sheremetyevo at FL250 and a maximum of 380 knots over ground. The aircraft remained another 14 hours on the ground in Moscow before returning to service. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c6242bb&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Spring Airlines A320 at Shanghai on Mar 31st 2019, rejected takeoff due to bird strike A Spring Airlines Airbus A320-200, registration B-8590 performing flight 9C-8949 from Shanghai Hongqiao to Shenzhen (China), was accelerating for takeoff from Hongqiao's runway 36L when the crew rejected takeoff at high speed. The aircraft came to a stop on the runway about 1500 meters/4900 feet down the runway. Emergency services responded and checked aircraft and runway. The aircraft subsequently taxied to the apron after about 45 minutes on the runway. A replacement A320-200 registration B-1892 reached Shenzhen with a delay of 3 hours. The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 16 hours before returning to service. The airline reported the crew rejected takeoff due to a bird strike. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c62406e&opt=0 Back to Top Singapore Airlines grounds two 787-10s citing Rolls-Royce engine problem Singapore Airlines' first Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner prepares to land at Singapore's Changi Airport March 28, 2018. SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore Airlines Ltd said on Tuesday it had grounded two Boeing Co 787-10 jets fitted with Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC Trent 1000 TEN engines after checks of its fleet found premature blade deterioration. The jets have been removed from service pending engine replacement, the airline said in a statement. The Trent 1000 TEN is the latest version of an engine that has had a problematic entry into service. As of late February, Rolls-Royce said 35 787s were grounded globally due to engine blades corroding or cracking prematurely. The manufacturer said it was aiming to reduce the number to 10 by the end of the year. In February, the company raised a Trent 1000 accounting charge to 790 million pounds ($1.03 billion) from 554 million pounds at the half year, contributing to a full-year operating loss of 1.16 billion pounds. It also allocated another 100 million pounds in cash to the problem. Rolls-Royce said on Tuesday that since the entry into service of the Trent 1000 TEN, it had communicated to operators that the high-pressure turbine blades in the engine would have a limited life. "Working with operators, we have been sampling a small population of the Trent 1000 TEN fleet that has flown in more arduous conditions," the manufacturer said in a statement. "This work has shown that a small number of these engines need to have their blades replaced earlier than scheduled." Rolls-Royce said its engineers were already developing and testing an enhanced version of the turbine blade. "We will now work closely with any impacted customers to deliver an accelerated program to implement the enhanced blade and to ensure that we can deliver on our Trent 1000 TEN future commitments," the company said. "We regret any disruption this causes to airline operations." https://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-air-rolls-royce-hldg/singapore-airlines-grounds-two-787-10s-citing-rolls-royce-engine-problem-idUSKCN1RE0KO Back to Top Air Travel in Africa Is Safer Than Ever, Despite the Ethiopia Crash Ethiopian Airlines is dealing with its biggest challenge in years following the crash last month of Nairobi-bound Flight 302 soon after takeoff in Addis Ababa. All 157 people onboard were killed. The crash raised serious questions about the safety of the Boeing 737 Max jet, which was involved in another fatal accident last year in Indonesia. For all the focus on the crash in Ethiopia, major African carriers and civil aviation entities have made significant strides in improving their safety records in recent years, says Daniel Kwasi Adjekum, an assistant professor of aviation at the University of North Dakota's John D. Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences. In an interview with WPR, he discusses the state of aviation safety across the continent and what further steps African countries and airlines can take. World Politics Review: What is the current state of aviation safety in Africa? Daniel Adjekum: Aviation safety in Africa continues to be a central concern for governments and aviation industry stakeholders, although the situation has been improving in recent years. Until the recent Ethiopian Airlines accident, African airlines had gone two years without any jet hull losses or fatalities. This demonstrates progress after decades of poor safety records in some African countries, which could be attributed to lax regulatory oversight, obsolete infrastructure, aging and poorly maintained fleets and inadequate technical training of aviation personnel. Still, there is more room for improvement. According to the International Air Transport Association, or IATA, only 24 African states-out of about 104 states around the world-currently have a critical elements implementation score of 60 percent or above in the International Civil Aviation Organization's Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program. This program is considered the global benchmark in assessing the oversight capabilities of government entities charged with regulating civil aviation. Cape Verde, South Africa, Mauritania, Togo and Egypt rank as the top five African countries in terms of operational safety according to this metric, while countries like Djibouti, the Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia and Sao Tome and Principe score below 25 percent on implementation of the critical elements. There has been a very positive trend with regard to many of the larger African flag carriers, such as Ethiopian Airlines, South African Airways, Kenya Airways, Air Mauritius, EgyptAir and Royal Air Maroc. These airlines strive to maintain excellent safety records that are on par with global industry standards, and they have great reputations among the traveling public in Africa. Smaller carriers, such as African World Airlines in Ghana and Air Peace in Nigeria, have also made strides in recent years, as demonstrated by their successes in the IATA's industry-benchmark Operational Safety Audit. In 2018, African carriers that successfully completed this process averaged only 1.18 accidents per million flights, while other African carriers' average accident rate was 9.79, according to the IATA. The global average accident rate was 1.35, which roughly equates to one accident for every 740,000 flights. WPR: What impact, if any, has the Ethiopian Airlines crash had so far on the reputation and business of the largest airline in Africa? Adjekum: The most immediate impact of the crash is probably the emotional trauma for Ethiopian Airlines staff due to the loss of their colleagues. Then there are the logistical challenges of reassigning essential human, financial and material resources to deal with the tragedy's operational implications. Like other airlines around the world, the company may have to restructure its fleet distribution in the short term in order to fill in the gaps created by the absence of the Boeing 737 Max 8. Longer-term impacts may be felt for Ethiopian Airlines' ongoing massive expansion project aimed at capturing a bigger share of the African aviation market, although this is more difficult to assess. This is part of a strategic plan dubbed Vision 2025, by which Ethiopian Airlines aims to position itself as Africa's airline of choice and build up its hub in Addis Ababa, which has recently tripled in size in terms of cargo and passenger throughput, overtaking Dubai as the world's gateway into Africa. The airline has played an important role in developing Africa's aviation infrastructure by launching or reviving sovereign airlines in other countries, like Zambia, and setting up transit and cargo hubs in Togo and Malawi. Ethiopian Airlines also recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Ghana to be a strategic partner in the formation of that country's national airline. With its good safety record, rapid growth and high levels of performance, Ethiopian Airlines probably will not suffer any long-term adverse effects in terms of passenger confidence and industry clout on the continent. That is particularly true given the emerging consensus that Boeing's faulty systems design on the Max 8 could be one of the probable causes of the crash, though we will have to wait for the detailed findings and recommendations of the accident investigation board before drawing any definitive conclusions. At the moment, it also appears unlikely that the accident will have any serious impacts on the reputation and business of major African flag carriers. WPR: Looking ahead, what are the major opportunities and challenges facing the aviation industry across Africa, in terms of continuing to ensure that safety standards are upheld? Adjekum: One issue is the wide variation in availability and quality of aviation safety infrastructure across the continent. In the north, east and south, established hubs such as Cairo, Addis Abba, Nairobi and Johannesburg provide airlines with sufficient infrastructure to develop their operations from these cities. Some West African countries lag behind by comparison. Lagos, Accra, Abidjan and Dakar have acceptable levels of aviation infrastructure and safety oversight, but other cities, such as Monrovia and Bissau, have issues that prevent them from developing into fully operational hubs. Another challenge has to do with the mindsets of public officials. Some African governments view aviation as a luxury rather than a necessity, and they don't see the tangible economic benefits for their citizens when compared with basic services. Some African countries also lack effective national aviation safety policy frameworks and technically competent personnel to manage civil aviation entities. There seems to be more of an emphasis on compliance safety-reacting to accidents and implementing the bare minimum safety standards-rather than devising proactive safety management frameworks, such as data-driven approaches to identifying current and emerging safety risks. Access to finance, both for working capital and fleet renewal, is also a perennial challenge for African carriers. High direct operational costs, unreasonable taxes and low returns on investment in some African countries affect the quality of aviation services and safety. It is important for developed nations with stronger economic resources and interests in African aviation to assist African countries in modernizing their regulatory frameworks around aviation safety. This can be done through training programs and infrastructure upgrades. African governments should also be willing to provide financial support and political backing for initiatives to promote air safety. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/27721/air-travel-in-africa-is-safer-than-ever-despite-the-ethiopia-crash Back to Top Asia's Airlines Are on Course for More Disasters • Cheap flights are pushing the limits of regulation . A man carries a piece of the Lion Air flight JT 610 wreckage which is being moved to another location for further investigation at the Tanjung Priok port on November 2, 2018 in Jakarta, Indonesia.. (Photo by Ed Wray/Getty Images) On May 6, 1935, 11 passengers and two crew were on a Douglas DC-2 on Transcontinental & Western Air (TWA) Flight 6 on a flight leg from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Kansas City, Missouri. The brand-new plane never made it to the stopover; instead it flew into the ground on a foggy Missouri night. Five people were killed, including U.S. Sen. Bronson Cutting. It was one of the most shocking accidents in the short history of American flight. The subsequent investigations found a tale of a mushrooming industry pushing the envelope of regulation and putting profit before safety -and created the basis of modern air safety. Today, the same pattern of risk and capital is playing out in Asia-but proper regulation may be a long way off. After the 1935 crash, investigators from the Bureau of Air Commerce, the government agency then supervising air travel, found that the crew, the dispatchers, and TWA's procedures were all at fault. The plane had been cleared for night flight despite lacking a functional radio to communicate with ground crew. In fog so dense that the plane shouldn't have even been flying, the pilots failed to find the runway at Kansas City. As they flew low over fields, the plane clipped the ground and spun out of control. The report was shocking-but blaming the airline wasn't enough for senators, who were spurred by their colleague's death to launch their own investigation into nationwide air safety and the bureau's operations. The Senate's Copeland Committee issued a report in 1936 which found, after looking at TWA Flight 6 and multiple other incidents over the preceding years, that safety procedures and regulation had failed to keep pace with huge increases in passenger, freight, and airmail carried. Cozy relationships between industry and regulator, along with the desire to put increased services and lower fares ahead of safety, led to multiple preventable deaths. Congress moved air regulation away from the Department of Commerce and created a new, dedicated agency, the Civil Aeronautics Authority, with a mandate to put safety first. Although the regulatory regime continued to change over the following 20 years, the principle established was the basis for the founding of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 1958, which remains the U.S. aviation regulator today. 83 years later, on the other side of the world, 181 passengers and eight crew joined Lion Air Flight 610 in Jakarta, Indonesia, on October 29, 2018, for a short hop to Pangkalpinang on the island of Bangka. The brand-new Boeing 737 Max 8, its pilots, and the company's procedures should have benefited from the intervening decades of aviation safety findings, making another avoidable crash unthinkable. And yet, just 12 minutes after take-off, the crew lost control. The plane crashed into the Java Sea, killing everyone on board. The Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee's preliminary report, released a month after the crash, gives us a good idea of the events from a technical perspective. A malfunctioning sensor led the plane's autopilot to push the plane's nose down, and the pilots' lack of awareness of what was happening meant that-rather than disengaging the automated system, as on a similar flight operated by the same aircraft with a different crew the previous day-they couldn't gain control of the plane before it hit the sea. Global attention has fixed on Boeing as the culprit-and the U.S. giant bears a great deal of the blame. But the story of air expansion in Asia in recent years, typified by Lion Air, also worryingly mirrors the dangerous, unregulated growth of the past.But the story of air expansion in Asia in recent years, typified by Lion Air, also worryingly mirrors the dangerous, unregulated growth of the past. The aviation-system safety principles that stem from the Copeland Committee are based on learning from previous incidents. Aircraft must have multiple redundant safety systems, airlines must ensure safety systems are available and that their operating procedures are fail-safe, and pilots are trained in procedures that allow safe fallbacks from other system failures. And yet in Lion Air Flight 610, the aircraft design failed to provide redundancy, the airline failed to maintain critical systems, and the crew failed to follow recovery procedures. The similar crash of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302-another 737 Max 8-on March 10 further increased suspicions about the aircraft type (the preliminary report had not been published at press time, so details are unclear). All 737 Maxes worldwide were grounded as of mid-March. Boeing undoubtedly bears significant responsibility for the Lion Air crash. The automatic nose-down response was connected to a single sensor instead of multiple redundant sensors. Pilots were inadequately briefed by Boeing on how automated systems had changed on the 737 Max. The revelation that additional sensors which would have prevented the crash were sold as optional extras is even worse news for Boeing. But in Lion Air Flight 610, the plane wasn't the only thing at fault. The decision to operate the flight with a known sensor fault, the failure of the airline to pass on information from the previous day's crew, the panicked crew response on October 29, and the cost cutting which led them to opt out of the optional warning systems, are all grounded in the airline's history. Aviation in Southeast Asian countries traditionally followed the expensive, inflexible national flag carrier model, but airlines like Lion Air and AirAsia in neighboring Malaysia have taken the market by storm over the past two decades. They have followed the model established by Southwest in the United States and Ryanair in Europe, running new fleets, minimal seniority, maximum flexibility, often (although not always) with a skeptical attitude to unions, and very low fares to meet and stimulate the need for travel among the region's rapidly emerging middle class. At the same time, as with low-cost carriers in the United States and Europe, they have attracted criticism from flight crew unions and independent safety groups over long hours and the willingness to sacrifice safety for cash savings-which is particularly concerning for many in a region where even flag carriers have had questionable safety records. "There are so many bad stories about Lion, it's hard to know where to start," former Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee investigator Ruth Simatupang told the New York Times in November. Lion Air Flight 583 crashed in November 2004 by failing to stop at the end of the runway at Surakarta airport on landing in bad weather, killing 25 people including the captain. The investigation found that the braking system and the aircraft's thrust reversers were both dangerously maintained. The crash of Lion Air Flight 904 off the coast of Bali in April 2013 didn't kill anyone, more by luck than good judgment. The plane-a brand-new Boeing 737-800, with no mechanical problems-landed in the sea, 1,000 feet short of the runway, as the crew failed to perform a go-around after losing sight of the runway in bad weather. Against all odds, the shallow, still waters allowed a relatively soft landing. Overexpansion, cost cutting and underregulation underlie these incidents. Lion Air struggles to attract and retain enough qualified pilots and skilled ground crew, its staff work very long hours, and training times are significantly shorter than many other airlines. At the same time, Lion Air chairman Rusdi Kirana is politically connected. Despite being a non-Muslim of Chinese heritage-a tricky sell in Indonesian politics-he is deputy chairman of and a major donor to the Islamist-populist National Awakening Party (PKB). The airline has used its connections to make cheap aviation available to Indonesia's new middle class, whilst working at the absolute limits of aviation regulation compliance-and, many insiders say, using its influence against stricter regulation. The company has not made any on-the-record comments over these initiatives, but Kirana was an economic advisor to Indonesian President Joko Widodo and currently serves as Indonesian ambassador to Malaysia, so his substantial influence over government is clear. It's all too reminiscent of the United States before Copeland. "Buying all the latest-generation, state-of-the-art engineering will be in vain if you don't have systems in place that prioritize safety," former Lion Air safety manager Frank Caron told the New York Times in November, before the full extent of Boeing's problems with the 737 Max became clear. Lion Air starkly illustrates the benefits and costs associated with the expansion of budget aviation in emerging economies. Other carriers in the enormous Asian discount-aviation market are not immune from cost pressures, even where regulators are tougher and safety cultures are greater. The shortage of qualified flight deck and engineering crew puts pressure on the whole industry, even on budget operators with cash to spare such as Australia's Jetstar. Could there be a regulatory revolution for the region's airlines, as the United States managed in the 1930s? It's harder to pass regulation on a multinational scale, especially in a region where many neighbors remain in political conflict. The 737 Max scandal has made the traditional solution-the United States leading and driving global standards via the FAA -look much less credible than it did a year ago. China has stepped in, perhaps opportunistically: It was the first country to ground the troubled Boeing model, and is keen to pursue a wider regional role. But other nations in the region will struggle to accept China's leadership. Without a high-profile political casualty like Cutting's death, the impulse to act may remain secondary to the drive for profit. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/29/asias-airlines-are-on-course-for-more-disasters/ Back to Top Should Airlines Consider Banning Alcohol On Aircraft? A traveler relaxes in her airplane seat and enjoys a drink on the flight. GETTY Should airlines ban drinking on some flights? Could never happen, you say? April Fool! Not exactly. Drunk and out-of-control passengers are becoming a real problem, groping and assaulting flight attendants, fighting other passengers and air marshals, attempting to open the aircraft door mid-flight and attempting to get into the cockpit, among other issues. To paraphrase the late Rick James, like cocaine, alcohol "is a hell of a drug." In 2017, a BBC investigation found that drunk air passenger arrests at UK airports rose 50% over the previous year. In an video posted by the BBC, 14-year Virgin Atlantic flight attendant Ally Murphy said one reason she quit flying were drunk, abusive passengers who groped and swore at her. Once, a "drunk passenger tried to open the plane door." Serious alcohol-based incidents continue to occur on board. Just last month, an Australian model was convicted for assaulting a flight attendant on a United flight from Melbourne to Los Angeles in January. According to a press release from the US Department of Justice, the woman, Adau Akui Atem Mornyang, 24, of Victoria, Australia, was convicted of offenses relating to a January 21 incident "in which she appeared to be intoxicated and was verbally and physically abusive to personnel and other passengers during the flight." According to the evidence presented at trial, several hours into the flight, passengers approached a flight attendant "to complain about Mornyang's disruptive behavior, which included flailing her arms and yelling obscenities and racial slurs." When a flight attendant tried to speak to her, she began shouting at him, then slapped him in the face. The flight attendant attempted to restrain Mornyang until federal air marshals on board could restrain her in the rear galley of the plane for the rest of the flight. A jury found Mornyang guilty of a felony charge of interference with a flight crew and misdemeanor assault. She faces a maximum sentence of 21 years in federal prison when sentenced this June. In 2018, a Southwest Airlines flight from Chicago to New Orleans was disrupted by a man who threatened to put a flight attendant into "a body bag" for refusing to serve him a fourth drink on the two-hour flight. The man, Joel Michael Bane of New Jersey, then refused to take his seat for landin. When the pilot did manage to successfully land, Bain assaulted a pair of police officers who had to use stun guns to get him off the plane. Amazingly, Bane, who pleaded guilty to one count of interference with flight crew, was sentenced only to two years of probation and a $3,000 fine. Also in 2018, a Delta Airlines overnight flight from Salt Lake City to Orlando with 193 people on board had to land in Oklahoma City to meet with police officers, after a passenger headbutted a flight attendant when he too was cut off from booze. And in 2018, a pilot traveling as a passenger on an Emirates flight asked to smoke on the flight, then slapped the chest of a Romanian flight attendant, threw his shoe at her, cursed at other passengers, then grabbed two beers and more booze from the galley. When finally restrained by crew and other passengers in handcuffs, he threatened the flight and slammed his head so hard against the seatback that the video screen broke. So would airlines ever consider making alcohol-free flights an option? Unlikely; on-board alcohol is not only a precious perk of flying First or Business Class, but a profit source from economy passengers. That $7 on-board beer probably cost the airline less than a dollar, certainly a financially compelling proposition. While flyers like myself find drinking a good way to deal with today's flying conditions, in-flight incidents do not seem to be going away. Instead, they seem to be getting more frequent, disturbing and violent. According to the British Civil Aviation Authority, there were 417 reports of serious disruption on flights in 2017, up from 195 in 2015. A survey by Britain's Which? Travel found that one in ten passengers had experienced a flight "blighted by shouting, drunkenness, verbal abuse or other obnoxious behavior". Irish-based low-cost airline Ryanair was apparently the incident leader, with 17% of Ryanair passengers saying they had experienced disruptive behavior in the past year. Recent Ryanair incidents include a flight featuring a fight between two drunks over a woman's not wearing shoes to the lavatory, another from Glasgow to Malaga with a drunk man bothering an on-board "hen party" resulting in a chaotic fist fight and two unruly men dressed as Tinkerbelle and Bob the Builder being thrown off a flight from London Stansted to Krakow, Poland. But even this had its element of menace, as Tinkerbelle "threatened to cut everyone up" before he was removed. "Nobody wants to be on a flight with a couple of drunks on board creating trouble," said Michael O'Leary, RyanAir CEO. But he blamed the problem on the airportss, with "stag and hen parties" (who Americans might call "bachelor" and "bachelorette" groups) drinking heavily before a flight and posing a "threat to safety." O'Leary told the Independent, "Drinking on planes is controlled. On our flights, averaging one hour 15 minutes, the most you'll be served is one or two drinks. And if a passenger is being disruptive, he or she won't be served with alcohol at all." But "Our challenge is: we have passengers, particularly during flight delays, stuck in airport bars drinking six, eight, 10 pints." Ryanair asked that British airport bars should stop serving alcohol before 10am, and limit passengers to two drinks. As of last November, the British government was considering a similar proposal. But what about the planes? Could a booze ban be imposed on certain flights, or could "alcohol-free" flights become a thing? Don't laugh; it happened to smoking, now little missed by most travelers. And that's no April Fool. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2019/04/01/should-airlines-consider-banning-alcohol-on-aircraft/#25f6d7a715e5 Back to Top Flight management system crash causes airline delays across US Service provider's software and data used for flight planning by multiple airlines. Southwest was hardest hit by a software glitch that delayed flights nationwide. A fault in software used by most US airlines caused a wave of flight delays this morning across the US, affecting hundreds of flights. "Several airlines are experiencing issues with a non-FAA flight planning weight and balance program called AeroData," a Federal Aviation Administration spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. "Mainline operations and regional operations are affected to varying degrees." That software, provided as a service by AeroData Inc., is used to perform weight and balance calculations needed for flight planning-which is particularly important for airlines operating regional and commuter flights. Today's software outage only lasted for about 40 minutes, but it had a rippling effect across the US. Southwest Airlines was the most heavily affected by the outage as the airline had to delay 620 early flights. SkyWest, a commuter airline affiliated with United and Delta Airlines, had over 200 flights delayed. United Continental had about 150 regional flights delayed. AeroData, based in Scottsdale Arizona, is a family-owned corporation with a very low profile on the Internet. According to the company's public website (which hasn't been updated since the company moved from Colorado to Arizona in 2008), AeroData won a 1990 contract with the FAA to "distribute its public domain data." In addition to the weight and balance system, the company also provides airlines with aircraft performance data, other aircraft management applications, and a "compute server system" to host these services. A Web portal to access the company's software (based on Flash and Microsoft Studio 7.0) was last updated in 2009. The portal advises visitors, "We will be enhancing our Web site in the coming months using Microsoft Silverlight technology." Access to the portal is controlled by customer credentials and IP address. Ars attempted to reach AeroData for comment, but we received no response. We will update this story if more information becomes available. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/04/flight-data-system-outage-causes-april-1-airline-delays-no-fooling/ Back to Top Bombardier's Safety Standdown Moving To Fort Worth Bombardier Business Aircraft will hold the 23rd edition of its Safety Standdown from November 12 to 14 at the Omni Fort Worth Hotel in Fort Worth, Texas, the Canadian airframer announced today. It will be the first time in the event's history that it will be held in a city other than Wichita, where Bombardier assembles Learjets and conducts flight testing. This year's theme of the three-day seminar is "Elevate Your Standards," with a focus on setting standards, determining how to strategically change standards in an organization to get the best possible results, and implanting them in an organization. "This message will be weaved into presentations and provide takeaways to improve and elevate safety within your organization," Bombardier said. Planning for the 2019 seminar's curriculum, hot topics and subject matter experts is under way, it added. The free seminar is directed at pilots, maintenance and cabin crews, managers, aviation professionals, and students. As in past years, the general session and selected workshops will also be webcast. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2019-04-01/bombardiers-safety-standdown-moving-fort-worth Back to Top United Arab Emirates to Host Blockchain Aviation Conference in Abu Dhabi Increasing blockchain presence in aviation will form the focus of a dedicated conference in Abu Dhabi from April 2 to 4, official news portal Emirates News Agency confirmed in a press release on March 31. Promising attendance by 800 people from almost 100 countries, "Blockchain: Unlock the Potential" aims to bring the possibilities of the technology, as they extend to the aviation industry, to a global stage. The press release notes that the event is held under the patronage of His Highness Sheikh Mohamed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, crown prince of Abu Dhabi, and includes the country's minister of economy and an executive from Heathrow Airport as speakers. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) was selected as a host venue due to authorities' ongoing efforts to implement blockchain at state level in various areas of the local economy. Saif Mohammed Al Suwaidi, director general of the UAE's General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA), commented in the press release: "Selecting the UAE is a testament to our leadership's continuing efforts towards investing in new technologies across different domains including the aviation sector and in maintaining strong partnerships between the government and the private sector, and the continuous endeavours in exploring methods to improve aviation business practices in a dynamic and thriving environment." Basic details about the conference reveal it will include blockchain applications throughout the industry, including aircraft and other assets, along with finance deals and other business-related processes. The event comes around two weeks after Abu Dhabi hosted another blockchain-related event, this time directly tackling cryptocurrency and fintech phenomena. The event drew supportive comments from local authorities on cryptocurrency, fuelling speculation the UAE could become a haven for digital assets. "It is essential that we develop frameworks and regulations that govern these technologies and developments," Abdul Aziz Al-Ghurair, chairman of United Arab Emirates Banks Federation (UBF) said. The aviation industry itself also continues to look into blockchain, one recent case involving NASA, which is considering applications of the technology in air traffic control environments. https://cointelegraph.com/news/united-arab-emirates-to-host-blockchain-aviation-conference-in-abu-dhabi Back to Top Qatar Aeronautical College starts aviation safety programme The AMASM programme is designed to train safety managers Qatar Aeronautical College recently started its first postgraduate programme and "delivered" the Advanced Master in Aviation Safety Management (AMASM) course. Developed and accredited by Ecole Nationale de l'Aviation Civile (ENAC) under the aegis of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), the AMASM programme is designed to train safety managers. Aviation safety is at the core of ICAO's fundamental objectives and they strive to promote a systemic approach of safety by the implementation of a Safety Management System (SMS). SMS is a structured process that requires organisations to address possible safety issues with the same level of priority that other core business topics are managed and to analyze them continuously, in conjunction with state institutions within their State Safety Program (SSP) and industry counterparts. It is the formal systemic and proactive approach to anticipate and manage safety risk, as well as to initiate and achieve the necessary transformation of organisational structures, accounting, policies procedures, standard practices and regulations. International civil aviation authorities require organisations and institutions alike to implement a Safety Management System (SMS) for the management of safety risks to reach the next level of aviation safety worldwide. In 2018, Qatar Aeronautical College (QAC) signed a partnership agreement with Ecole Nationale de l'Aviation Civile (ENAC), to offer the Advanced Masters in Aviation Safety Management to aviation professionals to create a new generation of SMS specialists in the aviation industry. This programme will enable the applicants to acquire a practical expertise in the development, implementation, assessment and improvement of Safety Management System and State Safety Programme. It is specifically designed to address both executive as well as working levels, to consider the entire range of aviation organisations (aircraft operator, manufacturer, maintenance organisation, airport operator, air navigation service provider, training organisation) and to cover the interactions between these structures. https://www.gulf-times.com/story/627517/Qatar-Aeronautical-College-starts-aviation-safety- Back to Top British startup looking to build 18-seat bioelectric hybrid airplane Credit: Faradair Aerospace British startup Faradair Aerospace has unveiled plans to build and sell an 18-seat bioelectric hybrid airplane for use as both a passenger and cargo air transport. The company is calling its plane the Bio Electric Hybrid Aircraft (BEHA). The current model is the M1H, and the plans include a triple box wing configuration to give it exceptional lift. The M1H will have an electric motor for use during takeoff and landing, providing a much quieter experience than jets with a traditional engine. Engineers at Faradair claim the plane will produce just 60 dba when taking off, compared to the average of 140 dba for conventional jet aircraft. It will also have a 1,600hp turboprop engine in the rear of the plane for use during flight and for recharging the batteries that power the plane when landing and taking off. Representatives for Faradiar also claim the plane will be able to land and take off from shorter runways than conventional jet aircraft, needing just 300 meters of space-this feat will be possible due to the "vectored thrust" provided by the two contra-rotating propfans, its triple box wing design and a light body made of carbon composites. Once in the air, the plane will be capable of flying at speeds of 230 mph. The team behind the plane, which includes a partnership with Swansea University, are aiming for 2025 as the year they will begin commercial flights. They expect small airlines will want to purchase their plane for several reasons. The first is faster commute times for passengers-they are promising a 42-minute commute, for example, between London and Manchester. Currently, the trip takes an hour. Also, the plane will run on biofuel instead of the traditional jet fuel, making it eco-friendlier. And using electricity to land and take off will reduce flight costs, which should translate to lower costs for passengers-possibly enticing them to switch to carriers that use the new airplane. The company also claims that the plane could be switched from passenger plane to cargo plane in just 15 minutes, making it even more of a draw for carriers who want to use it in both capacities. https://techxplore.com/news/2019-04-british-startup-seat-bioelectric-hybrid.html Back to Top How to ice-proof the next generation of aircraft 35,000 feet is standard cruising altitude for a commercial jet airplane, but at those lofty heights the air temperature plummets below -51 degrees Celsius and ice can easily form on wings. To prevent ice formation and subsequent drag on the aircraft, current systems utilize the heat generated by burning fuel. But these high-temperature, fuel-dependent systems cannot be used on the proposed all-electric, temperature-sensitive materials of next-generation aircraft. As scientists are searching for new anti-icing methods, physicists from Northwestern Polytechnical University in China and Iowa State University have taken a different approach. They've published evidence, in the journal Physics of Fluids, showing that equipment important in controlling landing and takeoff can double-up as icing control. "Current anti-icing methods are not suitable for next-generation aviation systems based on the new aviation technologies," said Xuanshi Meng an author on the paper. "We have found an excellent way to control the icing on these new aircraft." It depends on plasma actuators. Plasma actuators are a special type of short electrical circuit. When a high voltage is applied across the two electrodes, it causes the particles of air above it to ionize, forming a plasma, and inducing a flow, or wind. This plasma flow over the actuator has been previously manipulated to control the aerodynamics of aircraft wings, altering the lift and drag for landing and takeoff (known as flow control applications). But plasma actuators don't just release an induced wind. "When applying a high voltage, most is converted into heat and the rest is converted into an induced flow or ionic wind over the actuator, so the plasma actuator has both aerodynamic and heat effects," said Meng. "By coupling the aerodynamic and thermal aspects of the plasma actuator, we have provided a completely new method for efficient icing and flow control." The plasma control team of Northwestern Polytechnical University first realized the effect of plasma actuators on icing in 2012, when an ice cube placed in the discharge area of the plasma exciter quickly melted. To further demonstrate the mechanism of plasma ice protection, the team has designed incredibly thin, surface dielectric barrier discharge plasma actuators and mounted them on a 3-D-printed plastic NACA 0012 airfoil. Three configurations of actuators were installed in order to investigate how different aerodynamics impacted ice formation. Then high-speed cameras, alongside infrared thermal imaging and particle scattering lasers, were used to visualize how the induced flow and thermal output interacted. Tests were conducted in still air conditions as well as inside an icing wind tunnel, where cold particles of air were fired at the airfoil. The team found that thermal and flow dynamics are inextricably interlinked for all three actuators. The plasma actuators placed perpendicular to the airfoil surface were the most effective at transferring heat along the wing, completely preventing ice formation. By comparing heat transfer and flow between the different designs, the team concluded that the optimal design needs to generate as much heat locally, while also mixing well with the incoming airflow. "This could be used to design an effective anti-icing system at low enough temperatures to prevent stress on the composite material design of next-generation aircraft," said Meng. Meng's student, Afaq Ahmed Abbasi, added, "The conventional anti-icing technique uses air as hot as 200 degrees Celsius to vaporize the water droplets, and composite material cannot afford such high temperatures. But the plasma icing control can stop the supercool droplets forming ice on the surface of the vehicle without temperatures as high, which is good for the composite materials." Meng explained that his team's proposal to use plasma actuators as anti-icers was a "surprise" for fluid mechanics experts. Meng admits that they are just at the beginning of this research and that they still need to find out how thermal and flow effects are linked, and how exactly they work together to dissipate supercooled droplets from a wing's surface. https://phys.org/news/2019-04-ice-proof-aircraft.html Back to Top ANALYSIS: How Cape Air is recruiting pilots at both ends of the age scale For any airline dealing with a market shortage of pilots, encouraging some of your most promising young captains to move to another carrier once they have 3,000 flying hours under their belts might seem counter-intuitive. However, for US piston commuter airline Cape Air, its "Pilot Pathway" partnerships with two of the country's independent mainline operators are a highly effective way of recruiting ambitious aviators in the first place - and keeping them motivated. The Cape Cod, Massachusetts-based carrier - which flies a fleet of 88 Textron Aviation Cessna 402s under Federal Aviation Administration Part 135 rules - launched its tie-up with JetBlue 12 years ago, and is now expanding the scheme to fellow low-cost airline Spirit Airlines. So far, 66 Cape Air captains have made the transition to the JetBlue cockpit, and the first candidate for Spirit is completing his twinjet training, says Cape Air's director of pilot industry relations and sourcing James Fletcher. While giving your most experienced aircrew a structured route to leave the company may sound illogical, Fletcher believes that only by providing a clear career pathway can the independent airline hope to attract the steady stream of aspiring pilots it needs. "We have our eyes wide open," he says. "We know that most people want to fly a big, shiny jet, and if we can get them for a snapshot in time, we are happy with that." Cape Air Cessna 402 Under the initiative, Cape Air - which marks its 30th birthday this year and flies routes in New England, the Caribbean and the Midwest - takes on pilots as first officers after they have completed between 500h and 750h in entry-level roles, such as instructing. Once they have flown as co-pilots on the Cessnas for a total of 1,500h, they are promoted to captain. Then after a further 1,500h - a process that usually takes around two years - they become eligible to join JetBlue or now Spirit. Originally, recruits hoping to go on to fly for JetBlue had to be studying for a degree at one of seven recognised aviation schools, and had to complete one year as a flight instructor with the institution before joining Cape Air. However, as part of the agreement with Spirit, the airline will be able to cast its net wider and recruit anyone with 500h experience - and not just those who have completed a college flying degree. The programme, says Fletcher, allows young pilots to "bridge the gap" between qualifying or working in entry-level jobs such as flight instructing, and gaining the 1,500h necessary to become a first officer on a jet airliner. However, rather than joining a mainline carrier as soon as that 1,500h milestone is reached, the scheme requires the pilot to fly for two years as a captain for Cape Air. "We get that commitment," says Fletcher. Cape Air believes it offers its pilots plenty other inducements. Pay is less than at most mainline airlines, but there is often an opportunity to work more hours. Part 135 rules mean crew can fly up to 1,200h a year, although most Cape Air pilots average around 850h, says Fletcher. They are go home every night to one of the around 30 bases Cape Air uses. "We don't do overnights," he says. "The last flight is always back to base, so it's more like having a normal job." Pilots also get the opportunity to learn fast. Under Part 135 rules, Cape Air can fly single-pilot operations in most circumstances, although around two-thirds of its flights have two crew in the cockpit. This is not for safety or passenger perception reasons, says Fletcher, but to ensure a steady supply of captains by giving experience to pilot recruits. Flightcrew are also the "face" of the airline, he says, giving the safety briefing and dealing with passengers in the absence of cabin attendants. Another inducement is that Cape Air pilots will soon be the first in the world to fly an entirely new aircraft. The airline began working with Italian manufacturer Tecnam in 2009 to design a piston replacement for the 402 that met its specific short take-off and landing needs. The P2012 Traveller is the first new type in this segment for decades. After three years ago confirming an order for 100 of the 11-seat, Lycoming TEO-540-powered twin, Cape Air has just taken delivery of its first example. The remaining aircraft will arrive over the next 10 years or so, eventually replacing the airline's entire Cessna fleet. "The idea is that we will introduce the P2012s slowly, mostly around our home base initially, retiring our higher-hour airframe 402s and growing into new markets," says Fletcher, who describes the acquisition as "pretty exciting stuff". He adds: "The Cessna is still a great servant for Cape Air, but we needed to move onto something lighter, and more modern." According to Fletcher, the aspirations of millennial pilots have changed. "At the time I was learning to fly it was all about which airline would pay me most money. Today, pilots are looking more at quality of life and a known career pathway," he says. "When I took over as director of pilot sourcing in 2017, my biggest goal was to try to find ways to attract pilots, but also to give them a pathway to develop their career." As with the JetBlue scheme, pilots applying for the Spirit "Jetway Programme" have one joint interview with Cape Air and Spirit. Once accepted, they are assigned a mentor from the mainline carrier, who will provide advice and feedback during the pilot's time at Cape Air. Ryan Rodosta, Spirit's chief pilot, says the initiative will help solve many of the airline's recruitment challenges, and "help us maintain a skilled and robust pilot workforce for years to come". Spirit Airlines Airbus A319 While Cape Air is keen to recruit ambitious young pilots, it also has a plan to offer those at the other end of the age scale a chance to prolong their career. Under its Grey Gull programme, pilots, who face a mandatory retirement aged 65 from Part 121 operators such as Spirit, can go on working for Part 135 operators such as Cape Air so long as they maintain a first class medical. Fletcher says the airline has retired pilots from almost every major carrier, with the oldest currently flying aged 77. "We came up with the idea of Grey Gulls when we were sitting around thinking about how to get more pilots," says Fletcher. "We work with different pilot retirement organisations, and the great benefit is that we can offer these older guys very flexible scheduling. They can work for us as much or as little as they want. It helps tremendously in terms of mentorship of our younger pilots, and that has been great for us." https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-how-cape-air-is-recruiting-pilots-at-both-456606/ Back to Top The Largest Aircraft Ever Built: Meet the H-4 Hercules (Or the Spruce Goose) Why did it only fly once? The Time magazine article was titled "It Flies!" It was a note of triumph and vindication, but also an epitaph, of an aircraft that was five years in the making-the "Spruce Goose," a plane that should not have existed. Many things were against it, even, to a certain degree, its creator. The week of May 4-10, 1942, saw the loss of 300,000 deadweight tons of Allied shipping to German U-boats, loss rates that were twice new ship launches. Imaginative use of America's industrial and technological strengths to deal with such problems was the mission of the War Production Board's planning committee. On May 22, F.H. Hoge, Jr., a member of the committee, proposed the use of extremely large flying boats, pointing out that current aircraft on transoceanic flights devoted 38 percent of their takeoff weight to fuel and oil, but that a 300,000-pound plane would use only 20 percent, and, that since flying boats did not require landing gear, an additional 15 percent in aircraft weight would be saved. But it was the industrialist Henry J. Kaiser who saw the opportunity. He approached such problems with big schemes, limitless energy, and a genius for organization and improvisation. He had moved from constructing mammoth hydroelectric dams, such as the Hoover and Grand Coulee, to shipbuilding in 1941. Faced with the terrible loss of shipping that was threatening the Allies, Kaiser suggested two possible solutions. One was to convert some of his shipyards to the mass production of giant seaplanes. The other was to mass produce antisubmarine aircraft carriers on Liberty Ship hulls. In the latter case, Kaiser facilities would produce some 70 escort carriers during the war. But in the summer of 1942, after the Germans sank 681 Allied ships in the first seven months of the year, the idea of flying boats captured the nation's imagination. In July, Kaiser outlined plans for flying boats of 200 to 500 tons and launched a publicity and lobbying campaign telling the press that he envisioned a fleet of 5,000 flying boats. He followed with a proposal to the Army and Navy. And, though they considered it impractical, they knew that the public and some members of Congress believed otherwise. The Aircraft Division of the War Production Board was asked to review Kaiser's proposal. Merrill C. Meigs, deputy director of the board's Aircraft Division, told Kaiser that it took more than four years to develop a new aircraft, but Kaiser was undaunted. Regarding possible resource requirements, Kaiser said he would build a steel foundry and educate and develop technicians and engineers in support of his proposal. Meigs then set up a committee of aircraft manufacturers to hear Kaiser's plans. But the manufacturers were not enthusiastic about the possible entry of another aircraft company into their industry. Donald Douglas, head of Douglas Aircraft, advised that to prepare a preliminary design for a 200-ton aircraft would require at least 100,000 engineering hours. During July and August, Kaiser made two proposals-mass production of the Martin Mars flying boat and the design and development of the 200-ton flying boat--both taken under consideration by the War Production Board, headed by Donald Nelson. The Mars, first flown in June 1942, was a four-engine, 200-foot wingspan, 75,000-pound aircraft capable of carrying a 32,000-pound payload, or 133 troops, over a range of 5,000 miles. But Nelson was concerned about the possible impact on existing programs by manufacturers working at full capacity. Kaiser then approached the well-known aviator, Howard Hughes, with a pitch to jointly develop the large flying boat. Though aware of the problems in designing a new aircraft, Hughes was intrigued with the possibility of coming up with the world's largest airplane, especially after being told that the Douglas, Martin, and Northrup aircraft companies all thought that it couldn't be done. By August 22, 1942, after several weeks of discussion, a handshake agreement was reached-Hughes would design the plane and Kaiser would build it. Subsequently, a written contract between Hughes and Kaiser called for the design and construction of 500 aircraft. The Gigantic Spruce Goose On September 17, Kaiser-Hughes received authorization to proceed with design engineering and construction of three prototype flying boats. Among the conditions imposed were that all construction would use a minimum of any critical or strategic materials, that no engineers or technicians working for manufacturers already engaged in the war effort could be employed without the permission of their employers, that they could spend no more than $18 million, and that the program would be limited to 24 months. But the Kaiser-Hughes partnership soon dissolved and Hughes proceeded alone. During the first seven months of the project, Hughes acted as general manager. Kaiser, unsuccessful in his attempt at combining forces with Hughes, had nothing more to do with the project except to help out with providing a few personnel. Design presented several challenges- such a plane would require an overhang wingspan 50 percent greater than the Martin Mars, which would present new torsional, wing flutter, vibration, deflection, and control problems never before tested. Seven aircraft configurations were drawn up, including twin-hull and single-hull designs with four to eight engines. Hughes settled on a design gross weight of 400,000 pounds. This number was reached based on creating the largest aircraft possible using eight of the largest engines then under development. Eight was considered the maximum number of engines that seemed practical. In the final design, the HK-1, as it was called, would be built mostly of wood, its elevators and rudder fabric covered. It was referred to as the "Flying Lumberyard" by critics, while Hughes detested the other nickname, "Spruce Goose." To him she was "The Flying Boat," though one story was that Hughes's nickname for the plane was the "Jesus Christ," since those were the first words out of the mouths of individuals when Hughes took them into the hangar where the plane was being built. The giant airplane was made mostly of birch, not spruce, with a wingspan of 320 feet, a vertical fin of 85 feet, and a weight of 300,000 pounds. It was designed to carry 120,000 pounds of cargo, or 750 combat-ready troops, or two Sherman tanks. Its eight massive engines, with 17-foot propellers, generated over 3,000 horsepower each. It was to have a range of 3,000 miles at a speed of approximately 200 mph. The Project That Wouldn't Die During the design phase, Hughes was rarely seen by other members of the team. He was a night owl, had a penchant for secrecy, and was involved in multiple simultaneous projects, as well as a reluctance to delegate authority. Key decisions were delayed for days in some cases because of problems contacting Hughes. Even as the project began to fall behind schedule, Hughes refused to relinquish control. He continued to be involved in the smallest of details but then would disappear for weeks. Despite Hughes's management style, some progress was made during 1943 on the aircraft's design, but major problems resulted from combining wood construction with the plane's giant size. Elaborate and costly jigs had to be devised and new glues and gluing processes developed. Development of new tools, materials, and methods was by trial and error, consuming time, material, and money. Years later Hughes partially blamed delays on the requirement that he build the plane of nonstrategic materials; however, government records indicate that Hughes was given the option of switching to metal, but declined. Given the progress that had been made in pioneering innovative methods in wood construction, and Hughes's attraction to the smooth finish of the Duramold plywood used, he was reluctant to change materials. Hughes was meticulous regarding materials, workmanship, and appearance. Numerous elements lined up against the project. In October 1943 the Aircraft Production Board proposed cancelling the contract because it offered no useful contribution to the war effort. In early 1944 it was determined that successful development of the Mars flying boat would make the HK-1 unnecessary. In March 1944 the Cargo Plane Committee of the War Production Board was of the opinion that a change in the character of the war had abated a need for a giant cargo aircraft. The War Production Board dispatched Grover Loening, seaplane designer and consultant to the board, to evaluate the plane's design. But his report called the plane's design amazing and the most remarkable flying boat he had ever seen. On March 17, Hughes advised the board against stopping construction,saying, "If we are going to keep abreast of development in aviation, then we must reconcile ourselves to the necessity of building bigger and bigger airplanes." Despite the many efforts to kill the project, highly placed administration officials renewed it, though the plan was reduced to one plane. At the same time that the HK-1 was under development, Hughes was also active in pushing development of the Lockheed Constellation-a postwar, four-engine transport and civilian airliner. The First and Last Flight of the Spruce Goose The project continued into 1947, when a Senate committee began investigating Hughes for defense contract irregularities. Hughes was called before the Senate War Investigating Committee in the late summer of 1947. During testimony Hughes stated, "The Hercules was a monumental undertaking. It is the largest aircraft ever built. It is over five stories tall with a wingspan longer than a football field. That's more than a city block. Now, I put the sweat of my life into this thing. I have my reputation all rolled up in it and I have stated several times that if it's a failure, I'll probably leave this country and never come back. And I mean it." During a break in the Senate hearings, Hughes returned to California to run taxi tests on the renamed H-4 Hercules. On November 2, 1947, the taxi tests began with Hughes at the controls. His crew included Dave Grant as co-pilot, two flight engineers, Don Smith and Joe Petrali, 16 mechanics, and two other flight crewmen. In addition, the H-4 carried seven invited guests from the press and seven industry representatives. After the first two taxi runs, Hughes made a third and surprised all the onlookers and crew as the Hercules lifted off, remaining airborne at 70 feet off the water at a speed of 135 miles per hour for around a mile. Having proven to his detractors that the aircraft was flight worthy, Hughes felt vindicated in the development of the aircraft and receipt of the government's $18 million funding. But the flight was not without concerns. Harry Kaiser, engine man, went down to the cargo deck after touchdown and saw the tail twisting around. Bill Noggle, hydraulic mechanic, posted in the tail, reported, "It's about ready to leave us." After landing, Hughes was asked if he had expected to get the plane airborne. "Exactly," said Hughes. "I like to make surprises." Carl Babberger, Hughes's chief aerodynamicist, stated, "All the factors were present for take-off-a high head wind, the 15-degree flap setting, and a light load. It probably got airborne before he expected it to, but on the other hand it wouldn't surprise me that being under fire from Senator [Ralph Owen] Brewster, he was prepared to gamble. If it took off, fine. If it didn't, fine." Several months after the test, through a spokesman, Hughes wanted it understood that the Hercules was only a research aircraft. That it would never be used in competition with military or commercial planes, but would help to deal with the problems of large aircraft-that the Hercules would point the way for big planes. After the test a full-time crew of 300 workers, all sworn to secrecy, maintained the aircraft in flying condition in a huge, $1.75 million, climate-controlled hangar. A million dollars a year was spent maintaining the plane, as the engines were cycled and flight controls exercised weekly. Many modifications were designed and installed. For several years the crew expected that it would fly again as several more test flights were scheduled, then cancelled. There was a great deal of speculation about why the aircraft was never flown again. Some said Hughes was afraid to, but his closest associates denied this. The aircraft did have its weaknesses. According to one of Hughes's mechanics, "Maybe one of the reasons why they didn't fly it [again] was there was a little fluctuation in the tail, and maybe it wasn't beefed up enough to suit him." But there was also no reason to continue the project because the need for big seaplanes had evaporated, especially an aircraft made of wood. Even before the flight Hughes admitted that the plane was too large to be economical. However, claiming there were still research lessons to be learned, he stubbornly kept the work going. But he was distracted by other ventures and increasingly reclusive. After Hughes's death on April 5, 1976, the plane was put on exhibit at Long Beach, California. In 1977, the U.S. Navy considered test flights with the H-4 as part of its research into low-altitude transoceanic flight, but never carried out the tests. The plane was moved from Long Beach to the Evergreen Aviation Museum in McMinnville, Oregon, southwest of Portland, in 1992. Perhaps the key reason Hughes continued maintenance of the plane was that he saw it as his greatest aviation achievement. Despite being a short flight, the one and only flight of the Hercules may have been Hughes's finest hour. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/largest-aircraft-ever-built-meet-h-4-hercules-or-spruce-goose-50177 Back to Top Israeli Moon Lander Tweaks Orbit to Prep for Thursday Lunar Arrival And touchdown will occur on April 11, if all goes according to plan. Israel's Beresheet lunar lander captured this image of Earth on March 31, 2019, from a distance of about 9,940 miles (16,000 kilometers). The Arabian peninsula and southeastern Africa are visible.Israel's Beresheet lunar lander captured this image of Earth on March 31, 2019, from a distance of about 9,940 miles (16,000 kilometers). The Arabian peninsula and southeastern Africa are visible.(Image: ฉ SpaceIL/IAI) Israel's Beresheet lunar lander has almost made it to the moon. The 5-foot-tall (1.5 meters) Beresheet fired its engines for a little over a minute early this morning (April 1), altering its trajectory slightly to prepare for a planned capture into lunar orbit on Thursday (April 4). If all goes according to plan, the robotic lander will touch down on the moon one week later, on April 11. That will be a huge milestone. To date, the only organizations to pull off a soft lunar landing are superpower governments - the Soviet Union, the United States and China. Related: Israel's 1st Moon Lander Beresheet in Pictures Beresheet, meanwhile, is a private effort run by the nonprofit SpaceIL and the company Israel Aerospace Industries. SpaceIL formed in 2011 to compete in the Google Lunar X Prize (GLXP), a $30 million competition that asked privately funded teams to land a spacecraft on the moon and have it perform a few basic tasks. The GLXP ended last year without a winner, but SpaceIL and some other teams kept working on their moon landers. Beresheet, whose name means "in the beginning" in Hebrew, launched into Earth orbit atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket on Feb. 21. Since then, the spacecraft has performed a series of orbit-raising maneuvers to get closer and closer to the moon. This morning's 72-second-long burn helped make some "final adjustments" ahead of capture into lunar orbit, mission team members said in an update this morning. It's unclear if any further such tweaks will be needed. "The teams are assessing the results to determine if another alignment will be required before Beresheet enters the lunar orbit this Thursday," project team members said. Beresheet made its last close approach to Earth yesterday (March 31), zooming within 1,056 miles (1,700 kilometers) of our planet, they added. The lander snapped a gorgeous photo to commemorate this passage, capturing Earth from a distance of about 9,940 miles (16,000 km). The image shows the Arabian peninsula and southeastern Africa; thick clouds cover Israel, Beresheet team members said in today's update. Beresheet will perform some science work at and around the moon. For example, the lander will measure local lunar magnetic fields, and it's toting a small laser-reflector array for NASA to help prove out technology that could enable more precise landings on the moon and other bodies in the future. Beresheet is also carrying a "lunar library" to help safeguard slices of human history and culture. But the main mission goals are to advance Israel's spaceflight program and to inspire young people to care more about science, technology, engineering and math. Beresheet's total mission cost, including launch, is about $100 million, team members have said. https://www.space.com/israel-moon-lander-maneuver-for-lunar-arrival.html Back to Top Apply Now! - mba is seeking the following candidates: Director of Audit Programs mba is seeking an experienced individual to manage its audit programs with respect to IATA's (International Air Transport Association) IOSA* (IATA Operational Safety Audit) program. The candidate must meet the following requirements, be a self-starter and a leader within the organization. • Must have airline operational and safety experience and be familiar with the IOSA Program. • Be willing to travel globally without restriction to perform audits and attend meetings. • Manage and lead a team of experienced individuals in the performance of aviation safety focused audits. • Manage and develop new opportunities for mba in areas of auditing globally. Manager of Quality Control mba is seeking an experienced mid-career individual to manage its Quality Control function with respect to IOSA* (IATA Operational Safety Audit). The candidate must meet the following requirements, be a self-starter and a leader within the organization. • Must have airline quality control, operational and/or safety experience and be familiar with the IOSA Program. • Be familiar with Quality Control processes and methodology. • Manage and lead a team of experienced individuals in the performance of aviation safety focused audits. APPLY HERE *IOSA is a registered trademark of the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Back to Top Back to Top Call for Nominations For 2019 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- The Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Foundation is now accepting nominations for the 2019 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award, honoring a leader in global aviation safety. The Award will be presented during the 72nd Annual International Air Safety Summit, taking place Nov 4-6 in Taipei, Taiwan. 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 74 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 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 May 10, 2019. 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 non-profit 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. CONTACT: Philip Barbour, 205-939-1700, 205-617-9007 Back to Top Time is running out to submit a presentation for consideration for the 15th annual Summit will take place at the Omni Dallas Hotel October 1-3. This year's theme is "Shining a Light on Safety: Are We Looking in the Right Places?" Potential speakers will have until April 1, 2019 to submit entries to lead one or more of the 90-minute sessions during the three-day event. Submissions should be online and include proposed titles, a description or outline, objectives and audience benefits, a brief speaker biography and contact information. Interested speakers are encouraged to visit www.chcsafetyqualitysummit.com for additional information. Please make your submission online at Call For Papers Relevant topics include (but are not limited to): • Integrity and Management • Compliance Monitoring • Technology and Safety Methods of Training • Crisis Management • Organizational Leadership and Viability • Fatigue Risk Management • Human Factors • Risk Assessment and Hazard Management • Human Error Management • Flight Data Monitoring • HUMS • Organizational Causes of Accidents • Sustaining and Improving Industry Safety • Management System for Reducing Safety Risk and Business Risk • Safety Management Tools • Crew Resource Management • Practical Tools ABOUT THE CHC SAFETY & QUALITY SUMMIT Each Summit event features a series of presentations led by experts in the fields of aviation, oil & gas and energy, and safety. Invited speakers will lead approximately 100 concurrent sessions over a three-day period, addressing the theme and helping to contribute to the safety conversation in our industries, promoting excellence in safety and human factors and maintaining a robust safety environment. Approximately 500 delegates from nearly 30 countries and a range of industries join the Summit each year, making it one of the largest aviation safety events in the world. Visit www.chcsafetyqualitysummit.com for more information. ABOUT CHC For more than 70 years, CHC Helicopter has provided safe, reliable, cost-effective helicopter service in some of the most remote and challenging environments around the world. With extensive experience transporting customers in the oil and gas industry, supporting search-and-rescue and EMS contracts, and providing maintenance, repair and overhaul services, our dedication to safety and reputation for quality and innovation help our customers reach beyond what they thought possible. Visit www.chcheli.com for information. SUMMIT CONTACTS Michelle Chrystal S&Q Support Coordinator Speaker Liaison michelle.chrystal@chcheli.com Curt Lewis