Flight Safety Information April 23, 2019 - No. 082 In This Issue Just When You Thought You Could Stop Worrying About Airplanes, Another Boeing Jet Faces Safety Questions What the autonomous vehicles industry should learn from the Boeing 737 Max crisis Incident: Eurowings A319 at Hamburg on Apr 22nd 2019, runway incursion Incident: Frontier A321 near Atlanta on Apr 21st 2019, crew oxygen leak Incident: Cathay Pacific A333 near Shanghai on Apr 20th 2019, lightning strike Incident: TAP A343 at Lisbon on Apr 22nd 2019, gear problem on arrival Houston flight to Amsterdam diverted due to disruptive passenger GPS Error Causes Flight to Land 65 Miles Away From Destination Beechcraft 58 Baron - Fatal Accident (Texas) U.S. names experts to Boeing certification review panel What people don't get about why planes crash Departing the U.S. from an airport? Your face will be scanned DFW Becomes Largest Airport in the World to Achieve Carbon Neutral Status Air India Close to Defaulting on Loans for Aircraft Purchases Used Business Aircraft Fleet Value Primed For Decline Army considers better pay for aviation as pilots and crews leave at record rate Call for Nominations For 2019 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award ERAU Avionics Short-Course for Professionals Certificate Courses in Slovenia from SCSI Aircraft Cabin Air Conference Just When You Thought You Could Stop Worrying About Airplanes, Another Boeing Jet Faces Safety Questions Unlike the 737 Max, these problems can't be fixed with a software upgrade. In yet another black eye for Boeing, the New York Times has published a scathing exposé detailing potential safety problems with a flagship line of Boeing jets--this time, the 787 Dreamliner. The Times scrutiny of Boeing comes in the aftermath of two fatal crashes in less than six months that exposed software and hardware flaws in a different set of popular Boeing jets, the 737 Max line. Those flaws led to two tragic accidents and the deaths of a total of 346 people. After the second incident, the crash of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, 737 Max jets were effectively grounded around the world, awaiting Boeing's updated software, which should make those planes safe to fly again. But safety concerns about the Dreamliner will be much harder to address because they don't result from a specific design or software issue that engineers might be able to fix. Instead, from what sources told the Times, they arise from how Boeing runs its factories, and how it handles reports from the factory floor about quality control issues. The Dreamliner is a wide-body jet built for long-haul overseas trips. Many national airlines fly them, as do American and United. It's important to note one very big difference between the 787 Dreamliner and 737 Max lines. Unlike the Max, since its introduction in 2009, no Dreamliner has ever been involved in a crash or serious accident. However, the entire line was grounded for just over three months in 2013 due to design issues surrounding its lithium-ion battery and battery compartment. Those issues caused a fire during a Japan Airlines flight, and an earlier fire in an All Nippon Airways plane while it sat on the runway after passengers had disembarked. Boeing made some modifications to the battery system and the Dreamliners resumed flying. It's also important to note that many airlines--Boeing's customers--stand by the company and the safety of its planes. The safety issues reported by the Times have nothing to do with the plane's batteries, but instead mostly revolve around items left in planes by workers that could imperil passengers and crew, and the treatment of Boeing employees who sought to raise the alarm. Here's a quick look at what the Times found after more than a dozen interviews and a review of corporate documents, internal emails, and government records. 1. Metal shavings and other debris. John Barnett, a retired quality control manager says that he found metal shavings hanging over some of the wiring for flight controls. The shavings were created when a fastener was fitted into a nut. The Federal Aviation Administration also told the Times that it had found these shavings in Boeing planes that the company had certified free of debris. In certain situations, Barnett and an FAA spokesperson agree, those shavings could pierce the wiring and cause some very big problems. In 2017, the FAA ordered Boeing to remove all metal shavings from its planes before delivery. The company said it was complying, and working with a supplier to change the design of the nut. And it was more than metal shavings. Workers, apparently under pressure from Boeing to produce planes more quickly as it struggled to beat out its rival Airbus, often left items within the body of the plane, ranging from a tube of sealant to a ladder. The problem may not be limited to the Dreamliner. In March, the Air Force temporarily stopped accepting delivery of the KC-46 tanker after finding tools and trash in some of those planes. Boeing and the Air Force apparently worked out the problem, and the Air Force resumed began taking delivery on planes again this month. 2. Questionable treatment of employees who found problems. Several employees told the Times that they were scolded or disciplined for finding debris or other problems on planes. Many of these issues seemed to be at their worst at the Boeing plant in North Charleston, South Carolina, which the company built in 2009 specifically to help meet high demand for its two-year-old 787 Dreamliner line. In addition to the metal shavings, Barnett said he also saw a manager pull a defective part from a scrap pile, he believed to install on a plane. That complaint was investigated by the FAA, which concluded some damaged parts had indeed gone missing and might well be in use on planes. After the FAA investigation, Boeing issued a statement saying it would warn airlines about the defective parts as a precaution. Barnett was disciplined for his role in bringing this problem to light--in a subsequent review he was downgraded for using email to report process violations instead of a face to face conversation. He took that to mean that the company wanted there to be no written record of what he'd found. In addition, the review said he should be better at "working in the gray areas and help find a way while maintaining compliance." Kevin McAllister, CEO of Boeing's commercial airplanes division told the Times, "Boeing South Carolina teammates are producing the highest levels of quality in our history. I am proud of our teams' exceptional commitment to quality and stand behind the work they do each and every day." This year, the company plans to roll out 14 Dreamliners a month, an increase from 12 a month last year. Half will be built in Everett, Washington, the other half in North Charleston. Meantime, according to the Times, even as production increases, the company has said it will eliminate about 100 quality control jobs from the North Charleston plant. 3. Keeping unions out at the expense of needed skills. Boeing picked North Charleston for its Dreamliner plant for several reasons. Among them: The availability of lower cost labor and the $1 billion in incentives the state offered Boeing to move there. But the company may also have been attracted because South Carolina has the lowest percentage of unionized workers in the country. Clearly, Boeing does not want a unionized workforce in South Carolina. Last year, the plant's flight readiness technicians and inspectors voted to join the International Association of Machinists. That's after Boeing campaigned hard against it and went to court to try to have the vote delayed or the ballots impounded. Boeing lost in court, but is filing an appeal. If it wins, its flight readiness personnel will lose union representation. That's 178 people at a plant that employs about 6,700. Two managers reported to the Times that they were told not to hire managers from the Everett plant because the company did not want unionized employees interacting with non-unionized ones and potentially recruiting them. Not hiring from Everett created a skills shortage, though, because South Carolina doesn't have a pool of skilled aviation workers on the scale that the Seattle area does. Ever since the Lion Air crash last fall that first brought to light the problems with the 737 Max line, CEO Dennis Muilenberg has repeated one message over and over, though the wording has varied. In his recent response to the preliminary report on the Ethiopian Airlines crash, he put it this way: "We've always been relentlessly focused on safety and always will be." In his first comments on that accident and on the 737 Max software issue, he said this: "Safety is a core value for everyone at Boeing and the safety of our airplanes, our customers' passengers and their crews is always our top priority." If what these managers say is accurate--that the company chose not to bring skilled employees to South Carolina for fear they'd bring the union with them--then those statements just don't ring true. https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/boeing-787-dreamliner-safety-issues-north-charleston-plant-debris-planes.html Back to Top What the autonomous vehicles industry should learn from the Boeing 737 Max crisis We're about to enter a world in which autonomous vehicles (AVs) routinely make life-and-death decisions. Before hopping in, we should draw lessons on how to regulate them from recent missteps in another industry: airlines. With stronger oversight, it appears, the two fatal Boeing 737 Max crashes could have been prevented. For decades, we've trusted the air-safety system. The US Federal Aviation Administration exhaustively studies crashes and proactively forces airlines and manufacturers to improve safety by adding features or redesigning aircraft. Since the 1970s, the fatal accident rate for global air travel has plunged by a factor of 16 (paywall) to one accident every 3 million flights of large commercial passenger planes. Meanwhile AVs are nowhere near the human safety standard of one fatality for every 100 million vehicle miles traveled (although we are promised they will be safer). Several deaths have been linked to (paywall) fully or partially autonomous vehicles. Firms like Waymo (pdf) and Tesla have slowed ambitious timelines for rolling out their technology. But so far, regulation of AVs in the US has mostly been reactive. (China, South Korea, and others have implemented rules for the industry.) The latest guidance (pdf) from the US government allows companies to self-certify their new AV technologies without safety tests. The 737 Max tragedies point to the risk this model poses for AVs. To win swift approval for its update to the 1960s-era 737, Boeing cut corners on safety. Crucial cockpit alerts were optional, and pilot training consisted of "an iPad lesson for an hour." When safety concerns did arise, Boeing fought them. The FAA let this slide, approving a team of Boeing engineers to conduct inspections on its behalf, and never correcting a fatal flaw that caused an autonomous steering system to repeatedly force the 737 Max into a dive. Those decisions turned preventable technical mistakes into failures that killed nearly 350 people. Last year, AV legislation didn't pass the US Congress. "Some senators distrusted the technologies and the developers of those technologies and the regulators of those technologies," writes Bryant Walker Smith, a University of South Carolina law professor, via email. Those suspicions were well placed, he argues. Although we often ask whether the public trusts AVs, Smith suggests we should instead be asking if we trust the companies and regulators deploying these vehicles in the first place. https://qz.com/1595490/what-the-737-max-crisis-can-teach-the-autonomous-vehicles-industry/ Back to Top Incident: Eurowings A319 at Hamburg on Apr 22nd 2019, runway incursion An Eurowings Airbus A319-100, registration D-ABGK performing flight EW-2049 from Hamburg to Stuttgart (Germany), was taxiing for departure having been cleared to taxi to taxi via taxiway B3 and G, hold short runway 15. A Wizzair Airbus A320-200, registration HA-LYX performing flight W6-7317 from Kiev (Ukraine) to Hamburg (Germany), was on short final to runway 15, when the A319 crossed the hold short line on taxiway B3 and entered runway 15 coming briefly to a stop on the runway edge. Tower instructed the A320 to go around, the crew went around from about 300 feet AGL. The A320 positioned for another approach to runway 15 and landed safely about 12 minutes after the go around. The A319 continued taxi and departed from runway 05 about 7 minutes later. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c708530&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Frontier A321 near Atlanta on Apr 21st 2019, crew oxygen leak A Frontier Airbus A321-200, registration N716FR performing flight F9-1182 from Orlando,FL to Providence,RI (USA), was enroute at FL320 about 120nm east of Atlanta,GA (USA) when the crew noticed a leaking crew oxygen bottle and decided to divert to Atlanta for a safe landing on runway 28 about 23 minutes after leaving FL320. The remainder of the flight was cancelled. The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 22 hours before returning to service. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/FFT1182/history/20190421/1620Z/KMCO/KPVD http://avherald.com/h?article=4c7082ca&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Cathay Pacific A333 near Shanghai on Apr 20th 2019, lightning strike A Cathay Pacific Airbus A330-300, registration B-HLT performing flight CX-360 from Hong Kong to Shanghai Pudong (China), was enroute over southern China, when the aircraft received a lightning strike. The aircraft continued to Shanghai for a safe landing. The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 26 hours before returning to service. Passenger photos: http://avherald.com/h?article=4c707bf7&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: TAP A343 at Lisbon on Apr 22nd 2019, gear problem on arrival A TAP Air Portugal Airbus A340-300, registration CS-TOB performing flight TP-288 from Luanda (Angola) to Lisbon (Portugal), was on approach to Lisbon's runway 21 when the crew initiated a go around due to an unsafe gear indication. The aircraft climbed to 6000 feet and positioned for another approach to runway 21. The aircraft landed safely about 20 minutes after the go-around and needed to be towed to the apron. The runway was closed for about 20 minutes as result. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c707a80&opt=0 Back to Top Houston flight to Amsterdam diverted due to disruptive passenger United flight from Houston to Amsterdam diverted due to disruptive passenger. NEWARK, New Jersey (KTRK) -- A flight from Houston's Bush Airport to Amsterdam was diverted Monday night. United Airlines says the plane was forced to land at Newark Airport in New Jersey over a customer issue. The airline says the passenger was not complying with crew instructions, but would not go into detail about what happened. A new flight crew had to be brought in. The flight is expected to arrive in Amsterdam around 11 a.m., nine hours late. https://abc13.com/travel/houston-flight-to-amsterdam-diverted-due-to-disruptive-passenger-/5265752/ Back to Top GPS Error Causes Flight to Land 65 Miles Away From Destination A Scandinavian Airlines flight landed about 65 miles away from its target airport because of a GPS error. The plane left Copenhagen at noon and was scheduled to fly to Florence. But before takeoff, the pilots discovered they did not have "the correct flight route information" and "had to find another airport in which to land," according to The Independent. Service was delayed for about an hour until pilots could find a solution to the route, according to Swedish newspaper Expressen. They decided instead to program a flight to the nearby city of Bologna, located about 65 miles away. The compromise for passengers was that a shuttle bus would take them to their intended final destination. "We have just landed and it is a sieve with confused people who have booked hotels in another city," a passenger told the Swedish newspaper. "There is a whole cart full of people who are going to bus now." Last month, a British Airways flight from London to Dusseldorf accidentally ended up in Edinburgh after a GPS error. Passengers did not realize the error until the pilots came on the loudspeaker with a "Welcome to Edinburgh" message. All passengers were able to continue onto Dusseldorf and receive compensation for the mistake. https://www.travelandleisure.com/travel-news/gps-error-causes-scandinavian-airlines-flight-to-miss-destination Back to Top Beechcraft 58 Baron - Fatal Accident (Texas) Date: 22-APR-2019 Time: c. 09:00 LT Type: Beechcraft 58 Baron Owner/operator: Private Registration: N501CE C/n / msn: TH-1888 Fatalities: Fatalities: 6 / Occupants: 6 Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Written off (damaged beyond repair) Location: 6 miles off Kerrville Municipal Airport, Kerrville, TX - United States of America Phase: Approach Nature: Unknown Departure airport: Houston-West Houston Airport, TX (IWS/KIWS) Destination airport: Kerrville Airport, TX (ERV/KERV) Narrative: The aircraft impacted terrain while on approach to Kerrville Municipal Airport, in Kerrville, Texas. The aircraft sustained unreported damage and all 6 occupants were fatally injured. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=224241 Back to Top U.S. names experts to Boeing certification review panel WASHINGTON, April 22 (Reuters) - U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao said on Monday she named four experts to a blue-ribbon committee to review the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) aircraft certification process after two deadly Boeing 737 MAX crashes killed nearly 350 people. Chao said she was naming NASA's former aviation safety program director Amy Pritchett and Gretchen Haskins, chief executive of HeliOffshore Ltd, an international expert in aviation safety and a former U.S. Air Force officer. She also named Kenneth Hylander, chief safety officer at Amtrak and a former senior safety executive at Delta and Northwest airlines, and J. David Grizzle, chairman of the board of Republic Airways and a former FAA chief counsel. The committee is "specifically tasked to review the 737 MAX 800 certification process from 2012 to 2017, and recommend improvements to the certification process." U.S. lawmakers have criticized the FAA's program that allows Boeing Co and other manufacturers to oversee the process that ensures air worthiness and other vital safety aspects of new aircraft. Chao said last month the panel would be co-chaired by retired Air Force General Darren McDew, the former head of the U.S. Transportation Command, and Lee Moak, a former president of the Air Line Pilots Association. Federal prosecutors, the Transportation Department's inspector general and lawmakers are investigating the FAA's certification of the 737 MAX 8 aircraft. A joint review by 10 governmental air regulators is also set to start April 29. https://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL1N2240UQ Back to Top What people don't get about why planes crash A former accident investigator explains. By Christine Negroni Airline crash investigators try to find out why things happened the way they did. A gray-haired pilot straight out of central casting landed a US Airways airliner on the Hudson River on January 15, 2009. Geese had badly damaged the plane's engines, and faced with an airplane that was little more than a glider, the pilot successfully landed the Airbus 320 in the water. All 155 people aboard survived. You probably know the pilot by name: Celebrity is fleeting to most, but even a decade later, Captain Sully is widely remembered for his heroic landing, now known as the Miracle on the Hudson. The story even inspired a 2016 Clint Eastwood film starring Tom Hanks. The hero pilot is an enduring character. This may explain why, when planes crash - as two Boeing 737 Maxs have over the past five months - people immediately speculate about the folks in the cockpit. "Was it pilot error?" I am often asked by those who know my background as a former air accident investigator and the author of The Crash Detectives. Pilots may be the first to arrive at the accident scene, as the saying goes, but the question still troubles me. Accidents are never the result of one thing or one person. They lie at the end of a long chain of events. So I watched in dismay but not surprise as the pilots of Lion Air Flight 610, which plunged into the sea shortly after takeoff in October 2018, and those in command of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, which plowed into a field in March, were the focus of stories and speculation about the quality of their training and performance. THE WAY PILOTS INTERACT WITH TECHNOLOGY INTENDED TO PREVENT ERRORS CAN OFTEN CONTRIBUTE TO ACCIDENTS IN UNEXPECTED WAYS To be sure, when crash investigators start the process of figuring out what went wrong, pilots are scrutinized. Their training, medical history, sleep patterns, and emotional state are relevant, as are the actions of many others workers associated with the flight. Crash investigators also study the airplane, its past maintenance, repairs, service bulletins, its cargo, and of course all the details associated with the final flight itself. It may sound strange coming from a woman who used to do this job - specifically for lawyers representing victims of air accidents - but investigators are not there to determine blame. They're there to find out why things happened as they did. If it's determined that the pilots erred, that's not the end of the story. The next step is to figure out why. But in my years doing the job - and later reporting on safety - here's what stands out: The way pilots interact with technology intended to prevent errors can often contribute to accidents in unexpected ways. There's no better example of this than the one-two punch of Boeing 737 Max disasters. New information indicates that what tripped up the pilots of these ill-fated flights was not a lack of airmanship, but a new system Boeing installed on the Max. Worse, this technology - Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or MCAS - was intended to enhance safety by taking control of the airplane if the plane's nose got too high, threatening a loss of lift and a stall. In fact, the investigations still underway seem to show that in both accidents, the system engaged in response to an erroneous reading from a sensor. The planes were not in jeopardy, but the pilots could not override the computer's command, forcing the airplanes to dive. In short, technology bested the humans in the cockpit with disastrous consequences. Boeing now acknowledges the software is flawed. Introducing software into the cockpit as a backstop against human fallibility has been going on for decades. To be sure, computers have made flying safer in many ways. At the same time, it plays such a significant role in the pilot's realm that one cannot consider either in isolation. In the mid-80s, Airbus, the European competitor to Boeing, created the first fly-by-wire airplane. This innovation replaced the pilot's mechanical activation of flight control surfaces, with activation by electrical pulses. This gave the flight more precision and consistency. It also created safe operating envelopes outside of which the pilots could not fly. This would prevent them from leading to a catastrophic mishandling of the airplane. By the mid-2000s, Boeing was also offering fly-by-wire on its new B-777 widebody. So in a way, today's modern airliner technology can be compared to your mobile phone that tracks your steps, keeps your calendar, and provides navigation to get you to your appointments, or your car with its lane-keeping and parallel parking abilities. On land or in the air, modern technology consistently handles mundane, repetitious, complex, or mind-numbing tasks so we don't have to. But technology comes with a downside. Our phones, computers, cameras, and smart homes can both confuse us and make us careless. The same is true for pilots in modern aircraft. In the crash of an Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 landing in San Francisco in 2014, investigators determined that a contributing factor was the pilots' over-reliance on automated systems which led to an erosion in their flying skills. The investigation of the fatal flight of an Air France Airbus A330 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris in 2009 led to the conclusion that the complexity of the fly-by-wire airplane befuddled the pilots. The 737 Max probes suggest another variation on the conundrum: Technology intended to protect against pilot error trapped the pilots. Helpless in the cockpit, they were unable to do as Captain Sully did and save the day. Correction: Air France Airbus A330 flew from Rio de Janeiro, not Buenos Aires, to Paris. Christine Negroni is an aviation journalist and a former air accident investigator. For five years she was a member of an FAA rulemaking advisory committee on aging aircraft systems. She is the author of two books on air accidents including the Penguin bestseller, The Crash Detectives: Investigating the World's Most Mysterious Air Disasters. https://www.vox.com/first-person/2019/4/22/18511069/boeing-737-max-crash-plane Back to Top Departing the U.S. from an airport? Your face will be scanned. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is set to expand the use of facial recognition tech to identify just about every person leaving the United States on a commercial flight. As Quartz reports, the CBP already uses facial recognition technology at 15 U.S. airports. The system works by capturing a photo of a passenger as they approach their airport departure gate. The image is then compared to visa and passport applications for a possible match so as to create an "exit record." No match flags the individual for closer inspection by the CBP. In the Fiscal Tear 2018 Entry/Exit Overtstay Report released by Homeland Security, it's stated (on page 11) that CBP intends to expand the use of this so-called biometric exit over the next four years to, "97 percent of departing commercial air travelers from the United States." The reason? The technology is highly reliable and therefore very good at detecting individuals who are classed as overstays on a visa. The 15 airports already using facial recognition have had 15,000 flights and over two million passengers pass through the biometric exit system. Of those, over 7,000 passengers were detected as overstays. Considering the system only started being used in 2017, you can see why CBP views facial recognition as an important tool for use across all airports. The system was also key to identifying an imposter last year and blocking his entry into the U.S. For now, any airport not using the new tech will continue to rely on departing airline flight manifests. However, once installed across all U.S. airports, it's thought the same technology will start being introduced at land borders, too. https://mashable.com/article/departing-a-us-airport-your-face-will-be-scanned/ Back to Top DFW Becomes Largest Airport in the World to Achieve Carbon Neutral Status For the past decade, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport has been steadfastly focused on reducing its environmental impact and as part of that process improving operational efficiency and cutting costs. The Texas airport's efforts have been woven throughout all levels of operations, encompassing waste management, energy usage, water consumption and far more. All of which has begun to pay off on multiple levels, according to a fact sheet recently released by the DFW. Perhaps most notably among the achievements listed, DFW has become a carbon neutral airport, making it the largest airport in the world and the first in North America to receive this distinction. "Our initial goal was to reduce our CO2 emissions per passenger by 15 percent by 2020. We were able to achieve this goal two years ahead of schedule, and as such we've been able to drive more efficient operations, offset the impact of our growth and reduce our emissions per passenger," Robert Horton, vice president of Environmental Affairs for DFW told TravelPulse. "DFW has a strong commitment to sustainability, and we will continue to look for innovative ways to reduce our emissions while improving the customer experience." Facility officials say their focus on conducting business in a way that balances environmental considerations with the day-to-day operations of the global super hub have resulted in numerous additional achievements as well: -DFW recently achieved a three-year Airport Carbon Accreditation through 2021. DFW is the largest airport in the world, and the first in North America, to achieve this distinction. -In fiscal year 2018, DFW achieved a 5.4 percent reduction in carbon emissions per passenger, reaching a 2020 strategic plan goal two years early. -Since 2010, DFW has achieved 83 percent reduction in carbon emissions per passenger and an overall 27 percent reduction in electricity costs, all of which was accomplished while passenger totals increased 22 percent over the same period. -DFW diverted 180,000 U.S. tons from landfills through recycling in fiscal year 2018 -DFW purchases 100 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, specifically Texas wind farms. Dallas Fort Worth Airport, Terminal D ticket hall PHOTO: Dallas Fort Worth Airport, Terminal D ticket hall (Courtesy DFW International Airport) And despite naysayers who often suggest that such environmental efforts represent a costlier way to do business, the economic vitality of the airport has benefitted from all of the sustainability programs. The fact sheet highlights a number of relevant examples. For instance, by installing highly efficient plumbing fixtures across terminals and office buildings, DFW lowered customer water usage across all five terminals, saving millions of gallons each month. In addition, DFW has partnered with neighboring cities to create a reclaimed water-delivery system that provides water irrigation and serves as a key component in heating terminal buildings. By regaining the water rights to Trigg Lake, a major water resource for the irrigation of Bear Creek Golf Course, DFW further reduced the potable water used for irrigation. DFW used 126 million gallons of reclaimed water in the fiscal year 2018 and averages 100 million gallons per year. The airport also continues to reduce the consumption of power and water, despite projected passenger growth of 66 million to 80 million in only five years. In the fiscal year 2018, the airport reduced electricity costs by 27 percent. Additional efforts being undertaken at the airport focus on achieving a target of zero waste. Launched in the fiscal year 2018, the zero-waste initiative aims to have a 90 percent landfill diversion rate. "The new Zero Waste Program will improve overall performance of DFW's diversion rate by an estimated 45 percent and reduce operational costs," states the fact sheet. Last year alone, DFW diverted 180,000 U.S. tons from landfills through recycling. In addition, the airport recycled more than 2.4 million pounds of concrete truck washout waste from airfield construction projects - nine times more waste than what was recycled the previous year. All of this new data, which represents just a fraction of the airport's sustainability efforts, was released in advance of the airport's annual Environmental, Sustainability & Governance Report, which will be published in the coming months, officials said. "We recognize that environmental improvement is an economic, social and business imperative for the airport and for the community we serve," said Horton. "Sustainability touches everyone, and we look at our sustainability goals not just as expectations we need to meet, but an important responsibility. https://www.travelpulse.com/news/airlines/dfw-becomes-largest-airport-in-the-world-to-achieve-carbon-neutral-status.html Back to Top Air India Close to Defaulting on Loans for Aircraft Purchases An Air India 777-300ER departing from New York-JFK (Photo: AirlineGeeks | Ben Suskind) The Indian aviation market faces more turmoil as state-owned carrier Air India is potentially about to default on just over $1 billion in loans due this financial year which were used for the purchase of aircraft. The news comes in the same week as Jet Airways ceased flight operations after a failure to secure investment to maintain operations. Jet is hoping that the cessation will be temporary and that it will secure financial backing from a number of interested parties to recommence services. Air India has almost $8 billion in total debt and the Indian government has restructured the business to assist with repaying the debt down. The Indian government had attempted to privatize Air India last year but, according to The Hindu Business Line, no interested bidders were forthcoming. This has resulted in the government seeking to sell off some of the airline's assets including its landmark 23-story tower block in Mumbai and a number of other commercial and residential properties the airline owns in at least 16 cities. The government is seeking bids only from other state-owned businesses for the assets but has halted further attempts to sell off Air India, in whole or in part, due to the current election which the country is undertaking. India's aviation market has seen considerable growth and the country will have the third largest domestic network by passenger numbers behind China and the U.S. However the country has seen a number of airline failures in recent years, significantly the collapse of Kingfisher airlines in 2012, in a scenario similar to the grounding of Jet Airways this month. In that situation, Kingfisher began cancelling flights, did not pay staff for several months and the State Bank of India refused to offer further finance to sustain the airline's operations. Air India has been seeking to alleviate the impact of Jet Airways cessation of operations by accommodating a number of Jet employees. An Arabian news source has said that the state carrier is seeking to recruit flight attendants from Jet airways but could not confirm whether a formal plan was in place to recruit pilots. Arabia Industry also reported that Air India is interested in leasing five Jet Airways Boeing 777 aircraft to boost connectivity between the country and London, Singapore or Dubai. https://airlinegeeks.com/2019/04/22/air-india-close-to-defaulting-on-loans-for-aircraft-purchases/ Back to Top Used Business Aircraft Fleet Value Primed For Decline A shrinking inventory of newer preowned business jets and turboprops is threatening overall values as the remaining for-sale fleet gives way to older, harder-to-sell aircraft, according to Asset Insight's first quarter 2019 Market Report that was released late last week. The report analyzes values for every production year of modern make and model business aircraft listed for sale during the period. During the first quarter, overall demand-measured by days on the market and percent of the make and model fleet for sale-improved slightly, helped by large-cabin and midsize business aircraft, while asking prices for midsize and light jets rose by 3.4 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively. But as a whole, the overall value of the report's tracked pre-owned fleet decreased 5 percent in the three-month period. As the for-sale fleet of business aircraft continues to trend older, asking prices are expected to slide because of a decline in fleet quality and an increase in maintenance exposure, according to the Las Vegas-based firm's report. "Newer aircraft continue to sell quickly and for solid prices, but there are fewer and fewer of those low-time, high-quality aircraft available on the market," said Asset Insight president Tony Kioussis. "Buyers could see real opportunities in the second quarter for older, higher-time aircraft, as we expect prices to continue to decline across all market segments." https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2019-04-22/used-business-aircraft-fleet-value-primed-decline Back to Top Army considers better pay for aviation as pilots and crews leave at record rate A U.S. Army Apache helicopter pilot assigned to Task Force Viper 1st Battalion, 3rd Aviation Regiment, 12th Combat Aviation Brigade makes final checks before departing Zagan Poland Training Area on June 21, 2018. The Army wants to boost flight pay and award pilots with incentive money for career achievements to stem a historic attrition rate in its aviation community. The Army wants to boost flight pay and award pilots with incentive money for career achievements in a bid to stem a record 10% attrition rate due largely to aging air crews and competition from commercial airlines. Maj. Gen. William Gayler, commander of the Army Aviation Center of Excellence, spoke of the adjustments the Army is weighing to retain more experienced pilots at an aviation conference last week. "We have a commercial airline industry that needs pilots," Gayler said in an Army statement. "All of our [military] services have seen air crew members migrate out to the commercial world." The shortage of pilots across the military is most acute in the Air Force, which is facing a deficit of about 2,000 pilots. But the Army is also under its authorized strength for aviators, especially AH-64 Apache pilots, who take longer and are more expensive to train than many other pilots. The commercial airlines, meanwhile, have stepped up efforts to recruit Army rotor-wing pilots. A U.S. Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter from the 1st Combat Aviation Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, lands for final staging before taking off from Chievres Air Base, Belgium, Feb. 7, 2019. The Army wants to boost flight pay and award pilots with incentive money for career achievements to stem a historic attrition rate in its aviation community. To ease a global pilot shortage, U.S. regional airlines are recruiting military pilots by offering tuition reimbursement, sign-on bonuses and higher salaries, Reuters reported in January. Military helicopter pilots need only about 90 days of additional fixed-wing training to qualify for a type rating in commercial flying, according to Reuters. Compounding the problem for the Army is the high percentage of pilots nearing retirement age, Gayler said at the conference, according to the Army statement. Gayler said it was "alarming" that almost 30% of warrant officer crew members are eligible to retire, while more than 40% of all warrant officers have more than 17 years of service. Last year, the Army began offering retention bonuses of up to $35,000 to more experienced pilots. But Gayler said at the conference that bonuses are only a short-term fix. Instead, he said, the aviation branch has proposed boosting flight pay, which can retain more qualified aviators, he said. "We probably need to look at it and adjust it a little bit if we're having to throw bonus money to keep people," Gayler said. The current rate of up to $840 per month for active flight pay has not changed in more than a decade. "It's time for an adjustment again," Gayler said, adding that the new figure hasn't been determined. The Army may also offer additional incentive money to pilots who achieve a significant milestone, such as becoming an instructor or test pilot, he said. The Army aviation branch has also recommended increasing its active duty service obligation for new aviators from six to eight years, similar to what other services do. In another change, the active federal service maximum for enlisted soldiers wanting to convert to warrant officer aviators has been dropped from 12 years to eight years, without a waiver, Gayler said in the statement. About 75% of warrant officers were once enlisted, according to the statement. The adjustment would lengthen a soldier's aviation service if retiring at 20 years. "All of these are just levers to try to retain people," he said. "The single most important will probably be to pay them for what their skills require. That's a tough thing to do right now when money is a challenge and we have to prioritize for other things, but we've got to find ways to keep them." https://www.stripes.com/news/us/army-considers-better-pay-for-aviation-as-pilots-and-crews-leave-at-record-rate-1.577947 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 Back to Top Back to Top Helicopter Association International (HAI) is dedicated to providing its members with services that directly benefit their operations, and to advancing the international helicopter community by providing programs that enhance safety, encourage professionalism and economic viability while promoting the unique contributions vertical flight offers society. HAI has more than 3,800 member organizations and annually produces HAI HELI-EXPO®, the world's largest trade show and exposition dedicated to helicopters. Position: Deputy Director of Safety Overview: The Deputy Director of Safety is responsible for supporting the association's existing aviation safety programs and developing new safety initiatives to benefit HAI's membership. Essential Functions of the Position Include, but Are Not Limited To: • Providing auxiliary support to the Director of Safety • Serving as the HAI safety representative on various industry, government, and international boards, task forces, and meetings • Providing feedback for the association's response to proposed safety-related regulations and legislative initiatives • Collecting, researching, and analyzing safety and accident data for subsequent statistical reporting • Developing and implementing new HAI industry safety initiatives • Routinely interacting with aviation related agencies and organizations in support of the rotorcraft industry • Supporting all aspects of HAI's accreditation programs (IS-BAO & HAI APS) that assist helicopter operators in reducing incidents and accidents, while improving industry safety culture • Providing safety supervision for flight activities at the association's annual trade show and exposition, HAI HELI-EXPO® • Responding to requests for rotorcraft safety assistance from HAI members and the general public • Serving as staff liaison for assigned HAI committees • Contributing content for use in HAI's printed and electronic publications • Making safety presentations on behalf of HAI as necessary • Other duties as assigned The above statements are intended to describe the general nature and level of work being performed. They are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all duties and responsibilities. Desired Qualifications for the Position Include: • College or advanced degree related to aviation safety and/or management • Five or more years of related helicopter safety background, training, and experience • Certificated helicopter pilot and/or maintenance technician • Previous experience with helicopter or other aviation-related organization • Prior international experience preferred • Experience with auditing protocols and accreditation programs • A passionate commitment to the promotion of helicopter safety • Highly motivated, able to work independently and in a team environment • Excellent written and verbal communication skills with prior experience in creating and delivering written proposals and public presentations • Research, data analysis, and report writing experience • Proficiency with the Microsoft Office Suite • Detail oriented, self-starter, with strong organizational and time management skills • Ability to travel The above qualifications are representative, but not all-inclusive, of the experience, knowledge, skills, and abilities required for the position. APPLY HERE Curt Lewis