Flight Safety Information April 24, 2019 - No. 083 In This Issue Boeing sees FAA approving software fix in May, Max ungrounding in July Boeing Will Weather Storm, US Aircraft Output To Recover From 2020 'Passengers are afraid of this airplane': How Boeing is handling its 737 Max problem Incident: Yan B734 at Chisinau on Apr 19th 2019, crew struggles with ATC instructions Incident: Thai B772 at Seoul on Apr 22nd 2019, bird strike Incident: Virgin Atlantic B789 enroute on Apr 16th 2019, unexpected climb of cabin altitude Accident: Airblue A320 at Peshawar on Apr 23rd 2019, runway excursion on landing Incident: Fuji Dream E175 at Yamagata on Apr 23rd 2019, runway excursion on takeoff Accident: Asia Airways AN26 near Khartoum on Apr 22nd 2019, ran out of fuel Upset incidents lead EASA to issue emergency AD on CitationJets with active winglets FAA demands replacement of AOA sensors on Cirrus SF50 jets following incidents Two Cathay pilots suffer vision impairment during flights Orlando International Airport: Allow at Least 2 Hours for Screening What Your Airline Won't Tell You About Those Creepy Airport Face Scanners Boeing 737 MAX Raises Concerns Over How FAA Will Ensure The Safety Of Autonomous Aircraft Best and worst airlines for Wi-Fi FAA Certifies Google's Wing Drone Delivery Company To Operate As An Airline Navy's pilot shortage may be shored up by 2023, but then the real challenge begins Call for Nominations For 2019 Laura Taber Barbour Air Safety Award ERAU Avionics Short-Course for Professionals Certificate Courses in Slovenia from SCSI Position: Deputy Director of Safety Boeing sees FAA approving software fix in May, Max ungrounding in July • Boeing has told some 737 Max owners it is targeting FAA approval of its software fix as early as the third week of May, two sources told Reuters. • The people also said aircraft manufacturer expects its Max 737 jets to be ungrounded around mid-July. • But Boeing has not yet submitted its completed software package to the FAA for approval, two other sources said. An aerial photo shows Boeing 737 MAX airplanes parked on the tarmac at the Boeing Factory in Renton, Washington, U.S. March 21, 2019. Boeing has told some 737 MAX owners it is targeting U.S. Federal Aviation Administration approval of its software fix as early as the third week of May and the ungrounding of the aircraft around mid-July, two sources told Reuters. The dates are part of a provisional timeline that Boeing has shared in meetings with airline customers as it explains an upgrade to software that played a role in two fatal crashes and led to the worldwide grounding of its MAX 737 jetliner in March. However, Boeing has not yet submitted its completed software package to the FAA for approval, two other sources said. None of the sources, who were not authorized to speak publicly, said they knew for sure how long the re-certification process will take. A Boeing spokeswoman said the company is focused on the safe return to service of the MAX and its engagement with global regulators and customers. Boeing Chief Executive Dennis Muilenburg said last week the company had made the final test flight with the new MAX software before a final certification flight, indicating that the company believed it was making progress toward regulatory approval. On April 1, the FAA said that once it received Boeing's completed software package it would run a rigorous safety review before approving the software for installation. The agency also plans to work with other international regulators on MAX certification in their countries and regions before lifting the flying suspension in the United States, with Boeing prepared to address any concerns, one source said. Aside from the software certification, international regulators must also decide on new pilot training. This process is separate from an FAA-led international review panel, which the agency has said may not be completed before the MAX flying suspension is lifted. The two largest U.S. MAX owners, Southwest Airlines Co and American Airlines Group Inc, removed the aircraft from their flying schedules into August but have said they could use their MAX jets as spares if they are ungrounded sooner. United Airlines, with 14 MAX jets, said last week that it expected the aircraft to return to service this summer, with deliveries resuming before the end of the year. Boeing halted MAX deliveries to customers after the grounding in mid-March and said earlier this month that it would cut 737 production to 42 airplanes per month from 52. One industry source said that as of last week, Boeing planned to keep the lower production rate in place for two months, meaning it aims to resume a rate of 52 aircraft in July but the timeline could shift. Global airlines have had to cancel thousands of flights and use spare aircraft to cover routes that were previously flown with the fuel-efficient MAX. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/23/boeing-sees-faa-approving-software-fix-in-may-max-ungrounding-in-july.html Back to Top Boeing Will Weather Storm, US Aircraft Output To Recover From 2020 Boeing 737 Max An employee walks down a stairway leading to a Boeing 737 MAX airplane in Renton, Washington, March 14, 2019. Photo: Stephen Brashear/Getty Images The U.S. aircraft industry will take a hit from the Boeing 737 MAX groundings and the subsequent production cuts at the company, causing the aircraft gross output to drop more than 5 percent in 2019, Stephen Foreman, senior economist at Oxford Economics said, adding that the industry will gradually recover in 2020 and 2021. The Boeing production cuts -- announced earlier this month -- will see production drop to 42 aircraft per month from 52 and are likely to last at least six months, he said. Foreman said the planemaker's dominance in the aerospace market will help it weather the storm. The U.S. aircraft, helicopter, drones, gliders sub-sector accounts for around half the headline U.S. aerospace products and parts output. The U.S. emerged as the biggest market for aerospace parts manufacturing in 2017. Foreman said the overall impact on the headline U.S. aerospace products and parts, and the commercial aerospace supply chain will be comparatively limited. "We forecast an output contraction of just 0.4 percent in the headline U.S. aerospace products and parts industry in 2019, with the fall in U.S. aircraft output being partly offset by limited aircraft parts production disruption and buoyant aerospace defense activity," he wrote. Boeing 737 MAX was the company's hottest selling model before regulators across the world grounded them following two crashes -- that of a Lion Air plane in October off the coast of Indonesia, and an Ethiopian Airlines plane in March outside Addis Ababa -- which killed a total of 346 people. Investigations into the two crashes have pointed to an error in a new anti-stall software in the jets, known as the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System or MCAS. The final reports on the crashes are not yet out but Boeing now is in a race against time to update the MCAS software and get regulatory approvals for it so the planes can fly again. While the Boeing cuts will act as a drag, limited parts disruption and buoyant missile and space growth will provide some relief for the industry, Foreman said. "We expect output growth in the guided missiles and space vehicles to remain robust over the next few years, driven by increased military spending by the Trump administration. The strength in 2019 reflects a surge in U.S. defense shipments so far this year, which have risen by 8 percent year-on-year in the first two months of 2019," Foreman told International Business Times. He expects the annual inflation-adjusted gross output for guided missiles and space vehicles to rise to 7.7 percent in 2019, before cooling to 3.6 percent in 2020 and 3.2 percent in 2021. Foreman expects no visible effect on the U.S. GDP growth from the Boeing production cuts and does not foresee more than a 0.2 percentage point hit to the total manufacturing growth in 2019. He expects the U.S. aerospace parts and products industry to rebound in 2020 and 2021, with output growth of 3.5 percent and 3.1 percent, respectively, as these temporary cuts unwind. "While some order cancellations may occur, strong demand for single-aisle aircraft, and limited alternative aircraft should shield this U.S. aerospace giant from a mass cancellation of orders," Foreman said. Strong passenger demand, especially with the approaching peak-summer season, and a lack of alternatives for single-aisle aircrafts could see a temporary increase in the airline load factor, he said. The alternatives to the Boeing 737's single-aisle jet are limited and can barely keep up with half of the market's current demand, he said. The Airbus A320neo -- the closest alternative single-aisle aircraft -- has an order backlog of nearly 6,000 aircraft, which could take several years to be delivered. "And while Airbus plans to increase the production of these single-aisle aircraft, this will be difficult given ongoing supply-chain constraints," Foreman said. The impact across the commercial aircraft supply-chain will be much smaller given longer lead times, Foreman said. "Some of Boeing's aircraft parts suppliers -- such as Spirit AeroSystems -- do not plan to reduce production. Longer lead times relative to Boeing make temporary production cut very difficult, though they may be forced to as rising inventories start to hurt their profit margins," he said. The temporary cuts could, however, benefit some suppliers who have struggled with ramping up production in the recent years, such as aircraft engine manufacturers, he added. The impact of the production disruption on sectors such as metals and machinery -- that supply materials and components to the aerospace sector -- will be moderate, given low exposure to aircraft demand. "For instance, while aluminum is a key metal in the manufacturing of an aircraft, U.S. aerospace accounts for just 1 percent of total U.S. aluminum purchases. The aluminum sector sells its output to many other manufacturers across the industry -- such as automotive, beverages and boilers -- limiting its overall vulnerability," Foreman explained. He said the electronics sector -- including the watch, clock, and other measuring and controlling device manufacturing -- is more vulnerable to production disruption. "But some electronics sectors may be provided with relief as Boeing works to fix the control system that caused the crash," he said. https://www.ibtimes.com/boeing-will-weather-storm-us-aircraft-output-recover-2020-2787586 Back to Top 'Passengers are afraid of this airplane': How Boeing is handling its 737 Max problem Jet's maker has a technical fix, now comes the hard part: getting passengers on board again The 737 Max is Boeing's fastest-selling aircraft ever, but the company hasn't taken any new orders since an Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max crashed minutes after take-off from Addis Ababa in March, killing all 157 people on board. (Matt Mills McKnight/Reuters) Boeing has made changes to its 737 Max airliner and conducted more than 100 test flights to show that apparent problems have been fixed in the wake of two deadly crashes. Convincing passengers will be much harder. "Passengers are afraid of this airplane," aviation industry analyst Henry Harteveldt says. "I haven't seen anything like this in decades, in terms of consumer fear and desire to avoid flying on the 737 Max." Little wonder, given all the media coverage showing that a system designed for safety may have been a factor in the crashes involving both Lion Air last October and Ethiopian Airlines in March. The airliners both struggled at low altitude, then plummeted nose-first into the ground while the pilots frantically tried to figure out why their aircraft weren't responding to the controls. • 'It's our responsibility to eliminate this risk': Boeing responds to Ethiopian Airlines crash report • Boeing anti-stall software engaged repeatedly before Ethiopian Airlines crash: sources Early reports from the crash investigations indicate the issue may have begun with an erroneous reading from the angle-of-attack indicator on the nose of the aircraft, falsely suggesting the plane was pointing upwards so sharply it was about to stall. That prompted the safety system, known as MCAS, to manoeuvre the horizontal stabilizer on the 737 Max's tail to force the plane's nose down. But in reality there was no stall imminent in either crash, and pointing the nose down, without the pilots being able to recover in time, may have led to the crashes. One of the sensors that measures the angle of attack can be seen in this image of the nose of a Boeing 737 Max 8. (Stephen Brashear/Getty Images) The MCAS software has been changed. A new training regime is ready for pilots. And the 737 Max could be given the green light to fly passengers sometime in the summer. But Dennis Muilenburg, CEO of the aircraft-manufacturing giant, knows the big job is still to come. "We'll do everything possible to earn and re-earn that trust and confidence from our airline customers and the flying public in the weeks and months ahead." The sell to passengers The question remains how the company will accomplish that. The Boeing 737 has been a popular workhorse for airlines around the world. But after the second crash of the revamped Max model, a poll conducted by Business Insider suggested 53 per cent of American adults never want to fly on a 737 Max, even once it's deemed safe to do so. Boeing was dealt a further blow over the weekend when the New York Times warned of concerns at a factory producing Boeing's other crown jewel, the 787 Dreamliner. Past and current employees tell the Times they warned both the manufacturer and the regulator of sloppy work habits, such as debris sealed inside airframes that could lead to a disaster in flight. Boeing stands by the wide-body jet. To address the concerns of the flying public, Boeing is going to need to speak directly to the skeptical - something it has no history of doing. It sells planes to airlines, but never markets directly to passengers. A Lion Air Boeing 737 Max 8 is parked at Soekarno Hatta International airport near Jakarta, Indonesia, on March 15. Lion Air flight 610 crashed soon after taking off from the same airport on Oct. 29, 2018, killing all 189 aboard. (Willy Kurniawan/Reuters) "Boeing is going to have to be hyper-transparent, unlike anything it's ever been in the past in terms of what the fixes are," Herteveldt says. • Boeing records zero new Max orders following global groundings • Boeing to reduce production rate of troubled 737 Max jets He predicts a multimillion-dollar campaign through both traditional and social media. "It's bringing journalists and analysts and influencers into Boeing and doing something Boeing doesn't normally let people do from the outside - film, take them on test flights, let them interview Boeing engineers and test pilots." The sell to airlines Passengers are just part of the equation - there are also the carriers. In its perpetual battle for market supremacy with rival Airbus, Boeing raced to develop the 737 Max to offer airlines a more fuel-efficient version of its ever-popular 737 line. It worked. The Max became Boeing's fastest-selling aircraft ever. There are more than 300 already in service and about 5,000 more on order. But since the Ethiopian Airlines crash, Boeing hasn't sold a single one. And the list of orders may get shorter as skittish airlines back away or cancel their purchases. A row of grounded Boeing 737 MAX airplanes at Boeing Field in Seattle, Wash., on March 21. (Lindsey Wasson/Reuters) The world of selling planes can be complicated, but some expect the American manufacturing giant is likely to use the same simple approach as any retailer with a poorly selling product: drop the price. The company is not going to give the airplane away, but "Boeing will negotiate," says Harteveldt, "and I think very aggressively." It helps that North America's sixth-largest carrier, Alaska Airlines, is shopping. It had already ordered eight of the aircraft, and reportedly may still add dozens more. An anchor order from such a recognizable name could help restore confidence in the brand. Meanwhile, with sales stagnant, Boeing is trying to restore confidence in preparation for the resumption of 737 Max flights, expected later this year. Existing customers such as Westjet and Air Canada are being run through simulations of the changes to the 737 Max at Boeing's Seattle-area headquarters, and are also being included in design plans for a new pilot training regime. Convincing Congress Boeing is too big to fail, with an extensive product line extending well beyond commercial aviation. The 737 Max mess will hit the company's bottom line this year, but Boeing is in no danger of disappearing. But things will be different. The U.S. Federal Aviation Authority has the final say on when the plane will be ready to fly again. It's the same regulator that gave the 737 Max approval as a new product several years ago, but at that time nearly all the testing of the aircraft was done by Boeing engineers and pilots, not independently by FAA officials. Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg, left, and U.S. Republican Paul Ryan walk past a Rolls Royce Trent 1000 engine for a 787 jet in 2017 at the Boeing factory in Everett, Wash. (Elaine Thompson/Associated Press) For years, the airline industry has pushed not so much for less regulation, but for the delegation of that regulation to the manufacturers themselves. The two 737 Max crashes are prompting questions about whether that was a good idea. "It is clear, just based on public sentiment, that there is an expectation that the FAA have a more direct role," says Peter Lemme, a former Boeing engineer, "and perhaps they've overextended their delegation at this time." • American Airlines cancels Boeing 737 Max flights through mid-August • More families Lion Air victims set to sue Boeing Ironically, the FAA's man in charge of this 737 Max file was himself an ardent proponent of that delegation. Ali Bahrami is now the FAA's Association Administrator for Aviation Safety. But six years ago Bahrami worked for the aircraft manufacturers lobby, and he argued before Congress to fight foreign competition by delegating more regulatory authority to the plane-makers to help them get new products to market faster. Ali Bahrami, left, now Association Administrator for Aviation Safety at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), testifies during a hearing at the National Transportation Safety Board in Washington, D.C., on April 23, 2013. (Jonathan Ernst/Bloomberg via Getty Images) "We urge the FAA to allow maximum use of delegation," Bahrami told Congress in 2013. "It would be detrimental to our competitiveness if foreign manufacturers are able to move improved products into the marketplace more quickly." Now he'll be the one to sign off on the Max's return to the skies. Lemme says he expects Congress and others to nudge the FAA to rein-in some of the regulatory control that was handed over to companies like Boeing. "There was a balance that I think shifted unacceptably," he says. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/the-national-737-max-boeing-1.5107529 Back to Top Incident: Yan B734 at Chisinau on Apr 19th 2019, crew struggles with ATC instructions A Yanair Boeing 737-400 on behalf of Air Moldova, registration UR-CQX performing flight 9U-746 from Istanbul (Turkey) to Chisinau (Moldova), was on approach to Chisinau's runway 08 cleared to descend to FL070 expecting radar vectors for an ILS approach to runway 08, when the crew deviated from the route prompting ATC to query "confirm you are inbound to intermediate fix runway 08" which the crew affirmed. Subsequently the aircraft was cleared to descend to 2500 feet on QNH 1025 and made an unexpected 60 degrees right turn prompting ATC to query "what is the reason to fly your current heading" and turn the aircraft left back onto course via radar vector. The aircraft descended below minimum radar vectoring altitude, ATC instructed the aircraft to climb back to 2500 feet. ATC queried "is everything okay on board, do you need assistance?", the crew affirmed everything okay but didn't sound completely okay. The aircraft was cleared to join the localizer to runway 08, however, went straight through the localizer prompting ATC to cancel the ILS approach clearance and to turn the aircraft off the approach towards the south. The crew however did not follow that turn but aligned with the runway, was cleared for a visual approach to runway 08, descended rapidly from 2500 feet at about 4.5nm out and landed safely on runway 08. Immediately after landing the crew requested ambulances urgently to meet the aircraft. Air Modova said in a public comment, that the crew was in compliance with ATC instructions at all times and was just navigating around bad weather. Nonetheless, an internal investigation has been launched. Moldavia's Civil Aviation Authority opened an investigation into the occurrence. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c712cd9&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Thai B772 at Seoul on Apr 22nd 2019, bird strike A Thai Airways Boeing 777-200, registration HS-TJV performing flight TG-655 from Seoul (South Korea) to Bangkok (Thailand), was climbing out of Seoul's runway 34 when the crew stopped the climb at about 11,300 feet reporting they had received a bird strike and wanted to return to Seoul. The aircraft landed safely on Seoul's runway 34 about 25 minutes after departure. The aircraft is still on the ground in Seoul about 31 hours after landing back. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c71262e&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Virgin Atlantic B789 enroute on Apr 16th 2019, unexpected climb of cabin altitude A Virgin Atlantic Boeing 787-9, registration G-VBEL performing flight VS-20 from San Francisco,CA (USA) to London Heathrow,EN (UK), had step climbed to FL410 and was enroute about 210nm southeast of the soutern tip of Greenland when the crew declared PAN PAN reporting problems with the cabin pressure and requested to descend back to FL390. The aircraft continued to London for a safe landing about 3 hours later. The Canadian TSB reported the aircraft had been dispatched under minimum equipment list requirements with the cabin air compressor on the left hand air conditioning system inoperative. The TSB wrote: "Section 2 of the B787 MEL notes that the cabin altitude, which is normally 6000 feet, may rise to 8000 feet with an inoperative pack or CAC in degraded operations. After review of this section of the MEL, the flight crew continued to destination without further incident." https://flightaware.com/live/flight/VIR20/history/20190416/0100Z/KSFO/EGLL http://avherald.com/h?article=4c711acf&opt=0 Back to Top Accident: Airblue A320 at Peshawar on Apr 23rd 2019, runway excursion on landing An Airblue Airbus A320-200, registration AP-EDA performing flight PA-613 from Sharjah (United Arab Emirates) to Peshawar (Pakistan) with 150 people on board, landed on Peshawar's runway 35 at about 19:30L (14:30Z) with a delay of approximately 11 hours, however, veered temporarily to the right edge of the runway, veered back to the left edge of the runway, returned to the center line, in addition was unable to stop before the end of the runway (length 9000 feet/2740 meters) and overran the end of the runway. There were no injuries. The airport was closed. The airline confirmed the runway overrun and reported both engines were damaged in the occurrence. ADS-B data show the aircraft stopped about 120 meters past the end of the runway, still on the paved surface of the runway end safety area. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c710ccd&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Fuji Dream E175 at Yamagata on Apr 23rd 2019, runway excursion on takeoff A Fuji Dream Airlines Embraer ERJ-175, registration JA11FJ performing flight JH-386 from Yamagata to Nagoya (Japan) with 60 passengers and 4 crew, was about to depart Yamagata's runway 19 at about 16:40L (07:40Z) when the aircraft veered left off the runway and came to a stop on the grass at the eastern side of the runway. There were no injuries, the damage to the aircraft is being assessed. Japan's TSB rated the occurrence a serious incident and opened an investigation. The airline confirmed the aircraft departed runway 19 and came to a stop on the green zone at the east side of the runway. All passengers disembarked without injuries. The cause of the occurrence is being investigated. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c70fecd&opt=0 Back to Top Accident: Asia Airways AN26 near Khartoum on Apr 22nd 2019, ran out of fuel An Asia Airways Antonov AN-26 freighter, registration EY-322 performing a positioning flight from Djibouti (Djibouti) to Khartoum (Sudan) with 5 crew, ran out of fuel about 40nm short of Khartoum Airport and was forced to land in open terrain. There were no injuries, the aircraft sustained substantial damage however. EY-322 seen after the forced landing: http://avherald.com/h?article=4c70e109&opt=0 Back to Top Upset incidents lead EASA to issue emergency AD on CitationJets with active winglets 23 April 2019 The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued an emergency airworthiness directive (2019-0086-E) in the wake of recent in-flight upset incidents involving Cessna CitationJets, modified to have Tamarack ATLAS winglets. The active load alleviation system (ATLAS), when operational, deflects the Tamarack active control surfaces (TACS) on the outboard wings. This system can aerodynamically "turn off" the winglet in specific conditions, thus dumping additional loads. Load alleviation enables a substantial increase in aspect ratio without the need for wing reinforcement and added weight, according to Tamarack. The modification is available for Cessna CitationJet models. Recently, occurrences have been reported in which ATLAS appears to have malfunctioned, causing upset events where, in some cases, the pilots had difficulty to recover the aircraft to safe flight. Investigation continues to determine the cause(s) for the reported events. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to loss of control of the aircraft, EASA states. The AD issued by EASA requires the Tamarack ATLAS to be deactivated and the TACS to be fixed in place. It also requires implementation of operational limitations and repetitive pre-flight inspections by amending the applicable flight manual. Within 100 flight hours, owners must contact the ATLAS-manufacturer for modification instructions. https://news.aviation-safety.net/2019/04/23/upset-incidents-lead-easa-to-issue-emergency-ad-on-citationjets-with-active-winglets/ Back to Top FAA demands replacement of AOA sensors on Cirrus SF50 jets following incidents 22 April 2019 On April 18 the FAA published an emergency airworthiness directive (2019-08-51), requiring replacement of the angle of attack (AOA) sensor with an improved model. This AD was prompted by Cirrus reporting three incidents of the stall warning and protection system (SWPS) or Electronic Stability & Protection (ESP) System engaging when not appropriate. The SWPS and ESP may engage even when sufficient airspeed and proper angle of attack (AOA) exists for normal flight. SWPS includes the stall warning alarm, stick shaker and stick pusher. ESP includes under speed protection (USP). The SWPS and ESP engaging could potentially result in a STALL WARNING crew alert (CAS) message activation, accompanied by an audio alarm and stick shaker activation, followed possibly by either low speed ESP/USP engaging and/or the stick pusher engaging. The pilot will also observe the dynamic and color-coded (Red) airspeed awareness ranges displaying the stall band, regardless of actual indicated airspeed. These conditions, if not addressed, could result in the flight crew having difficulty controlling the airplane, lead to excessive nose-down attitude, significant altitude loss, and possible impact with terrain. Cirrus and Aerosonic (manufacturer of the technical standard order AOA sensor) have identified the probable root cause as an AOA sensor malfunction due to a quality escape in the assembly of the AOA sensor at Aerosonic. Two set screws that secure the potentiometer shaft to the AOA vane shaft may have improper torqueing and no application of thread locker (Loctite) to secure the two set screws. Before further flight, AOA sensor must be replaced before further flight. Operators may fly the airplane to a location where the modification/corrective action can be incorporated using a special flight permit. https://news.aviation-safety.net/2019/04/22/faa-demands-replacement-of-aoa-sensors-on-cirrus-sf50-jets-following-incidents/ Back to Top Two Cathay pilots suffer vision impairment during flights In what Hong Kong's aviation incident authority classified as "serious incidents", two Cathay Pacific pilots suffered a loss of eyesight on two different flights a month apart. Their co-pilots, both first officers, had to take control and subsequently landed the aircraft safely, says Hong Kong's Air Accident Investigation Authority says in a media statement. It has classified both incidents as a "serious" case of "flight crew incapacitation". The two flights involved a Boeing 777-300 flying from Sapporo to Hong Kong on 26 January 2019, as well as an Airbus A350-900 returning to Hong Kong from Perth on 21 February. According to the authority's preliminary investigation report into the incident, the Airbus A350-900 was flying somewhere near Manila towards Hong Kong when the captain informed his first officer that he "felt out of breath and his vision was impaired". The first officer, who was not named in the report, then assumed command of the aircraft, while the crew sought medical assistance from a medical professional on board the aircraft, the report says. The aircraft was carrying 270 passengers and 13 crew members. In the January incident, the aircraft was flying west of Taiwan when the captain "experienced a sudden loss of visual acuity" for about 30 minutes, the report notes. The first officer took over command of the Boeing 777-300, which was carrying 348 passengers and 16 crew, after he was informed by the captain, and landed the aircraft safely at Hong Kong. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/two-cathay-pilots-suffer-vision-impairment-during-fl-457653/ Back to Top Orlando International Airport: Allow at Least 2 Hours for Screening ORLANDO, Fla. - Orlando International Airport on Tuesday urged travelers to allow for more time - at least two hours - to get through the ticketing and screening process. Orlando airport officials move up arrival time recommendation 25th firearm this year intercepted Tuesday by Orlando TSA agents The new recommended arrival time is effective immediately, the airport said. It said the Transportation Security Administration has implemented "enhanced" passenger security screening procedures at OIA, which is can slow down the screening process. It's also the spring break season, so volume at the airport is up. The enhanced procedures include taking anything larger than a cell phone out of your carry-on bag and placing it in a bin if you're not in TSA Precheck, TSA says. The agency added that a loaded gun was intercepted at OIA Tuesday morning, the 25th firearm found by Orlando TSA this year. On April 12, Orlando TSA agents found a loaded .45 Springfield handgun in a carry-on bag, according to TSA data. https://www.mynews13.com/fl/orlando/news/2019/04/23/orlando-international-airport-security-screening-time Back to Top What Your Airline Won't Tell You About Those Creepy Airport Face Scanners Last week, a Twitter conversation between an airline passenger and JetBlue went viral after she asked about the company's creepy facial recognition cameras. Mostly, the passenger seemed shocked to learn airlines were scanning customers' faces at all. "Instead of scanning my boarding pass or handing over my passport, I looked into a camera," wrote writer MacKenzie Fegan. "Did facial recognition replace boarding passes, unbeknownst to me? Did I consent to this?" Fegan had a lot of questions about the program, and JetBlue's official Twitter account didn't offer many answers. As alarming as airport face scanners may be, however, their rollout across the U.S. has hardly been secret. And there's a lot we can tell you about them that airlines' customer service agents never will. Facial scanners are already at more than a dozen U.S. airports The use of facial recognition in American airports has been spearheaded by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)-part of the Department of Homeland Security-which has been testing these systems as part of its "Biometric Exit" program since 2015. The initiative scans the faces of passengers taking international flights out of the U.S. and matches them to identity photos the CBP has on file. Earlier this month, Homeland Security said it plans to scan the faces of "over 97 percent" of departing international passengers by 2023. According to Buzzfeed, 17 U.S. airports are currently part of the program. "Since its inception, over two million passengers on over 15,000 flights have used the technology on exit," the agency boasted earlier this month. By the end of 2021, CBP has been given the goal of scanning the faces of passengers on 16,300 flights per week. Some major airlines are enthusiastic partners Both airports and airlines have been all too happy to participate in the scheme. JetBlue, Delta, Lufthansa, British Airways and, most recently, American Airlines have all tested CBP face scanners on their customers. These airlines emphasize that passengers can choose to opt out, but as Fegan's case illustrates, this option isn't always clear to customers. (Delta has said less than two percent of fliers at one terminal opted out of face recognition.) JetBlue and Delta have even gone one step further, giving passengers more opportunities to have their faces scanned. In November, Delta debuted what it called America's "first biometric terminal" in Atlanta, celebrating an (optional!) "end-to-end Delta Biometrics experience" that would use facial recognition for check-in, bag check, TSA identification, and boarding. And in December, JetBlue told Travel Weekly it planned to install two "self bag drop" machines in New York that would scan passengers' faces and check them against CBP data. We don't know how facial data collected by airlines is protected While CBP has said it will only keep facial exit scans for a maximum of 14 days, the rules for partner airlines are vaguer. Speaking to the New York Times last summer, a CBP official said that while he doubted airlines would want to keep fliers' biometric data, it "would really be up to them." More recently, CBP claimed in December that it has "developed business requirements which do not allow approved partners to retain the photos they collect." If so, these requirements do not appear to have been made public, and it's unclear when they were instituted. In a statement to Gizmodo, a CBP spokesperson said "only CBP has access to this biometric data" and "no personally identifiable information associated with biometrics" is ever shared with partner companies. For their part, JetBlue, Delta, and American Airlines have said that they don't retain facial scans and say they are sent directly to CBP for matching. In a 2017 report, Georgetown Law's Center on Privacy and Technology noted that by partnering with private companies, Homeland Security makes it easier for these companies to track travelers for their own business interests. "[D]espite the risk that airlines will use biometric exit data and technology for their own tracking purposes, [the agency] has not published any guidelines for or agreements with its private partners," wrote the authors. It's not clear why Homeland Security even needs to scan faces As its name suggests, the Biometric Exit program scans people leaving the country. How this makes us any safer is difficult to explain. The government seems to believe that knowing-100 percent, for sure-when people legally admitted to the U.S. have left is important enough to scan everyone's face. In a recent report, Homeland Security bragged that the program has biometrically confirmed "over 7,000" cases of people leaving the country after their visas expired-again, leaving. Out of 2 million passengers, that's a hit rate of about 0.0035 percent. Asked what the Biometric Exit program does that traditional verification can't, a CBP spokesperson told Gizmodo that facial scans help the agency secure the border, identify persons of interest, and improve statistical reporting. Additionally, the spokesperson said it was convenient for travelers. Facial recognition tech has repeatedly shown racial and gender bias Over and over again, facial recognition systems have been found to be less accurate when identifying women and people with dark complexions. Just last year, the ACLU found that Amazon's face-scanning system matched 39 percent of non-white U.S. representatives to mugshot photos. When it comes to CBP's face-scanning program, we don't even know how biased it may or may not be. Asked if the CBP's facial scans had a disparate impact on any demographic groups, a CBP spokesperson told Gizmodo the agency was "still looking further into this question." (A CBP official gave a similar answer in 2017.) Facial recognition isn't just coming to airports While airports might be the place where this creepy tech is being introduced the most rapidly, all kinds of industries are excited about the possibilities of facial recognition. Companies in the U.S. have tested out face-scanning kiosks designed to do everything from track fast food customers to secretly identify Taylor Swift stalkers. Just last month, Twitter users were disturbed by a facial recognition kiosk in a Chinese airport that appeared to be passively scanning passersby. The New York Times recently reported that police in that country are now specifically requesting systems that can identify faces belonging to members of the Uighur ethnic minority. If we don't demand tighter rules on face scanning, this type of surveillance won't be surprising anymore: It will just be normal. https://gizmodo.com/what-your-airline-wont-tell-you-about-those-creepy-airp-1834218228 Back to Top Boeing 737 MAX Raises Concerns Over How FAA Will Ensure The Safety Of Autonomous Aircraft Uber air taxi Jeff Holden, Uber's chief product officer. Uber envisions a fleet of electric-powered 'flying taxis.' They would be piloted at first, but to achieve scale, urban air taxis will need to be autonomous. After two deadly crashes of Boeing's 737 MAX believed to be linked to design flaws in a flight control system, policymakers and investigators are examining why the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration didn't spot the problems during the plane's certification. Some aerospace observers say it underlines a looming problem: that the agency may not be equipped to vet the safety of the much more complicated software that will enable the next generation of flight, including autonomous drones and pilotless urban air taxis. "We need to have an oversight agency that has modernized in a way that allows them to engage deeply with these technical experts at the companies asking for certification," says Ella Atkins, an aerospace engineering professor at the University of Michigan whose research is focused on autonomous systems. Boeing has halted deliveries of the 737 MAX after the March 10 crash of a model of the plane operated by Ethiopian Airlines, the second crash of a 737 MAX in five months. CEO Dennis Muilenburg has acknowledged that a new flight control feature on the new version of its bestselling plane called the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS) contributed to the crashes, which killed 346 people. The Chicago-based jet maker will give its next briefing on its business during its quarterly earnings report Wednesday. Analysts are expecting a drop in adjusted profit. The FAA is also under scrutiny, both for lagging other countries' aviation regulators in grounding the 737 MAX after the Ethiopia crash, and for its certification of MCAS. Congress, an international panel of aviation authorities, the Department of Transportation's inspector general and federal prosecutors are all examining MCAS, which that was designed to automatically push the MAX's nose down during certain maneuvers to counter the plane's tendency to pitch upward due to the placement of its new larger engines. MCAS was classified as not critical to safety, allowing it to be triggered by a single, non-redundant sensor. The FAA and Boeing assumed that if MCAS malfunctioned, pilots would recognize it as a problem with the plane's automatic stabilizer trim system, which was on the previous version of the 737, and switch it off using previously established procedures. But according to preliminary reports from the investigations into the Ethiopian crash and the prior accident, the loss of a Lion Air jet off Indonesia on Oct. 29, sensor failures in both cases improperly triggered MCAS, and the pilots were unable to counteract it, leading to fatal dives. Despite the 737 MAX crashes, many observers say the current safety certification process for aircraft software has generally worked well. Safety critical programming rarely fails to operate as designed; rather what problems there have been have tended to stem from failures to foresee danger points in the design specifications, including the unexpected ways that pilots can interact with the system, as seems to be the case with MCAS. "It's very hard to analyze mixed human-automation systems, in part because humans don't behave in a reliable way," says R. John Hansman, a professor of aeronautics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Software problems appear to have contributed to only a handful of air accidents (including one case involving an Airbus A330 that bears some similarities to the two Boeing 737 MAX crashes). Safety has been aided by the slow pace of change in aviation - new generations of airliners tend to be spaced out by 10 to 20 years - and plane makers' tendency to reduce costs by reusing already certified code rather than completely rewriting software. Even the flight controls of Boeing's most advanced airliner, the 787, incorporates programming developed for much older planes, says Hansman. With a limited budget and staff, the FAA has for decades relied on industry to shoulder most of the burden of certifying the safety of aircraft. As of 2013, more than 90% of the work was being done by deputized consultants and employees at the manufacturers it oversees, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office. With software, the certification process is focused on spelling out what the programming is needed to do and ensuring that the code matches up to those requirements. Designated representatives of the FAA will guide the development of a testing scheme by the developer and audit some of those tests, but FAA itself doesn't execute any of the code. Daniel Elwell, the FAA's acting administrator, told a congressional panel after the Ethiopian crash that it would require roughly 10,000 more employees and another $1.8 billion for the agency to do the certification job by itself. Nonetheless, experts warn that the agency will need a more sophisticated approach to assess the algorithms being developed to direct autonomous drones and urban air taxis. With current flight control systems, "you just verify that given certain inputs you get an expected output," says Mykel Kochenderfer, an aerospace professor at Stanford who's the co-director of the university's Center for AI Safety and the director of the SAIL-Toyota Center for AI Research. The software controlling autonomous cars and aircraft will have to be capable of learning from experience and reacting to situations the designers couldn't anticipate, and its decisions may be hard to interpret. "When our autonomous system is doing something counterintuitive, is it doing something wrong or right? Sometimes the explanation for that behavior is very complicated," says Kochenderfer. Companies developing urban air taxis like Boeing's Aurora Flight Sciences, Textron unit Bell Helicopter and billionaire Larry Page's Kitty Hawk are in a dialogue with the FAA to establish a roadmap for bringing their vehicles to market. The University of Michigan's Atkins says that a vast talent gap between the companies and FAA in computer science slants that conversation toward industry. She says that it's critical for the agency to hire more computer science experts and develop the ability to independently validate and verify code. An FAA R&D and engineering advisory committee chaired by Hansman has warned repeatedly over the years that the agency needs more expertise in software, among other technical areas. However, the agency faces a tall task in competing for computer science graduates with Silicon Valley and the urban air mobility startups that offer the excitement of building new things and the possibility of striking it rich. The FAA said officials were unavailable for an interview. A spokesman told Forbes by email that the agency has significant capabilities in computational and automation systems, and that it will take incremental steps toward introducing autonomous aircraft. Experts say they're confident that the technical issues are solvable to make autonomous systems safe, but whether it can be done affordably is another question. The FAA requires redundancy of safety critical sensors and systems on passenger aircraft - for example, airliners typically have three independent flight guidance computers. Those back-up systems mean higher costs and higher weights, which could reduce payloads. Given the small size of most autonomous air taxi concepts, that could blow up the business case. "I'm skeptical we can provide the same level of integrity in a small autonomous vehicle at a price point we can afford," says Hansman. Continued progress in shrinking the size of electronics will be necessary - Honeywell, for example, has developed radar sensors for drones that are the size of a paperback book. And researchers are developing ways to substitute physics-based models for redundant sensors. But much work remains to be done, and the spotlight that the 737 MAX crashes have put on flight controls and the fact that components can fail with catastrophic consequences serves as a sobering reminder of the stakes. "It's fun to talk about Amazon package delivery and urban air mobility through Uber," says Peter Seiler, an aerospace professor at the University of Minnesota. "But you can't just anticipate that you've gotten on airplanes all your life and it's rare for these things to fail and that's all going to be fine. There are technical issues that have to be worked out to maintain that track record of safety and reliability." https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremybogaisky/2019/04/24/boeing-737-max-faa-autonomous-aircraft/#23bc472c3769 Back to Top Best and worst airlines for Wi-Fi You're boarding a plane to attend an important meeting, when you suddenly realize you forgot to include a graph critical to the report your going to present. You keep your fingers crossed that you'll have access to Wi-Fi during the flight. Whether you do or don't depends on which airline you're using. Also, having Wi-Fi is one thing, but having quality Wi-Fi on a plane is entirely different. Cost also is a consideration, especially if you're on a plane with a slow or patchy connection. If Wi-Fi access is important to you, make sure to check your airline's capabilities and cost. In-flight Wi-Fi providers There are two major companies that provide the technology that makes Wi-Fi internet on commercial airlines possible: GoGo and ViaSat. GoGo has 51% of the market share in North America and contracts with 17 commercial airlines. ViaSat covers military and commercial markets. Last year, it appeared that ViaSat was going to make a dent in GoGo's market share after winning a contract to equip Wi-Fi access to American Airlines' new fleet of Boeing 737 MAX. However, in May the planes were grounded worldwide due to safety issues. The 3 best airlines for quality Wi-Fi Boeing's problems notwithstanding, these are what reviewers say are the top three airlines for Wi-Fi access, based on in-flight Wi-Fi internet access, the number of miles the connection covers, price, payment options and customer reviews. JetBlue Topping the list is JetBlue, which this year became the first airline to offer free Wi-Fi on all flights. The company calls the free service Fly-Fi, and passengers have access to it from the second they get on the plane until the aircraft lands. In addition, JetBlue has partnered with Amazon to allow passengers to stream music or movies or buy products on the site. In exchange, JetBlue gives passengers three TrueBlue points for every dollar spent on Amazon. The points can be redeemed for JetBlue flights or donated to charitable causes. There's only one downside -- and considering everything else it offers it's a minor one -- JetBlue's FlyFi service is available only in the lower 48 states. Virgin America Virgin America followed JetBlue and has wireless internet access on all of its flights. Their A320 aircraft use ViaSat, while the rest of their fleet uses GoGo. Unlike JetBlue, Virgin America charges for in-flight Wi-Fi. The price can range from $5 to $40 depending on usage. It's also worth noting that on some flights the internet service isn't available for the entire duration of the flight. Delta Air Lines Delta Air Lines uses GoGo's 2Ku satellite-based system for speeds of about 100 Mbps per plane. In theory, more than 30 people could simultaneously be watching Netflix and no one would experience any slowdowns. As with Virgin America, you have to pay for Delta's Wi-Fi access. Passengers have to buy a Delta Wi-Fi Pass. About $20 gets you an hour of service on a laptop or tablet. For around $40 you have access for throughout the duration of the flight. Delta's in-flight Wi-Fi portal is free, but likely isn't high speed or lasts many miles. Southwest Southwest's Wi-Fi is $8 a day per device (so, unlike GoGo, you can't buy access and use it across devices). If you're an A-List Preferred member, you get it free. Reviewers give Southwest pretty high marks for speed and reliability. Worst airlines for Wi-Fi? So who gets the prize for the worst airline for in-flight Wi-Fi access? American Airlines. True, American was GoGo's first customer, but the company hasn't done much with its access. The carrier uses outdated ATG-4 technology that delivers only 9.8 Mbps per plane. Despite that, the company charges about $50 plus tax for a monthly subscription. For an all-day pass you pay $16 plus tax. American Airline's isn't alone. United Airlines' CEO told an ABCNews interviewer that the airline has had a hard time finding a reliable in-flight Wi-Fi provider. Apparently, they use several providers, which could be why their connections are hit and miss. CEO Oscar Munoz says Wi-Fi is very important to its customers, and the company is working to find a better solution. Pro tip: If you pay for in-flight Wi-Fi and you aren't able to use it, save your receipt. The provider should be able to check your receipt, see that you didn't use any of your time, and they may give you a credit for the next time you fly (it worked when we tried it with American Airlines and GoGo Inflight). https://www.komando.com/happening-now/563194/best-and-worst-airlines-for-wi-fi Back to Top FAA Certifies Google's Wing Drone Delivery Company To Operate As An Airline The Wing company, a Google spinoff, has won federal approval to operate its drone delivery system as an airline in the U.S. The Federal Aviation Administration has certified Alphabet's Wing Aviation to operate as an airline, in a first for U.S. drone delivery companies. Wing, which began as a Google X project, has been testing its autonomous drones in southwest Virginia and elsewhere. "Air Carrier Certification means that we can begin a commercial service delivering goods from local businesses to homes in the United States," Wing said in a statement posted to the Medium website. The company has touted many advantages of using unmanned drones to deliver packages, from reducing carbon emissions and road congestion to increasing connections between communities and local businesses. "This is an important step forward for the safe testing and integration of drones into our economy. Safety continues to be our Number One priority as this technology continues to develop and realize its full potential," Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao said in a statement from the agency. In a statement to NPR, the FAA says Wing was able to qualify for an air carrier certificate because it has shown "its operations met the FAA's rigorous safety requirements." Wing's electric drones are powered by 14 propellers, nearly all of which are top-mounted to help carry loads of up to 1.5 kilograms (3.3 pounds). They're meant to deliver a wide range of everyday items, from food and drinks to medicine and emergency supplies. By developing delivery drones - and a retail system that would connect customers with local merchants - Google's parent company is directly competing with Amazon, which has been readying its own unmanned delivery system, called Prime Air. As early as 2013, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos predicted that the online retail giant's "octocopter" drones would start buzzing out of fulfillment centers in the coming years. At the time, Bezos said his company's drones would be built to carry around 5 pounds - a weight limit that would allow about 85 percent of the products sold by Amazon to be delivered by drone. But Bezos also said it would take time to develop a safe and reliable drone system - and to get federal approvals. It wasn't until late 2016 that Amazon announced its first fully autonomous Prime Air delivery. Since then, like Google, it's been testing its delivery drones. The use of unmanned aircraft in the U.S. has been growing by leaps and bounds. At the end of 2018, The Associated Press reported that "110,000 commercial drones are operating in U.S. airspace," citing government figures that also projected the number would more than quadruple in 2022. Wing has been testing its drone delivery systems from an FAA-approved test area at Virginia Tech since the autumn of 2016. With its new air carrier certification in hand, the company says it hopes to expand deliveries in southwest Virginia, recruiting businesses and potential customers in the Blacksburg and Christiansburg areas who want to try out the delivery system. That expansion is planned for later this year. In the meantime, Wing "will begin its first trial in Europe in the spring, delivering to homes in Helsinki, Finland," a company representative said in an email to NPR. Some of the earliest Wing drone tests took place in Canberra, Australia, in 2014. Since then, the company says, its drones have flown more than 70,000 test flights and delivered thousands of packages there. Earlier this month, Wing officially launched its commercial delivery service in northern Canberra after gaining regulatory approval. Its initial partners in that venture range from local coffee, bakery and gelato shops to chocolate makers and a taqueria. In addition to Google and Amazon, delivery companies such as United Parcel Service and DHL Express also have been developing their own drone systems. And like many human endeavors that rely on technology, a main hurdle has been a relatively simple constraint: battery life. "If you have to recharge them every other hour, then you need so many drones, and you have to orchestrate that. So good luck with that," Frank Appel, the CEO of DHL parent Deutsche Post AG, told the AP last December. https://www.npr.org/2019/04/23/716360818/faa-certifies-googles-wing-drone-delivery-company-to-operate-as-an-airline Back to Top Navy's pilot shortage may be shored up by 2023, but then the real challenge begins It will take the Navy at least four or five years until it can recapitalize its inventory of pilots, but by then the talent pool may be unpredictable. A recent report, which provides one of the most comprehensive pictures of the military-wide pilot shortage, shows the root of the Navy's pilot problem is similar to the one the Air Force is facing. Both services are losing the retention battle with experienced pilots. A Defense Department report sent to Congress outlines a short fall of 1,242 aviator billets in the Navy - that includes pilots and navigators - in 2018. The service is experiencing higher than average pilot loss rates, especially in the mid and senior officer levels. In 2018, the Navy lost 611 pilots. That is 131% higher than the 10-year average of 465. The Navy's pilot inventory is about 7,000 pilots and combined pilot/flight officers (NFOs). Flight officers specialize in weaponry. "The most adverse retention trends are being driven by the tactical air support community, accounting for 37% of naval aviation or about 3,723 pilots," the report states. "The Navy produces approximately 167 pilots and 88 NFOs for these communities annually, with three years required to train new pilots. Therefore, any delays in flight training further challenge the Navy's ability to replenish strike fighter and electronic attack pilot manning." The shortage was caused by under-accessions from 2005 to 2012 and under-production in the undergraduate training commands and Graduate Fleet Replacement squadron. Another reason is senior pilots are leaving the Navy for commercial airlines - a problem the Air Force is also facing. "While mid-level officer retention represents our greatest challenge, resignations have also increased among junior and senior aviators due, in part, to intense competition from private industry," Chief of Naval Personnel Vice Adm. Robert Burke told Congress in 2017. Navy captain "losses have steadily increased since 2009, further diminishing essential talent and expertise." The Navy thinks it can slow the bleeding in five years by fully funding and staffing its training pipeline. The pipeline can hold 1,100 potential pilots at at time while it's at its peak - that means 1,100 will graduate in three years. It will have full funding in 2019 for the first time in several years due to extra readiness funding. The reason for the delay is it will take time to get the new pilots the experience and qualifications they need and older pilots will be dropping off in the meantime. "Similar to the Air Force, significantly expanding the number of aviators produced annually today, without a concurrent increase in the fleet billet base, would result in overfilled billets in fleet squadrons," the report stated. "With no extra billets to send the excess officers to and no increase in the resources to give them training in the fleet, the effect would be to exacerbate experience and retention problems." Basically, the Navy would have too many inexperienced pilots and nowhere to put them. Meanwhile, as the pipeline is filling up, experience pilots are flying extra duty and staying away from their families to make up for the shortfall. That's causing more pilots to burnout and leave because of quality of life issues. "Fleet feedback indicates aviators want more career path flexibility and opportunities for personal and professional development," the report states. Navy leadership is heavily engaged in using things like the career intermission program and creative personnel distribution to mitigate operational tempo issues, but it is too early to measure the effects. The year 2023 If the pilot training pipeline stays strong, the Navy should be caught up by 2023. But that's exactly when new problems arise. The military isn't the only place in need of pilots. The private sector is also pining for aviators and the peak of the shortage is supposed to hit in 2023 and stay that way for a few years. The Navy will have to contend with the demand from other areas, while also worrying about its instructors. The current shortage in pilots will lead to a short fall in instructors around the 2021 to 2023 timeframe. The Navy is already working on a plan to address the pending instructor gap. They include: "expanded use of the reserve component instructor pilots, reintroduction of the Selective Retained Graduate Program and creating and alternate career path under the Professional Flight Instructor Program." The instructor program gives senior aviators more career flexibility to stay out of command positions and keep flying and instructing. The retained graduate program turns pilots into instructors after their first tour as aviators. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/navy/2019/04/navys-pilot-shortage-may-be-shored-up-by-2023-but-then-the-real-challenge-begins/ 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. Curt Lewis