Flight Safety Information May 15, 2019 - No. 098 In This Issue Before Ethiopian Crash, Boeing Resisted Pilots' Calls for Aggressive Steps on 737 Max Incident: Eurowings A332 at Dusseldorf on May 5th 2019, flaps up landing Incident: Lufthansa A346 at Shanghai on May 13th 2019, could not retract gear Incident: Norwegian B788 over Labrador Sea on May 13th 2019, engine issues Incident: UTAir B738 at Moscow on May 14th 2019, could not fully retract gear Training jet crash injures two U.S. FAA Downgrades Costa Rica's Air Safety Rating Taquan Air safety record shows air tour danger in Southeast Alaska JetBlue operations delayed as 'global' computer outage briefly cripples airline, again F.A.A. Chief to Face Boeing Questions at House Hearing Western Michigan University to Expand College of Aviation Campus Aircraft fuel is notoriously dirty. This airline is betting on clean electricity Boeing Jet Sales Have Tanked in the Wake of 737 Max Crashes SpaceX kicks off its space-based internet service tomorrow with 60-satellite Starlink launch POSITION AVAILABLE:...AVIATION ADVISOR ISASI - DFW Regional Chapter Meeting GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY Before Ethiopian Crash, Boeing Resisted Pilots' Calls for Aggressive Steps on 737 Max An American Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 in Miami. The airline's pilots union asked Boeing in November to take an emergency measure that would likely ground the Max. Company executives pushed back. Weeks after the first fatal crash of the 737 Max, pilots from American Airlines pressed Boeing executives to work urgently on a fix. In a closed-door meeting, they even argued that Boeing should push authorities to take an emergency measure that would likely result in the grounding of the Max. The Boeing executives resisted. They didn't want to rush out a fix, and said they expected pilots to be able to handle problems. Mike Sinnett, a vice president at Boeing, acknowledged that the manufacturer was assessing potential design flaws with the plane, including new anti-stall software. But he balked at taking a more aggressive approach, saying it was not yet clear that the new system was to blame for the Lion Air crash, which killed 189 people. "No one has yet to conclude that the sole cause of this was this function on the airplane," Mr. Sinnett said, according to a recording of the Nov. 27 meeting reviewed by The New York Times. Less than four months later, an Ethiopian Airlines flight crashed, killing all 157 people on board. The flawed anti-stall system played a role in both disasters. Boeing is facing intense scrutiny for the design and certification of the Max, as well as for its response to the two crashes. There are multiple investigations into the development of the Max. And in recent days, unions representing pilots from American Airlines and Southwest Airlines have received federal grand jury subpoenas for any documents related to Boeing's communications about the jet, according to three people with knowledge of the matter. The Federal Aviation Administration is also under fire for its role in approving the Max, and its decision to wait for days after the second crash to ground the plane. At a Wednesday congressional hearing, lawmakers will grill federal regulators about how the Max was certified. Boeing declined to comment on the November meeting. "We are focused on working with pilots, airlines and global regulators to certify the updates on the Max and provide additional training and education to safely return the planes to flight," the company said in a statement. American Airlines said in a statement that it was "confident that the impending software updates, along with the new training elements Boeing is developing for the Max, will lead to recertification of the aircraft soon." Mike Sinnett, a Boeing vice president, balked at taking a more aggressive approach to issues with the 737 Max during a meeting with American Airlines pilots in November. The hourlong November meeting, inside a windowless conference room at the Fort Worth headquarters of the American Airlines pilots' union, was confrontational at times. At the table was Mr. Sinnett, along with Craig Bomben, a top Boeing test pilot, and one of the company's senior lobbyists, John Moloney. They faced several union leaders, many of them angry at the company. Michael Michaelis, an American pilot, argued that Boeing should push the F.A.A. to issue what is known as an emergency airworthiness directive. The F.A.A. had already issued one directive after the Lion Air crash, instructing airlines to revise their flight manuals to include information on how to respond to a malfunction of the anti-stall system known as MCAS. But Mr. Michaelis pushed Boeing to consider calling for an additional one to update the software. Such a procedure would have required Boeing and airlines in the United States to take immediate action to ensure the safety of the Max, and would have likely taken the jet out of service temporarily. "My question to you, as Boeing, is why wouldn't you say this is the smartest thing to do?" Mr. Michaelis said. "Say we're going to do everything we can to protect that traveling public in accordance with what our pilots unions are telling us." Mr. Sinnett didn't budge, saying that it remained unclear that the new software, which automatically pushes the plane's nose down, was responsible for the Lion Air crash. He added that he felt confident that pilots had adequate training to deal with a problem, especially now that pilots - who were not initially informed about the new system - were aware of it. "You've got to understand that our commitment to safety is as great as yours," Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. "The worst thing that can ever happen is a tragedy like this, and the even worse thing would be another one." The pilots expressed frustration that Boeing did not inform them about the new software on the plane until after the Lion Air crash. "These guys didn't even know the damn system was on the airplane, nor did anybody else," said Mr. Michaelis, the union's head of safety. Another American pilot, Todd Wissing, expressed frustration that no mention of the system had been included in the training manual for the 737 Max. At the meeting, Boeing executives acknowledged they were looking into potential flaws in the design of the jet. "I would think that there would be a priority of putting explanations of things that could kill you," Mr. Wissing said. The Boeing executives, Mr. Sinnett and Mr. Bomben, explained that the company did not believe that pilots needed to know about the software, because they were already trained to deal with scenarios like the one on the doomed Lion Air flight. All pilots are expected to know how to take control of an aircraft when the plane's tail begins moving in an uncontrolled way because of a malfunction, nudging the aircraft toward the ground. "The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained," Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: "Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that's how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together." When the pilots pressed Boeing to consider encouraging the F.A.A. to issue an emergency airworthiness directive, Mr. Sinnett made the case against moving too quickly. "We don't want to rush and do a crappy job of fixing the right things and we also don't want to fix the wrong things," Mr. Sinnett said, later adding, "For flight-critical software, I don't think you want us to rush, rush it faster." Mr. Sinnett acknowledged that the company was looking into potential mistakes in the design of the jet. "One of the questions will be, is our design assumption wrong?" Mr. Sinnett said. "We're going through that whole thought process of, were our assumptions really even valid when we did this?" But he remained steadfast that pilots should know how to handle a malfunction of the new software on the plane, given their existing training. As the meeting was concluding, Dennis Tajer, spokesman for the union, asked the Boeing executives whether they were still confident in the Max. "Do you feel comfortable that the situation is under control today, before any software fix is implemented?" he asked. Mr. Sinnett replied immediately: "Absolutely." https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/business/boeing-737-max-ethiopian-plane- crash.html Back to Top Incident: Eurowings A332 at Dusseldorf on May 5th 2019, flaps up landing An Eurowings Airbus A330-200, registration D-AXGD performing flight EW-1141 from Punta Cana (Dominican Republic) to Dusseldorf (Germany), was on final approach to Dusseldorf's runway 05R when the crew went around due to a trailing edge flaps problem. The aircraft climbed to 4000 feet, the crew worked the related checklists and prepared for trailing edge flaps up, slats down landing. The aircraft landed safely on runway 05R at a higher than normal speed (about 170 knots over ground) about 25 minutes after the go around. The aircraft returned to service 54 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c7f52f6&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Lufthansa A346 at Shanghai on May 13th 2019, could not retract gear A Lufthansa Airbus A340-600, registration D-AIHH performing flight LH-727 from Shanghai Pudong (China) to Munich (Germany), was climbing out of Pudong's runway 17L when the crew stopped the climb at 2700 meters (about 8900 feet) due to being unable to retract the landing gear. The aircraft subsequently climbed to 3000 meters (about 10,000 feet) to dump fuel and returned to Shanghai for a safe landing on runway 16R about 100 minutes after departure. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Shanghai 27 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c7f4cdb&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Norwegian B788 over Labrador Sea on May 13th 2019, engine issues A Norwegian Long Haul Boeing 787-8, registration LN-LNB performing flight DY-7055 from Copenhagen (Denmark) to Orlando,FL (USA), was enroute at FL380 over the Labrador Sea about 440nm northeast of Goose Bay,NL (Canada) when the crew drifted the aircraft down to FL250 due to a problem with the left hand engine (Trent 1000), the crew however did not request priority and did not declare emergency (indicating that both engines continued to operate). The aircraft landed safely in Goose Bay about 75 minutes after leaving FL380. The airline reported a mechancial problem prompted the diversion to Goose Bay. A replacement Boeing 787-9 registration G-CKWE was dispatched from London Gatwick,EN to Goose Bay and is currently enroute at flight DY-7950 from Goose Bay to Orlando, where it is estimated to arrive with a delay of 12 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Goose Bay about 24 hours after landing. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/NAX7055/history/20190513/1505Z/EKCH/KMCO http://avherald.com/h?article=4c7f4b2d&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: UTAir B738 at Moscow on May 14th 2019, could not fully retract gear A UTAir Boeing 737-800, registration VQ-BJH performing flight UT-787 from Moscow Vnukovo (Russia) to Milan Malpensa (Italy) with 109 people on board, climbed out of Vnukovo's runway 06 when the crew stopped the climb at 6000 feet due to a gear disagree indication after selecting the gear up. The aircraft entered a hold to burn off fuel and returned to Vnukovo Airport. The crew was able to safely extend the gear resulting in all gear down and locked and landed safely on runway 06 about 1:45 hours after departure. A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration VQ-BQP reached Milan with a delay of about 7 hours. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c7f47fa&opt=0 Back to Top Training jet crash injures two A Navy flight instructor and a student sustained minor injuries Friday when their T-45 Goshawk jet crashed at Naval Air Station Kingsville, Texas. (Richard Stewart/Navy) Two military personnel suffered minor injuries in a T-45C Goshawk aircraft crash Friday, officials announced. The Navy instructor and a student were taken to a local hospital after the crash, which took place just after 2:30 p.m. at Naval Air Station Kingsville, Texas. "The pilots safely ejected from the aircraft just before it crashed just short of the runway inside the airfield perimeter fence," the release states. No other details were immediately available and the incident remains under investigation. It was characterized as a so-called "Class A" mishap by the Naval Safety Center, a designation that involves at least $2 million in damage. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2019/05/14/training-jet-crash-injures- two/ Back to Top U.S. FAA Downgrades Costa Rica's Air Safety Rating The Costa Rican airlines Volaris and Avianca Costa Rica will suffer the most direct repercussions; international airlines are NOT affected The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said on Tuesday it had found Costa Rica did not implement, within a reasonable time, provisions of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in the last 9 years and reduced its rating to Category 2. Guillermo Hoppe, Director of Civil Aviation and Rodolfo Méndez, Minister of Public Works. Photo: Albert Marín: The new rating means Costa Rica's carriers, Volaris and Avianca Costa Rica*, can continue existing service to the United States but will not be allowed to establish new service to U.S. destinations. The downgrading from Category 1 to Category 2 means Costa Rica either lacks the laws or regulations necessary to oversee air carriers in accordance with minimum international standards, or the Direccion General de Aviacion Civil (DGAC) - Civil Aviation - is deficient. The FAA did not elaborate. Costa Rica was assigned a Category 1 rating in 1996. The FAA conducted an in-country reassessment of Costa Rica in October 2018 and had met with DGAC officials in February to discuss the results. The Minister of Public Works and Transportation, Rodolfo Méndez Mata, did comment on the downgrade, saying "We do not know if that transcendent aspect is weighing for the resolution that they have issued by virtue of the strong implication that it has (...) It is one of the most important findings that they have claimed where they imply a slowness in the attention procedure timely application of that rule". However, there are at least 22 findings and there is a report that, according to Civil Aviation and the MOPT, they do not know. The Minister only explained that the indications are related to backwardness in regulations related to the licenses that are granted to aeronautical personnel, with aircraft operations and airworthiness. "The main issue that emerged is the delay in implementing amendments that come out of ICAO, at the macro level is what the minister mentioned; for years, no follow-up was given to these amendments," confirmed Guillermo Hoppe, Director of the DGAC. Hoppe, however, insisted that they do not know the details of the study. According to the DGAC director, on Monday, representatives of the US embassy in San Jose informed him of the downgrade. Months ago, he said, the atmosphere was very positive. For now, he said, it is up to Civil Aviation to continue working. "We will continue to monitor all operators and aircraft that enter Costa Rican skies. We take care of regulating, of certifying and after that, giving due vigilance to all the operators at a national level," Hoppe said. Hoppe expressed that it is "complex to be able to correct deficiencies of the last 9 to 10 years in a matter of a few months. The idea is to implement them so that the operators apply them," acknowledged Hoppe. Not About The Air Accidents Hoppe denied that the downgrade has any relation with air accidents, specifically with the tragedy of December 31, 2017, when a small plane with 10 Americans and two Costa Rican crew crashed in Corozalito de Nandayure, Guanacaste. All died. The aircraft was operated by Nature Air, a company that at that time was facing economic problems and operations difficulties. In fact, months later, the shutdown operations. Downgrade Believed Not To Affect Tourism Rodolfo Méndez affirmed that the downgrade will activate a joint work with the FAA to recover the qualification. "We are to understand that this will not affect the tourist arrivals, it (the downgrade) has a unique effect on Costa Rican airlines licensed for flights to the U.S.", explained Méndez. Méndez stressed that it does not affect international airlines with flights to and from Costa Rica and that the audit that resulted in the downgrade has nothing to do with airport security either. The minister said that international airlines are not affected. "The foreign flag airlines that arrive and operate in Costa Rica have their normal operation and can increase the frequency of their flights if they want," said the director of the DGAC. https://qcostarica.com/u-s-faa-downgrades-costa-ricas-air-safety-rating/ Back to Top Taquan Air safety record shows air tour danger in Southeast Alaska Taquan Air was operating one of the two floatplanes that collided midair near Ketchikan Monday, leaving at least four people dead. A search of a National Transportation Safety Board database found that Taquan Air has been involved in five other aircraft accidents in Alaska since 1992, two of which were fatal. A 2015 LA Times article reported that, in the last 30 years, 697 floatplane accidents have killed 258 people across Alaska. In August 2010, former Sen. Ted Stevens died when a de Havilland Otter carrying him and others to a fishing trip crashed near Dillingham. The most recent crash involving Taquan Air, prior to Monday's collision, happened on July 10, 2018 about 9 miles west of Hydaburg. An Otter operated by Taquan was carrying 10 passengers and a pilot. The pilot told NTSB investigators that visibility decreased rapidly and he became disoriented when he tried to turn around, then crashed into snow-covered mountains. While six passengers had serious injuries, everyone on board survived. A Taquan flight was also involved in a non-fatal accident in Ketchikan 2012. The de Havilland Beaver tipped to the side when the pilot attempted to step taxi before takeoff. The plane's wing was damaged, but none of the six people on board were injured. On July 24, 2007 a pilot and four passengers were killed on a Taquan flight about 40 miles northeast of Ketchikan. The Otter aircraft encountered a wall of weather and mountainous terrain. An investigation found the primary cause of the crash was pilot misjudgment. Continuing poor weather kept the NTSB and Federal Aviation Administration from reaching the accident site for three days. This crash brought up concerns that the FAA's supervision of the flight tour industry in Southeast Alaska was inadequate. A year later, after an investigation, the NTSB issued four recommendations to the FAA: * Install and maintain weather cameras at critical areas of tour routes. * Establish monthly ground and en route inspections of air tour flights to observe and enforce safe-flying practices. * Provide training for commercial air tour pilots in responding to changing local weather conditions. * Require pilots to take the training. An NTSB report from 1996 reports says a Taquan pilot and one passenger aboard a Beaver encountered gusty conditions and crashed into water about 18 miles southwest of Ketchikan. The passenger was able to escape uninjured, but the pilot's body was recovered inside the plane. A 1992 NTSB report describes a Taquan Air accident in Metlakatla where an Otter aircraft started vibrating on landing, but the pilot and sole person on board, was not hurt. In a statement after Monday's collision, Taquan Air stated, "There are no words other than we are heartbroken over this loss. We are focused now on extending our full support to our passengers and their families, along with first responders and other agencies involved." All Taquan scheduled flights are currently suspended and the company is working with the NTSB, FAA and other authorities to examine the incident. https://www.ktva.com/story/40475131/taquan-air-safety-record-shows-air-tour- danger-in-southeast-alaska Back to Top JetBlue operations delayed as 'global' computer outage briefly cripples airline, again Another month, another computer outage snarling morning travel. JetBlue reported Tuesday morning that operations had been slowed by what it called a "global Sabre outage impacting multiple airlines." By 5:22 a.m. EDT, the airline tweeted that its systems were recovering but that customers might experience longer-than- average waits at some airports as it worked to catch up. It was the third such outage in two months for Sabre, the backbone of many airlines' reservations systems and other critical tech functions. Without its systems, airlines are unable to check in passengers or issue boarding passes, nor can customers check themselves in at self-serve kiosks. JetBlue confirmed its systems were affected by the Sabre outage early Tuesday morning. (Photo: JetBlue) In a statement, Sabre spokesperson Jess Mathias told USA TODAY that the problem was due to an internal failure with one of Sabre's network suppliers: "This impacted a subset of our customers who communicate with our systems via CenturyLink's network. The issue has now been fully resolved, and airlines are returning to normal operations. We apologize for any inconvenience." Matthias would not say how long the latest outage lasted or which airlines were affected. When Sabre's system went down on March 26 and April 29, American and Alaska were also affected. However, American and Alaska told USA TODAY they were not impacted Tuesday. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2019/05/14/jetblue-computer-outage- hinders-operations-again-sabre-reservations/3664100002/ Back to Top F.A.A. Chief to Face Boeing Questions at House Hearing Daniel Elwell, left, the acting head of the Federal Aviation Administration, and Robert L. Sumwalt, chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, at a Senate hearing in March. Both will appear before a House committee on Wednesday. The acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration will face questions from members of the House Transportation Committee on Wednesday about the regulator's role in approving Boeing's now-grounded 737 Max airplane to fly. It will be the first in a series of hearings that House Democrats plan to hold on the troubled jet, which was grounded in March after an Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max crashed shortly after takeoff from Addis Ababa, killing all 157 people on board. Less than five months earlier, a Lion Air 737 Max flight went down in Indonesia, killing 189 people. A flawed anti-stall system known as MCAS, which was new to the Max, played a role in both disasters. Daniel Elwell, the F.A.A.'s acting administrator, will appear alongside the chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, Robert L. Sumwalt. Also on Wednesday, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will question Stephen Dickson, the former Delta Air Lines executive whom President Trump has tapped to permanently lead the F.A.A., about the plane. Representative Rick Larsen, a Democrat from Washington who heads the Transportation Committee's Subcommittee on Aviation, said he would press Mr. Elwell on the agency's designee authorization process, a decades-old program that relies on employees at aircraft manufacturers to assist in certification. He also plans to question Mr. Elwell about the F.A.A.'s role in the development of pilot training procedures for the 737 Max, which did not include explicit mention of the MCAS system. "The committee's investigation is just getting started, and it will take some time to get answers, but one thing is clear right now: The F.A.A. has a credibility problem," Mr. Larsen said in statement on Tuesday. "Congress has an obligation to the traveling public and the victims of these accidents and their families to ensure the safety of air travel." Over the past two months, the committee's chairman, Representative Peter A. DeFazio, an Oregon Democrat, has requested a trove of documents from the F.A.A. and Boeing regarding the inspection process and the review undertaken to determine the safety of MCAS. He is especially focused on why Boeing did not require pilots to undergo further training with the anti-stall system. Boeing 737 Max airplanes at the Boeing Factory in Renton, Wash. "The committee's investigation is just getting started," said Representative Rick Larsen, a Democrat on the House Transportation Committee. Mr. DeFazio has received none of the requested documents, although the F.A.A. is expected to begin releasing documents to the committee soon. It is not clear when Boeing intends to reply. Senator Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, also sent a request to Boeing for answers on its procedures. He has received a two-page later referring to Mr. Elwell's previous public statements but providing little new information. Mr. Markey has invited Michael Stumo, the father Samya Stumo, 24, a Massachusetts resident who died in the Ethiopian crash, to Wednesday's hearing on Mr. Dickson's nomination, a spokeswoman said. Mr. Elwell defended his agency during a contentious Senate hearing about the F.A.A.'s oversight of the 737 Max on March 27. Senator Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who chairs the commerce committee's aviation subcommittee, grilled him about the certification process. "There have been longstanding concerns that have been raised about the closeness of the F.A.A. with Boeing," Mr. Cruz said at the time. "At this point, we don't know that's what caused this, but on the face of it, it certainly seems inadequate," he added. "The pilot training material did not raise the details of this new system." During the Senate hearing, Mr. Elwell estimated it would cost taxpayers an additional $1.8 billion to use federal inspectors to certify all aircraft under the agency's purview, and require hiring 10,000 new F.A.A. employees. "Despite what you might read in the press, I believe the F.A.A. still is the gold standard, still has the credibility around the world to make change," said Mr. Elwell, a former aviation industry lobbyist. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/15/us/politics/faa-boeing-congress-daniel- elwell.html Back to Top Western Michigan University to Expand College of Aviation Campus College enrollees number nearly 1,000. WMU planes on runway WMU employs an extensive fleet of Cirrus aircraft for flight training. As the demand for more pilots and maintenance technicians continues, Western Michigan University in Kalamazoo, Michigan plans to grow its College of Aviation campus located at nearby W. K. Kellogg Airport in Battle Creek, Michigan (BTL). The university said a 35 percent growth in student demand over the past five years, created the need to add a new 67,000 sq. ft. building to provide added classroom space, a computer room, a state-of-the-art simulation center. The new location, expected to be completed by the summer of 2020, will also include a research center, student briefing rooms, as well as faculty office space, a cafe, amenities and upgrades in technology and laboratories. The entire project is expected to cost $20 million and was funded in part by a $15 million grant from the State of Michigan. Ranked as one of the top three collegiate aviation programs nationally, WMU's College of Aviation student body has reached nearly 1,000. WMU's undergraduate programs include aviation flight science, aviation management and operations, and aviation technical operations. https://www.flyingmag.com/wmu-to-expand-aviation-campus Back to Top Aircraft fuel is notoriously dirty. This airline is betting on clean electricity. Harbour Air wants to become the world's first all-electric airline and start flying passengers by 2022. Harbour Air, a Vancouver-based airline that operates seaplanes, wants to become the world's first all-electric airline. Harbour Air. It's becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the fact that air travel is a massive and growing problem for the global climate. In the US, transportation is now the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, and aircraft account for 12 percent of transportation emissions. US air travel reached a record high last year, pushing up overall emissions even while the power sector saw a decline. To make matters worse, demand for flights is growing. Emissions from air travel are poised to spike up to sevenfold globally by 2050 if nothing else changes. That's why it's so urgent to decarbonize air travel. Yet the technical challenges are immense. Alternatives like carbon-neutral biofuels remain far too costly. And the stodgy rules in the heavily regulated, risk-averse aviation sector lag far behind advances in electric drivetrains. Which is why it's pretty exciting that the first test flights from what may become the world's first all-electric airline are expected to take off later this year. Harbour Air, a regional seaplane airline based in Vancouver, announced in March that they want to zero out their emissions with electric airplanes. They think they have a formula that works. Here's why. Harbour Air is the perfect candidate for electrification I've written before about the technical challenge and promise of electric aviation. But Harbour Air presents an interesting case study for how electric flight can make business sense as well. Harbour Air flies a fleet of more than 40 propeller-driven seaplanes that take off and land on water. It flies 500,000 passengers per year to 12 destinations in the Pacific Northwest. And it turns out that the current generation of battery and electric motor technology - developed for cars and industry - fits almost perfectly within the Harbour Air's existing operations. "We are in this rather unique position of having short stage lengths and single-engine aircraft that require a lot less energy," than larger planes, said Harbour Air CEO Greg McDougall. "We started doing some math and working with some engineers and figured out that it was actually entirely doable with the technology that exists today, although with a limited range and limited payload." A battery is nowhere near as energy-dense as a liquid fuel. Jet fuel, for example, has a specific energy of 11,890 watt-hours per kilogram. Top-tier lithium-ion batteries currently max out around 250 watt-hours per kilogram. That means you'll need a far heavier amount of batteries to match the distance traveled with conventional aviation fuels. Weight is a critical constraint in small aircraft, where almost every pound has to be tabulated in flight plans. This drastically limits how far and how fast an aircraft can go. But all of Harbour Air's routes are less than 30 minutes, so there's plenty of juice in the current and upcoming generation of batteries to meet the demand for these routes, and the planes don't have to be quick. Another consideration is that fuel is often the largest single expense for most airlines. Its price is volatile and spikes can hit small airlines especially hard. Electricity prices, on the other hand, are far more stable. Harbour Air is working on converting a de Havilland Canada DHC-2 beaver, like the one pictured here, to run on electricity. Test flights are expected later this year. Harbour Air McDougall says he expects electrification to save money for the company. "It's just way cheaper to run electrified propulsion systems in aircraft in the long-run as the technology evolves," he said. That's because electric motors are simpler and easier to maintain than the company's existing piston engines, which require millions of dollars in maintenance every year, he said. A piston motor drivetrain ranges in cost between $300 and $450 per operating hour. The electric drivetrain is projected to cost $12 per hour. Lower operating costs coupled with improving range and performance would eventually lead to lower ticket prices, according to McDougall. Electrification is also on-brand for Harbour Air. The company has been carbon neutral since 2007. McDougall said many of the airline's customers are tourists and vacationers who want to experience snow-capped mountains, forests, and clear, pristine waters. A quieter, cleaner aircraft becomes another selling point, one that customers might even pay extra for. But all the factors that make Harbour Air an ideal candidate for electrification are also why few companies can follow in their footsteps. About 5 percent of global commercial flights are shorter than 100 miles, but Harbour Air flies them exclusively. It's much easier to change the logistics around propulsion in a small regional carrier than in a global airline that's constantly competing on cost. And no electric propulsion system right now can get dozens of passengers in an airliner off the ground. For now. Electric motors solve some aviation problems but also introduce their own headaches Harbour Air is sharing the costs of their foray into electrification with magniX, an electric powertrain company founded in Australia. Roei Ganzarski, CEO of magniX, told Vox his company is developing electric motors with a high power-weight ratio, a trait especially suited to aircraft. They began looking for a partner a year ago that would be interested in flights with a 100-mile range and found Harbour Air. He noted that while battery capacity remains the biggest challenge, magniX is concentrating on vaulting some of the other hurdles in electrifying aircraft. One issue is that electric motors generate a lot of heat, but there isn't enough air for cooling them at the current flight speeds of aircraft. Adding a liquid cooling system would add weight and defeat the purpose of a light and powerful motor, so magniX has developed a proprietary cooling system. A magniX electric propulsion system mounted in a Cessna iron bird. Another concern is that there are few power electronic devices like inverters that are rated for aviation, so magniX is developing those as well. But airlines also have to consider how their ground operations will accommodate electrics. Right now, the companies are focusing on retrofitting a six-passenger de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, a plane first flown in 1947. However, using an electric motor as a drop-in replacement for a piston engine is a bit like treating a gasoline engine in a car as a drop-in replacement for a horse; it undervalues the potential of the technology. Getting the most out of an electric drivetrain would require redesigning the aircraft around a new propulsion system - smaller wings, more motors, different aerodynamics. That in turn would unlock new approaches to air travel, like air taxis. But it's the retrofitted aircraft that will likely be the first to get off the ground with customers. Ganzarski said he expects Harbour Air's test flights to begin in November and to carry paying passengers by 2022. "We're really confident that from an engineering point of view, there's no issues there. I really don't see much downside at all," McDougall said. "The things that we can't control are the regulatory side of it, although we're getting a lot of cooperation and interest from the FAA and Transport Canada." The biggest hurdle might be aviation regulations The airline industry and government regulators have spent decades making flying safe and affordable. However, the rules they've created are tailored to conventional jet and propellor-driven aircraft. In the United States, the regulations from the Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates and certifies aircraft, are set in law. That gives them teeth, but it makes it harder for rules designed to govern piston engines and turbines to adapt to battery- powered planes, and regulators are reluctant to change them because they are unfamiliar with the technology and they are afraid of introducing new risks. "Our ability to change the law to accommodate new technology is very poor," said Pat Anderson, director of the Eagle Flight Research Center at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. "This is new to the FAA, so it's pretty challenging." For example, the FAA has rules for how a battery has to be encased in a "coffin" inside an aircraft to contain a potential fire or leak. That might make sense for smaller batteries designed to power and back up the plane's electronics, but not so much for a battery meant to fly the plane itself. "The energy for a propulsive battery would be so much that it wouldn't be a coffin; it would be a bomb," said Anderson. The FAA did not respond to requests for comment. The FAA is trying to adapt, though. The agency is shifting how it comes up with rules for electric airplanes from federal regulations toward standards established by consensus from the industry. Experts in new technology can meet and vote on the requirements electric airplanes have to meet to be certified. But the process itself is new, so it might still take several years before the agency can come up with standards that make sense for electric aircraft. However, when an electric commercial flight does take off for the first time, it could start a revolution. "It will feel a little like Kitty Hawk, I think," McDougall said. https://www.vox.com/2019/5/14/18535971/electric-airplane-aircraft-aviation-clean- energy Back to Top Boeing Jet Sales Have Tanked in the Wake of 737 Max Crashes A Boeing 737 Max 8 airliner leaves Renton Municipal Airport near Boeing's production facility in Renton, Washington, in March 2019. Photo: Stephen Brashear (Getty Images) After two crashes in the Java Sea near Indonesia and Ethiopia involving Boeing's 737 Max line of passenger jets killed a total of 346 people, sales of 737 Max models have plummeted, CNN reported on Tuesday. A company report says that Boeing has not sold a single new 737 Max aircraft since the line was grounded on March 13, while April also saw no new sales of other Boeing jets "such as the 787 Dreamliner or the 777," CNN wrote. The report suggests that potential customers have grown wary about the wisdom of buying 737 Max aircraft, and have held off on buying other Boeing models that were not involved in crashes as well: Boeing (BA) did report some orders for the other jets in late March, even in the wake of the March 10 crash of an Ethiopian Airlines jet and the grounding of the 737 Max that followed. Lufthansa ordered 20 of the 787 jets on March 15, and British Airways ordered 18 of the 777X on March 22. But the only orders reported by Boeing for April were bookkeeping entries: Four 737 Max jets that had been sold to Boeing Capital in the past were transferred to an unidentified lessor last month. Boeing didn't count those as new orders. Instead, it reclassified sales it had already reported in the first quarter. However, safety concerns are likely far from the only factor behind the sales slump. Standard & Poor's transportation sector lead credit analyst Philip Baggaley told CNN he believed it was possible airlines believe the crashes-and subsequent groundings that are reportedly costing airlines hundreds of millions of dollars-have strengthened their bargaining position. Baggaley told the network any agreement Boeing reaches with the airlines over the groundings may not take the form of a "straight cash compensation," and may instead involve "lower price on future orders, or some other change in those orders. There could be things going on behind the scenes that could essentially turn into orders." Additionally, CNN wrote that airlines already have a massive backlog of orders from Boeing and competitor Airbus, and both companies had bad first-quarter sales showings in part due to that. Boeing has continued to manufacture new jets to fill prior orders. The two crashes are both believed to have involved issues with two 737 Max systems: The angle of attack sensors, which indirectly measure the amount of lift generated by a plane's wings, and the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), an anti-stalling system implemented due to changes in engine placement in the new aircraft. If the sensors feed bad data into MCAS, the system could automatically trigger, potentially sending the plane into a nosedive. Preliminary signs are that pilots on the two flights repeatedly struggled with MCAS to regain control of the planes. The exact degree to which pilot error may have been a factor remains unclear and likely will remain so until final reports are issued, but according to CBS, those errors probably would not have been a factor had there not been "clear and fundamental flaws" in the MCAS design. In the meantime, backlash against the aerospace manufacturer has been mounting. The company only offered critical safety features that could have alerted pilots to a sensor malfunction as optional upgrades. Other reports have indicated flight crews may not have been aware the systems were not operational by default or otherwise received insufficient training. Boeing has announced a software fix to MCAS that the Federal Aviation Administration characterized last month as "operationally suitable," as well as said it would install some of the safety features previously offered as optional upgrades as default features in all 737 Max jets. But that fix has not yet been approved and the groundings have continued, with the planes starting to pile up at storage sites. Boeing and the FAA are also facing increasing scrutiny of whether regulators failed to flag potential issues with the aircraft's design, as well as whether Boeing should have responded more aggressively after the first crash, according to reports in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Boeing insiders also reportedly called an FAA hotline to report issues with the 737 Max line after the second crash, including a previously unknown issue involving a "foreign object" that damaged wiring attached to an angle of attack sensor. https://gizmodo.com/nasa-wants-1-6-billion-to-send-first-woman-to-the-moon- 1834741208 Back to Top SpaceX kicks off its space-based internet service tomorrow with 60-satellite Starlink launch As wild as it sounds, the race is on to build a functioning space internet - and SpaceX is taking its biggest step yet with the launch of 60 (!) satellites tomorrow that will form the first wave of its Starlink constellation. It's a hugely important and incredibly complex launch for the company - and should be well worth launching. A Falcon 9 loaded to the gills with the flat Starlink test satellites (they're "production design" but not final hardware) is vertical at launchpad 40 in Cape Canaveral. It has completed its static fire test and should have a window for launch tomorrow, weather permitting. Building satellite constellations hundreds or thousands strong is seen by several major companies and investors as the next major phase of connectivity - though it will take years and billions of dollars to do so. OneWeb, perhaps SpaceX's biggest competitor in this area, just secured $1.25 billion in funding after launching the first six satellites in March (of a planned 650). Jeff Bezos has announced that Amazon will join the fray with the proposed 3,236-satellite Project Kuiper. Ubiquitilink has a totally different approach. And plenty of others are taking on smaller segments, like lower-cost or domain-specific networks. Needless to say it's an exciting sector, but today's launch is a particularly interesting one because it is so consequential for SpaceX. If this doesn't go well, it could set Starlink's plans back long enough to give competitors an edge. The satellites stacked inside the Falcon 9 payload fairing. "Tight fit," pointed out CEO Elon Musk. SpaceX hasn't explained exactly how the 60 satellites will be distributed to their respective orbits, but founder and CEO Elon Musk did note on Twitter that there's "no dispenser." Of course there must be some kind of dispenser - these things aren't going to just jump off of their own accord. They're stuffed in there like kernels on a corncob, and likely each have a little spring that sends them out at a set velocity. A pair of prototype satellites, Tintin-A and B, have been in orbit since early last year, and have no doubt furnished a great deal of useful information to the Starlink program. But the 60 aboard tomorrow's launch aren't quite final hardware. Although Musk noted that they are "production design," COO Gwynne Shotwell has said that they are still test models. "This next batch of satellites will really be a demonstration set for us to see the deployment scheme and start putting our network together," she said at the Satellite 2019 conference in Washington, D.C. - they reportedly lack inter-satellite links but are otherwise functional. I've asked SpaceX for more information on this. It makes sense: If you're planning to put thousands (perhaps as many as 12,000 eventually) of satellites into orbit, you'll need to test at scale and with production hardware. And for those worried about the possibility of overpopulation in orbit - it's absolutely something to consider, but many of these satellites will be flying at extremely low altitudes; at 550 kilometers up, these tiny satellites will naturally de-orbit in a handful of years. Even OneWeb's, at 1,100 km, aren't that high up - geosynchronous satellites are above 35,000 km. That doesn't mean there's no risk at all, but it does mean failed or abandoned satellites won't stick around for long. Just don't expect to boot up your Starlink connection any time soon. It would take a minimum of six more launches like this one - a total of 420, a happy coincidence for Musk - to provide "minor" coverage. This would likely only be for testing as well, not commercial service. That would need 12 more launches, and dozens more to bring it to the point where it can compete with terrestrial broadband. Even if it will take years to pull off, that is the plan. And by that time others will have spun up their operations as well. It's an exciting time for space and for connectivity. No launch time has been set as of this writing, so takeoff is just planned for Wednesday the 15th at present. As there's no need to synchronize the launch with the movement of any particular celestial body, T-0 should be fairly flexible and SpaceX will likely just wait for the best weather and visibility. Delays are always a possibility, though, so don't be surprised if this is pushed out to later in the week. As always you'll be able to watch the launch at the SpaceX website, but I'll update this post with the live video link as soon as it's available. https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/14/spacex-kicks-off-its-space-based-internet-service- tomorrow-with-60-satellite-starlink-launch/ Back to Top POSITION AVAILABLE: AVIATION ADVISOR Job Description A unique opportunity to bring your aviation expertise and management skills to help Shell drive its operational excellence. Join a team of subject matter experts, applying your aviation expertise, to jointly develop, implement and audit the best safety standards in close collaboration with our worldwide Shell business units. Where you fit in The Shell Aircraft Air Safety and Advisory Group gives advice to 35 Shell Business Units in 30 countries and audits up to 100 aircraft operators on their behalf. This results in substantial financial savings and major improvements in safety and quality. Shell exposure to flying, at 85,000 flying hours per year, equates to the activity of a moderate size airline. The Air Safety & Advisory Group is staffed by a team of Aviation Advisers and is part of Shell Aircraft International which also includes the Corporate Fleet department. At Shell our commitment is to satisfy the world's need for energy with economically, socially and environmentally responsible solutions. We seek a high standard of performance and understand that great ideas can change the world. If you want to work with a group of safety conscious, ambitious and committed professionals then you should consider Shell. We will provide you with the resources to put your ideas into action, possible worldwide opportunities to advance your career, and outstanding benefits and rewards. Join us and let's make a difference together. What's the role? As Aviation Advisor, you're going to be playing a vital role in maintaining and improving our operational excellence. Providing expert advice on the safe and efficient use of aircraft and air transport services in support of the Shell Business Unit aviation strategy. In practice that means you'll be running operational and technical audits of contractors and logistics teams; producing reports in accordance with Shell Aircraft processes and procedures; and making sure any audit recommendations are actioned by aviation management. You can also expect to be involved with air safety accident and incident investigations. Naturally, you'll need to have a strong safety drive for achieving excellence, as well as being skilled at juggling a challenging workload, often with competing business targets. Along with advising on general aviation safety, you'll also lead on specific areas of expertise, which means keeping your technical knowledge up- to-date and relevant. Company Description Shell Nederland BV is a platform for international collaboration, with Shell offering direct employment to around ten thousand people in the Netherlands alone, including roughly 2,800 non-Dutch employees from around 80 countries. Diversity is key at Shell Nederland, and our employees reflect the innovation that stems from a diverse workforce. By joining Shell Nederland, you will benefit from an unrivalled industry- leading development programme that will see you tap into a pool of expert knowledge that will help propel your career. Shell Nederland is the holding company of most Shell companies operating in the Netherlands. Shell Nederland also has an advisory and coordinating role in numerous areas. Requirements You are holder of a valid professional Pilot fixed or rotary wing license (ATPL or equivalent). You have a strong track record in all aspects (incl. management) of aircraft operations and support, as well as an understanding of the commercial and legislative aspects of aviation. The relevant experience in the aviation industry may be gained within an aircraft operating company or equivalent military organization. Extensive knowledge of aviation quality & safety management systems, aviation legislation and their application is required. The ability to write and brief all levels of management succinctly on complex aviation issues is also essential. Shell's aviation professionals are required to travel extensively in support of our work and as such, must be able to travel anywhere in the world. This position is based in The Netherlands on local terms, therefore the applicant must be able to work and live in The Netherlands. Our values Shell is a company with shared values. Honesty, integrity, and respect aren't simply a strapline: they are a part of everything we do. What's more, Shell is an equal opportunities company, and we place the highest possible value on the diversity of our people and our inclusive approach. Join us and you'll belong to a world where you can feel pride in your achievements and propel your career with global opportunities Women's perspective We care deeply about fostering a truly diverse workplace. We believe in doing everything we can to make Shell as flexible, appealing and supportive a place for women to work as possible. We help with things like our formal (and informal) flexible working. Like our global and transparent pay policies, backed by a leadership team fully supportive of our diversity ambitions. And we'll foster your career through our Women's Career Development programme. People with an impairment At Shell, we're all about top talent. End of story. We encourage anyone who may face an impairment to see Shell as a place where you'll be fully supported to grow and develop your career. It's as simple as that. If you'd like to apply, just let us know about your circumstances. We can support you throughout the process: from application, to interview, to your first day of a rewarding career with us. Interested? Please apply via the 'Apply' button. APPLY Back to Top Back to Top GRADUATE RESEARCH SURVEY Dear Aviation Professionals, My name is Marta Delbecchi. I am an MSc student in Organisational Psychiatry and Psychology from King's College London, andas part of my degree requirements I am conducting a research study entitled: The wellbeing of air, marine and rail accident investigators. I am carrying out this research study with the support of Cranfield University's Safety and Accident Investigation Centre. I am looking for current or retired civil air accident investigator to complete an online survey. The purpose of the survey is to learn more about the health and wellbeing of personnel who investigate the causes of accidents and serious incidents in the air, marine, and rail transportation modes. Your participation would be a very important contribution to the current paucity of scientific literature and understanding concerning the psychological and emotional wellbeing of accident investigators. Completing the survey should take no more than 35 minutes of your time and participation in this research study is entirely voluntary and anonymous. All your responses will be treated in the strictest confidence, and you will be able to withdraw from the survey at any time. If you are able to assist by completing the online survey then please email me directly at marta.delbecchi@kcl.ac.uk and I will forward you an information sheet and a link to the survey. Thank you for your kind consideration, Marta Delbecchi Department of Psychosis Studies, PO63 Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London De Crespigny Park London SE5 8AF Curt Lewis,