Flight Safety Information May 20, 2019 - No. 101 In This Issue Can Boeing Be Safe, Profitable and Wise? Pilots Confront Boeing: 737 Max Crashes Were NOT Pilot Error Incident: American B763 at Montevideo on May 12th 2019, rejected takeoff due to engine failure Incident: Copa B738 at Panama City on May 17th 2019, could not fully retract gear Incident: Zimbabwe B762 at Johannesburg on Apr 28th 2019, engine surges, engine recovered Incident: SAS A20N near Copenhagen on May 18th 2019, fuel leak Incident: British Airways A319 near Lyon on May 17th 2019, electrical burning odour in cabin Incident: Austrian DH8D at Stuttgart on May 9th 2019, oily odour in cockpit Incident: Alitalia A332 at Milan on May 17th 2019, could not fully retract gear 4 Americans, 1 Canadian die in small plane crash in Honduras Russian plane's brakes not used before fiery crash that killed 41, report says Mindful airline pilots are involved in fewer potentially hazardous aviation incidents Boeing 737-8Q8 (WL) - Smoke in the Cabin (Thailand) EVAS - Video Cuba: Crash of Global Air Boeing 737-200 at Havana due to errors in weight and balance calculations NASA backs development of cryogenic hydrogen system to power all-electric aircraft Some grounded Boeing 737 Max jets stored in San Antonio 10 Top Space Start-Ups You've Probably Never Heard of Leading Change in Safety Management Systems ICAEA Industry Survey The Steps to Organizational Reliability ISASI - DFW Regional Chapter Meeting Can Boeing Be Safe, Profitable and Wise? The recent tragic losses of all the passengers and crew members on the Boeing MAX 737 planes that crashed in Indonesia and Ethiopia have raised troubling questions about the safety of these new planes. Investigators, investors, customers and legislators are asking: Does Boeing - one of two major airplane manufacturers in the world - have a safety culture problem? How can you tell if Boeing's executives are focused on safety? Try our approach. We start by analyzing the words in Boeing's annual reports. We look for key words that reveal the underlying beliefs and values that define the company's culture. Why is this important? Because corporate culture inspires actions that determine results. And the quality of that culture starts at the top. To evaluate Boeing's culture, we searched their 2018 annual report to see how many times the word "safe" and its derivations - "safety," "safest," "safer" and "safely," etc. - were used in this public document. Then we did the same search in Airbus' 2018 annual report, the other global airplane manufacturer. We compared these search results and found that Boeing's 154-page annual report had only 17 words related to "safe". In contrast, Airbus' 324-page annual report had 155 words related to "safe". We found the same trend when we searched for these words in company annual reports over the past five years. Boeing used "safe" words a total of 76 times and Airbus used them a total of 397 times. We also calculated the ratio of the number of times words about "profits" were found in each annual report compared to words about safety. In its 2018 annual report, Boeing used two profit words for every safety word, while Airbus' ratio was one profit word for every safety word. Linguistically, Airbus appears to have a more balanced and stronger safety focus than does Boeing. But why do linguistics matter? Because words lead to actions that create the future. As Peter Drucker famously said, "The way to predict the future is to create it." And how do we create the future? Through our words that lead to intended and unintended actions. What can we as investors, customers or employees take away from this analysis? Consider this core principle of governance and performance: the tone at the top of a company is revealed in executive vocabulary. This forms a moral and ethical climate that will inspire actions that create trustworthy or mistrustful behaviors. Since the fatal air crashes, some reports have faulted Boeing for seeming to be more focused on profits than on safety. But two CEOs from manufacturing companies, have shown in the past that choosing profits over safety can be a false and unwise choice. Each understood that pursuing profits over advancing key practices that drive profitability - such as worker and customer safety - is a profit-losing strategy. One of these CEOs was Paul O'Neill. In 1987, soon after being named Alcoa's new CEO, he gave his first speech to the Wall Street investment community. He admitted the company had financial problems: its profits did not cover the cost of capital. But O'Neill never mentioned his expectations for profit margins and sales. Instead he told the audience that he would talk about worker safety. And while Alcoa's accident record at that time was better than the national average, his goal for the company was to reach zero injuries. When an analyst asked him about company inventories, O'Neill replied, "I'm not certain you heard me. If you want to understand how Alcoa is doing, you need to look at our workplace safety figures." According to a report of this meeting in Charles Duhigg's book, "Power of Habit," investors ran out of the room after the presentation and advised clients to sell their Alcoa stock. Years later, one of these investors told the author, "It was the worst piece of advice I gave in my entire career." By the time O'Neill retired in 2000, Alcoa's market cap had grown 900 percent and worker injuries had dropped to 0.13 versus 1.6 injuries for the industry. What caused this? O'Neill attributed it to his belief that human beings have discretionary energy which they can give or not give. When respected and valued, employees are proud to give their best. And this grows profits. How does a CEO restore confidence when customers are dying from their products? By not hiding behind a lot of lawyered communications. In June 2014, GM's newly appointed CEO, Mary Barra, led a town hall meeting that was broadcast to the 220,000 company employees. She reported the findings of a blue-ribbon panel charged with investigating GM's faulty ignition problem that had resulted in 124 passenger deaths. She said the investigative report was "extremely thorough, brutally tough and deeply troubling." She went on, "I never want you to forget it. This is not just another business crisis for GM. We aren't simply going to fix this and move on." She described how GM was improving its safety processes and compensating the families of those who had died or were injured. She explained, "I want to keep this painful experience permanently in our collective memories. I don't want us to forget what happened because I - and I know you - never want this to happen again." Since that time, Barra is credited with presiding over ending GM's government bailout to positioning the company for the automotive technology revolution and becoming one of the best run auto companies in the world. Her words are hard to forget. So are Paul O'Neill's. They change minds and behaviors. They speak to what is possible when people are respected and choose to make a difference. https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurarittenhouse/2019/05/19/can-boeing-be-safe- profitable-and-wise/#7aa6d46e7383 Back to Top Pilots Confront Boeing: 737 Max Crashes Were NOT Pilot Error The lie of the day: Skilled pilots could have prevented the two 737 Max crashes. The deeper we dig into the 737 Max crashes, the easier it is to make a case that Boeing, not software, not poorly trained pilots is to blame for the 737 Max crashes. The Seattle Times addresses the issue in How much was pilot error a factor in the Boeing 737 MAX crashes? In his opening statement Wednesday at the House Aviation subcommittee hearing on the 737 MAX in Washington, D.C., the lead Republican congressman blamed errors by the Indonesian and Ethiopian pilots for the two deadly MAX crashes in those countries. "Pilots trained in the United States would have successfully been able to handle" the emergencies on both jets, said Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri, ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. He added that preliminary reports about the accident "compound my concerns about quality training standards in other countries." That's the gambit that Boeing wants everyone to believe. However, pilots strongly disagree. "I'm disappointed with those who sit in their lofty chairs of judgment and say this wouldn't have happened to U.S. pilots," said a veteran captain with a major U.S. airline, who asked not to be named to avoid involving his employer. The flight crew on the March 10 Ethiopian flight faced a barrage of alerts in the flight that lasted just 6 minutes. Those alerts included a "stick shaker" that noisily vibrated the pilot's yoke throughout the flight, warning the plane was in danger of a stall, which it wasn't; repeated loud "DON'T SINK" warnings that the jet was too close to the ground; a "clacker" making a very loud clicking sound to signal the jet was going too fast; and multiple warning lights telling the crew the speed, altitude and other readings on their instruments were unreliable. The Lion Air crash in October would have been at the forefront of the Ethiopian pilots' minds, and they seem to have focused solely on following the Boeing procedure to eliminate the MAX's new flight-control system - called Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) - that was pushing the nose down. They did so by flipping two cut-off switches. But then the heavy forces on the jet's tail prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude. "What would the best pilot do on their worst day with all of this sensory overload?" the veteran U.S. airline captain said. "Who knows what any of us would have done?" "The manufacturer isn't supposed to give us airplanes that depend on superhuman pilots," he added. "We should have airplanes that don't fail the way these airplanes failed." What Does the Simulator Say? Starting from the point where the Ethiopian pilots hit the cut-off switches and stopped MCAS from operating, the U.S. MAX crew tried in the simulator to recover. Even though the U.S. crew performed the simulator experiment at a normal speed of 250 knots instead of the more than 350 knots of the Ethiopian jet, the forces on the jet's tail still prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude. To get out of it, the pilots used an old aviator technique called the "roller coaster" method - letting the yoke go to relieve the forces on the tail, then cranking the wheel, and repeating this many times. This technique has not been in U.S. pilot manuals for decades, and pilots today are not typically trained on it. Using it in the simulator, the U.S. MAX crew managed to save the aircraft but lost 8,000 feet of altitude in the process. The Ethiopian MAX never rose higher than 8,000 feet, indicating that from that point in the flight, the crew couldn't have saved it. Two Hours on an Ipad Boeing says 2 hours on an iPad is all it takes in additional training. Really? When top-notch pilots cannot recover a craft in a simulator as opposed to real life panic? Of course, Boeing insists that the software is now fixed. Is it? Trained Pilots Bjorn Fehrm, a Swedish pilot and aerospace engineer who is an analyst for Bainbridge Island-based Leeham.net, said the report assumes the accidents could have been avoided by "a really proficient pilot ... on a good day." But he said Boeing and Airbus cannot rely on the roughly 300,000 pilots flying worldwide having a good day and being perfectly trained for every emergency. The veteran U.S. airline captain said that the American aviation community needs to avoid getting "too cocky about U.S. pilots being immune from mistakes." He said he's spent a lot of time flying with local pilots in western China where the mountains are high and the flying is hazardous. I'd put them up against American airline pilots any day," he said. "They are exceptional airmen." And he criticized Boeing for designing an airplane in which a system triggered by a single sensor failure would present such challenges and require such a high-performance response from the pilots. Myth Shattered I believe that dispels the myth that US pilots would necessarily have avoided those crashes. Damning Audio Next consider a damning audio that shows pilots confronting Boeing about new features suspected in deadly crashes. CBS News has obtained audio from the American Airlines pilots' union confronting Boeing about new features to the 737 Max that may have been factors in two deadly crashes. Frustration boiled over during the tense meeting in November 2018, less than a month after the first Max crashed, and four months before the second crash. "We flat out deserve to know what is on our airplanes," one pilot is heard saying. "I don't disagree," a Boeing official said. The pilots at the meeting were angry that system was not disclosed to them until after the first crash. "These guys didn't even know the damn system was on the airplane - nor did anybody else," one pilot said. The official, Boeing vice president Mike Sinnett, who does not appear to know he was being recorded, claimed what happened to Lion Air was once-in-a-lifetime type scenario. Boeing told the pilots it would make software changes, perhaps in as little as six weeks, but didn't want to hurry it. "We want to make sure we're fixing the right things," the official said. "That's the important thing. To make sure we're fixing the right things. 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." That fix was still in development when the second 737 Max crashed in March, leading to the worldwide grounding of the plane. The existence of the audio was first reported by the Dallas Morning News. Fixes Needed Boeing was aware fixes were needed but sent out no alerts or warnings. Boeing did not treat this as an emergency. Recall that even after the second crash Boeing begged Trump to not ground the planes. How galling is that? Criminal Negligence? The Points Guy says Boeing Faces a Possible Legal Nightmare With Airlines for the 737 MAX. Norwegian Air has already declared that it will demand compensation from Boeing for its grounded fleet of 737 MAXes and lost fares, meaning that a lawsuit is all but certain unless Boeing simply gives in, which is unlikely. Other airlines are widely expected to follow Norwegian's lead. Boeing and its client airlines are likely already frantically preparing their legal arsenals. That will play a huge role in determining how much the aircraft manufacturer will ultimately be on the hook for - or whether it might even come out of the debacle scot- free. The key point of contention will be whether Boeing did its due diligence in keeping its planes safe. That includes rolling out an airworthy vessel, but also making sure it and its clients were up to date on needed improvements, upgrades and revised standards. "The easiest thing to relate it to is your car," Dedmon said. "If the airbag's been found to be bad, the manufacturer issues a notice to the buyers, you take it to the dealer, and they get it fixed. Things of that nature happen in aviation as well, like a repair that went out at a certain time, or inspections to have to be done within certain flight hours - those things aren't routine in aviation, and there's nothing abnormal in any form with that." Where the parties are likely to disagree in court, however, is whether the airline or Boeing or a third party didn't do the best reasonable job of making sure everyone who needed to know was kept abreast of vital updates. What the plaintiffs' lawyer will particularly be keeping an eye out for - but are unlikely to find, in this day and age - is a "smoking gun" document that's proof that Boeing knew about a dangerous fault in the 737 MAX and covered it up. That's what happened with the Ford Pinto, which notoriously exploded into flames in relatively minor collisions. Tough But Not Too Tough The Detroit Free Press discusses criminal negligence in its report Should Boeing be held liable for plane crashes? It's complicated. The crashes highlight a perennial question facing authorities in many nations: How to punish and correct bad corporate behavior without damaging the economy or thousands of innocent employees? Preet Bharara, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, writes in his new book "Doing Justice" that people often ask him why no Wall Street executives went to jail following the collapse of the financial system in 2008, an event that triggered the Great Recession. The answer, he writes, is that criminal charges are often so hard to make stick. "Much of what happened in 2008 was not the product of a few people with clear, provable intent to rob others of their savings," he writes. Rather, the financial collapse stemmed from thousands of people ignoring or not understanding the risks in the mortgage-backed securities they were buying and selling. Everyone wants the bad actors to go to jail, Bharara adds. "But in the system that we have, you can't proceed without proof of particular people engaging in particular conduct with a particular mental intent. The bar to prove intent is high." Absent clear evidence of criminal intent, he writes, "You can find behavior reprehensible, careless, greedy, thoughtless and cruel, but that's not enough to bring a case." "If they can't get an individual, then they'll try to charge the company because companies generally are easy to get," Henning said. "They tend not to fight, so there's less of a chance they will go to trial." And often what you see in these settlements with companies, they try to mitigate the damage. They get the penalty but then they try to make sure it doesn't cost the company too much. You don't want to put Boeing out of business. Smoking Gun? In the absence of a smoking gun, it would be very difficult to prove criminal negligence. But consider wrongful death lawsuits. Expect the airlines to be dragged into some of those lawsuits. And Boeing might counter-sue over cancelled contracts claiming the planes are fit to fly. This can drag on for years and probably will. Lawyers will have a field day and make a fortune. Mike "Mish" Shedlock https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/pilots-confront-boeing-737-max-crashes- were-not-pilot-error-xn0yCAc6c0q8uOU3-XjSMQ/ Back to Top Incident: American B763 at Montevideo on May 12th 2019, rejected takeoff due to engine failure An American Airlines Boeing 767-300, registration N384AA performing flight AA-984 from Montevideo (Uruguay) to Miami,FL (USA), was accelerating for takeoff from Montevideo's runway 06 when the crew rejected takeoff at low speed after the right hand engine (CF6) emitted a loud bang and streaks of flame. The aircraft slowed safely, the crew advied they wanted to return to the apron but did not state any reason for the rejected takeoff. A replacement engine was delivered to Montevideo on May 17th 2019. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground a week after the rejected takeoff. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c827d0d&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Copa B738 at Panama City on May 17th 2019, could not fully retract gear A Copa Airlines Boeing 737-800, registration HP-1713CMP performing flight CM-291 from Panama City (Panama) to Asuncion (Paraguay) with 136 passengers and 6 crew, was climbing out of Panama City's runway 03R when the crew stopped the climb at about 8000 feet due to being unable to fully retract the landing gear. The aircraft burned off fuel and returned to Panama City for a safe landing on runway 03R about 70 minutes after departure. A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration HP-1825CMP reached Asuncion with a delay of 3:20 hours. The occurrence aircraft returned to service after about 14 hours on the ground. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c827949&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Zimbabwe B762 at Johannesburg on Apr 28th 2019, engine surges, engine recovered An Air Zimbabwe Boeing 767-200, registration Z-WPF performing flight UM-462 from Johannesburg (South Africa) to Harare (Zimbabwe) with 98 passengers and 9 crew, was climbing out of Johannesburg's runway 03L when the crew declared Mayday Mayday Mayday and requested to stop climb at FL090 and return to Johannesburg. The crew advised they had left hand engine (PW4056) surges. While turning south on radar vectors the engine recovered, the crew subsequently reported the fault had cleared and they had normal operation about 10 minutes later, they wanted to continue to Harare. The aircraft climbed to FL390 and continued to Harare where the aircraft landed safely about 90 minutes after departure. Johannesburg's ATC had alerted emergency services, who had assumed their stand by positions, had halted departures and sent arrivals into holds for the emergency return. After the crew had reported the fault had cleared ATC resumed operations at Johannesburg Airport and stood down emergency services. Ground witnesses reported they saw the aircraft repepatedly banging and emitted streaks of flame, while the aircraft was turning south the surges stopped. The aircraft turned north again and climbed out of sight. The aircraft was transponding callsign AZW-303 (UM-303), the previous inbound flight's callsign from Bulawayo (Zimbabwe) to Johannesburg. On Apr 29th 2019 the airline reported the aircraft experienced a malfunction on one of the engines resulting in a brief tail pipe fire. The malfunction did not threaten the continuation of the flight and the aircraft landed safely in Harare. A deputy minister of Zimbabwe travelling as passenger on board of the aircraft reported the aircraft received a bird strike on departure causing blowing sounds and sparks from the engine. South Africa's CAA (SACAA) opened an investigation into the occurrence reporting the crew had reported a malfunction of the left hand engine related to an engine surge, after completing the checklist the crew reported the fault had cleared, they had normal operation and they want to continue to Harare. Despite the successful landing in Harare the SACAA engaged the airline and the CAA of Zimbabwe in order to obtain the data needed for the investigation. On May 19th 2019 the NTSB reported the occurrence was rated an incident and is being investigated by the SACAA. The NTSB have appointed an accredited representative and joined the investigation representing the state of Design and Manufacture of the aircraft and engines. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c7467ca&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: SAS A20N near Copenhagen on May 18th 2019, fuel leak A SAS Scandinavian Airlines Airbus A320-200N, registration SE-ROM performing flight SK-7847 from Thira (Greece) to Stockholm (Sweden), was enroute at FL360 about 80nm southeast of Copenhagen (Denmark) when the crew decided to divert to Copenhagen due to a fuel leak making it impossible to reach Stockholm, although the fuel leak had been contained. The aircraft landed safely on Copenhagen's runway 04L about 16 minutes later. The aircraft remained on the ground for about 2 hours, then continued to Stockholm as flight SK-9249. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c81ddd3&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: British Airways A319 near Lyon on May 17th 2019, electrical burning odour in cabin A British Airways Airbus A319-100, registration G-DBCA performing flight BA-2541 from Rome Fiumicino (Italy) to London Gatwick,EN (UK) with 123 people on board, was enroute at FL380 about 60nm southeast of Lyon (France) when the crew decided to diver to Lyon reporting an electrical burning odour in the cabin, they had warm oxygen generators in the aft cabin, cabin crew did not find any sort of fire or smoke however. The aircraft landed safely on Lyon's runway 17L about 25 minutes later. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Lyon about 24 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c81dba5&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Austrian DH8D at Stuttgart on May 9th 2019, oily odour in cockpit An Austrian Airlines de Havilland Dash 8-400, registration OE-LGC performing flight OS-186 from Stuttgart (Germany) to Vienna (Austria), was climbing out of Stuttgart when the crew stopped the climb at FL150 due to an odour related to engine oil in the cockpit. The crew donned their oxygen masks, one of the two cabin crew donned her smoke hood. The aircraft returned to Stuttgart for a safe landing about 30 minutes after departure. Austrianwings reported passengers also briefly felt a strange odour in the cabin. The airline reported the flight crew noticed an unusual odour. The cause of this odour was the leakage of a small quantity of oil. Flight crew and one cabin crew donned their oxygen masks/smoke hoods as precaution and returned to Stuttgart. All passengers disembarked normally and were rebooked onto other flights. The occurrence aircraft returned to service about 196 hours (8 days and 4 hours) after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c812eff&opt=0 Back to Top Back to Top Incident: Alitalia A332 at Milan on May 17th 2019, could not fully retract gear By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, May 18th 2019 20:31Z, last updated Saturday, May 18th 2019 20:31Z An Alitalia Airbus A330-200, registration EI-EJH performing flight AZ-604 from Milan Malpensa (Italy) to New York JFK,NY (USA), was climbing out of Malpensa's runway 35L when the crew stopped the climb at 6000 feet due to the gear not fully retracting. The aircraft burned off fuel and returned to Malpensa for a safe landing on runway 35R about 85 minutes after departure. A replacement A330-200 registration EI-EJO reached New York with a delay of 7.5 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Milan about 32 hours after landing back. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c81d914&opt=0 Back to Top 4 Americans, 1 Canadian die in small plane crash in Honduras In this photo released by the Honduras Fire Department, firefighters and men work at the crash site of a plane that fell into the Atlantic in Roatan, Bay Island, Honduras, Saturday, May 18, 2019. All five people on board were killed after the plane plummeted shortly after takeoff from the popular tourist destination of Roatan en route to the port of Trujillo. (Honduras Fire Department via AP) TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras (AP) - Four Americans and a Canadian pilot were killed when a small plane went down off the coast of Roatan island in Honduras, officials said Sunday. Armed Forces spokesman Jose Domingo Meza confirmed the nationalities of those who died in Saturday's crash. The Piper Cherokee Six plummeted into the Atlantic shortly after takeoff from the popular tourist destination of Roatan en route to the port of Trujillo. The military said in a statement that rescue boats with police divers and firemen recovered four bodies within minutes of the crash, and transported another to a hospital, where he died shortly after of internal injuries. The U.S. State Department also confirmed the deaths of four U.S. citizens and Global Affairs Canada confirmed that a Canadian also had died. They did not release names. Honduran authorities identified the pilot as Patrick Forseth, a Canadian national who developed tourism projects in the Trujillo Bay area. Forseth was involved in a legal dispute with Afro-indigenous Hondurans who accused him of trying to develop their ancestral lands into vacation properties for international tourists. Forseth defended his company in a 2017 statement, saying it had purchased the land in 2013 and had made several attempts to reach an amicable resolution. https://www.yahoo.com/news/4-americans-1-canadian-die-small-plane-crash- 184408245.html Back to Top Russian plane's brakes not used before fiery crash that killed 41, report says The crew of a Russian airliner that caught fire while making an emergency landing, killing 41 people, had not deployed the plane's air brakes, a report by the country's civil aviation authority has found, according to a state news agency. Key points: * A report by the civil aviation authority, obtained by the RIA-Novosti news agency, found the pilot changed the plane's pitch * Russian investigators are looking into whether the pilots breached air safety rules * Forty-one people were killed when the Aeroflot passenger jet exploded into flames * The report indicated human error could be an important factor in the May 5 crash. Video footage showed the Aeroflot SSJ100 passenger jet landing at Moscow's Sheremetyevo International Airport, before the rear of the plane bounced twice on the tarmac and exploded into flames. Other television broadcasts showed the plane spewing large clouds of black smoke as it careened along the runway. In all, 33 people survived. The RIA-Novosti news agency said it had obtained a report from Rosaviatsiya, the civil aviation authority, which showed the brakes - flaps that hang down from a plane - were not used. It also said the pilot changed the plane's pitch markedly. Russia's main investigative body, the Investigative Committee, previously said both flight recorders had been recovered from the plane, and three main possible causes for the disaster would be examined: insufficient pilot qualifications, equipment failure and weather. While some Russian news reports initially cited sources as saying the plane caught fire mid-air, the airport said in a statement that it was the hard landing that started the fire. Russian investigators have been looking into whether the pilots breached air safety rules. A burned out hull of a plane, with melted plastic clumped on the interior and mounds of debris on the ground. Forty-one people were killed when fire consumed the plane. (AP) The SSJ100 went into service in 2011, introduced as a replacement for outdated Soviet- designed aircraft. Also known as the Superjet, it was heralded as a new phase for Russia's civil aviation industry. But the plane has been troubled by concerns about defects in the horizontal stabilisers. In 2017, Russia's aviation authority ordered inspections of all Superjets in the country because of the problems. More than 8,231 passengers have died in Aeroflot crashes - more than any other airline, according to a report in the UK Telegraph last year. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-19/brakes-unused-on-russian-plane-killed-41- report-says/11127638 Back to Top Mindful airline pilots are involved in fewer potentially hazardous aviation incidents Pilots high in trait mindfulness tend to be involved in fewer hazardous aviation incidents, according to a study published in the Journal of Safety Research. The study found that trait mindfulness had a direct and negative effect on airlines pilots' incident involvement. Trait mindfulness is characterized by an ability to recognize and accept one's thoughts and emotions without judgment. Those high in trait mindfulness also tend to be more aware of the present moment rather than performing tasks automatically. For their study, the researchers had 295 commercial airline pilots from China complete measures of mindfulness and aviation risk perception. The pilots also reported their total number of flight hours and the number of times they were involved in potentially hazardous aviation incidents, such as accidentally stalling an aircraft or inadvertently flying into instrument weather conditions. Trait mindfulness was directly linked to airlines pilots' incident involvement, and also indirectly linked via risk perception. In other words, high levels of trait mindfulness were associated with increased risk perception. Pilots who viewed situations as more risky, in turn, were found to be involved in fewer incidents. "Pilots with higher trait mindfulness were more likely to perceive risk in the flight environment and make more effective judgements," the researchers explained. "A possible explanation for the latter is that trait mindfulness can exert the effects found here not only by improving one's attention and focus, but also through fostering better regulation of emotion, body awareness, and by bringing about a change in perspective with regard to one's inner and outer experience." The study, "The influence of trait mindfulness on incident involvement among Chinese airline pilots: The role of risk perception and flight experience", was authored by Ming Ji, Can Yang, Haiyan Han, Ying Li, and Quan Xu. https://www.psypost.org/2019/05/mindful-airline-pilots-are-involved-in-fewer- potentially-hazardous-aviation-incidents-53717 Back to Top Boeing 737-8Q8 (WL) - Smoke in the Cabin (Thailand) Date: 19-MAY-2019 Time: 11:25 UTC Type: Boeing 737-8Q8 (WL) Owner/operator: NewGen Airways Registration: HS-NGE C/n / msn: 30661 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: None Location: Bangkok - Thailand Phase: Initial climb Nature: International Scheduled Passenger Departure airport: Bangkok-Don Muang International Airport (DMK/VTBD) Destination airport: Wuxi Airport (WUX/ZSWX) Narrative: NewGen Airways flight E3865, a Boeing 737-800 aircraft, returned to land at Bangkok's Don Muang Airpot after smoke developed inside the passenger cabin after takeoff. The aircraft made a safe landing 18 minutes after takeoff. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/225252 Back to Top Back to Top Cuba: Crash of Global Air Boeing 737-200 at Havana due to errors in weight and balance calculations (18 May 2018) The Instituto de la Aeronáutica Civil de Cuba (IACC) reported that it had completed their investigation into the May 2018 accident involving a Global Air Boeing 737-200, citing errors in weight an balance calculations. The Global Air Boeing 737-200, operating on Cubana de Aviación flight 972 from Havana to Holguín, Cuba, crashed shortly after takeoff on May 18. 2018. The aircraft came down in vegetation near a railway outside the airport, broke up and burst into flames. There were 107 passengers on board along with six Mexican crew members. One passenger survived the accident. On May 16, the Instituto de la Aeronáutica Civil de Cuba (IACC) reported that it had completed their investigation. The authorities did not share any details and just reported that the probable cause of the accident "were the actions of the crew and their errors in the weight and balance calculations, which led to the loss of control and collapse of the aircraft during the takeoff stage" A Global Air official earlier had reported that the aircraft had attained an extreme nose- up attitude during takeoff, which would suggest the centre of gravity was aft of the aircraft's limits. https://news.aviation-safety.net/2019/05/18/cuba-crash-of-global-air-boeing-737-200- at-havana-due-to-errors-in-weight-and-balance-calculations/ Back to Top NASA backs development of cryogenic hydrogen system to power all-electric aircraft Artist's rendering of an advanced commercial transport aircraft concept utilizing CHEETA systems The University of Illinois has announced that NASA is underwriting a project to develop a cryogenic hydrogen fuel cell system for powering all-electric aircraft. Funded by a three-year, US$6 million contract, the Center for Cryogenic High-Efficiency Electrical Technologies for Aircraft (CHEETA) will investigate the technology needed to produce a practical all-electric design to replace conventional fossil fuel propulsion systems. The jet engine in all its variations has revolutionized air travel, but with airline profit margins running wafer thin in these ecologically conscious times, there's a lot of interest in moving away from aircraft powered by fossil fuels and toward emission-free electric propulsion systems that aren't dependent on petroleum and its volatile prices. The CHEETA project is a consortium of eight institutions that include the Air Force Research Laboratory, Boeing Research and Technology, General Electric Global Research, Ohio State University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Arkansas, the University of Dayton Research Institute, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Although the project is still in its conceptual stage, the researchers have a firm vision of the technology and its potential. Concept sketch of a fully electric aircraft platform that uses cryogenic liquid hydrogen as an energy... "Essentially, the program focuses on the development of a fully electric aircraft platform that uses cryogenic liquid hydrogen as an energy storage method," says Phillip Ansell, assistant professor in the Department of Aerospace Engineering at Urbana-Champaign who is the project's principal investigator. "The hydrogen chemical energy is converted to electrical energy through a series of fuel cells, which drive the ultra-efficient electric propulsion system. The low temperature requirements of the hydrogen system also provide opportunities to use superconducting, or lossless, energy transmission and high-power motor systems. "It's similar to how MRIs work, magnetic resonance imaging. However, these necessary electrical drivetrain systems do not yet exist, and the methods for integrating electrically driven propulsion technologies into an aircraft platform have not yet been effectively established. This program seeks to address this gap and make foundational contributions in technologies that will enable fully electric aircraft of the future." The team points out that though progress has been made, there are many basic problems that need to be overcome before we see such electric aircraft taking to the skies. "Advances in recent years on non-cryogenic machines and drives have brought electric propulsion of commercial regional jets closer to reality, but practical cryogenic systems remain the 'holy grail' for large aircraft because of their unmatched power density and efficiency," says Associate Professor Kiruba Haran of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Illinois. "The partnerships that have been established for this project position us well to address the significant technical hurdles that exist along this path." Source: University of Illinois https://newatlas.com/nasa-cheeta-funding-aircraft-fuel-cell/59725/ Back to Top Some grounded Boeing 737 Max jets stored in San Antonio SAN ANTONIO (AP) -- Some grounded Boeing 737 Max jets are being stored at a South Texas maintenance facility amid the investigation into two fatal crashes overseas. The San Antonio Express-News reports a Boeing spokesman declined to say how many of the jets are at the 168-acre (67.989-hectare) Port San Antonio site. Paul R. Bergman says Boeing is also storing 737 Max jets at facilities around Seattle. Planes are manufactured in nearby Everett, Washington. Bergman says the Boeing San Antonio site will temporarily store jets for inventory management. Several 737 Max jets were seen parked at the location last week. Crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia killed more than 340 people and led to grounding of Max 737 jets in mid-March. Boeing this month announced it finished updates to the flight-controlled software implicated in the crashes. ___ Information from: San Antonio Express-News, http://www.mysanantonio.com https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/grounded-boeing-737-max-jets-173921966.html Back to Top 10 Top Space Start-Ups You've Probably Never Heard of This list includes one bright, shining space stock that you may already be able to invest in. 2019 is "the year for space," says Morgan Stanley. Globally, the nascent space industry is worth about $350 billion in total annual sales, argues the investment banker -- and could grow as big as $1.75 trillion by 2040. Already, smart money is pouring in. The investment group Space Angels estimates that $1.7 billion in private capital was invested in space companies in the first quarter of 2019 alone -- nearly twice the sum invested in the fourth quarter of 2018 (in other words, 100% sequential growth). SpaceX, Blue Origin, and OneWeb (to name just a few) are each working to put "constellations" of thousands of satellites in orbit to facilitate communication and broadband internet on Earth. Companies both large (Boeing, SpaceX) and small (Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin) are developing human-rated spacecraft that could soon return American astronauts to the International Space Station from U.S. territory, carry paying space tourists past the Karman Line -- or both. With so many companies striving for the same goal, Space Angels declares that 2019 "will most certainly be the year of commercial space travel." Sun peeking above Earth's horizon, seen from space Space Angels: A name investors need to know But speaking of Space Angels...what is Space Angels, anyway? Unknown to most individual investors, Space Angels bills itself as "the perfect platform" for high-net-worth angel investors to "make a 30x return" by investing in "the best early-stage space ventures on (or off) the planet." Importantly, this means that most of the companies that Space Angels identifies will not be stocks that you can invest in today. But they very well could become companies that you will be able (and might want) to invest in a few years from now -- and thus are worth watching. Space Angels' list of current and past picks already reads like a who's who of the private space industry, featuring names from SpaceX to Made in Space to Vector Space Systems and Planet Labs. And in its recent Q1 2019 "Space Investment Quarterly" report, Space Angels adds 10 names to that list -- many of which you might not have heard of. (At least eight of these names are new to me.) Some other names you need to know So let's get to know them, shall we? According to Space Angels' research, the following companies have received the most private investment year to date. In order from most to least, they include: Now, I've written extensively about both OneWeb and SpaceX. I'll pause and give you a chance to read up on those if you haven't already.... Ready? Okay, then. Here's what we know about the rest of these companies. Tarana Wireless The largest of these small space companies that we don't yet know much about, Tarana Wireless is a broadband infrastructure developer backed by both OneWeb's founder Greg Wyler, and now EchoStar as well. Investments from other backers, including AT&T and Deutsche Telekom, bring this company's total funding to $200 million. Its specialty is "beamforming" technology, which permits long-distance wireless internet signals to travel unimpeded around objects that would otherwise block the beam. Swarm Technologies A communications satellite operator, Swarm Technologies aims to provide "affordable connectivity ... to people and devices in remote regions." The company is only three years old, but already has seven satellites in orbit, and more on the way. The company targets customers in the maritime shipping, agriculture, energy, and ground transportation industries. Isotropic Systems Backed by Boeing, Isotropic Systems is developing modular antenna systems for satellite communications, as well as user modems for communications between Earth and satellites, and communications terminals that cost as little as $300. The company was founded in 2013, but is still a few years away from bringing its first product to market. Mynaric Similar in focus to Swarm, Mynaric aims to bring "ultra-high data rates, license-free and 100% secure wireless communication across vast distances" to the "half the world [that] has no access to the internet" presently. Instead of using radio waves for communications, however, Mynaric's technology employs laser beams (think fiber optics, but without the fiber-optic cables). Not yet public in the U.S., Mynaric did float stock in 2017 on the Frankfurt Boerse, in Germany. (So depending on your broker, this is one you may be able to invest in today.) CesiumAstro CesiumAstro, in contrast, more resembles Isotropic Systems -- a start-up builder of advanced "phased array" antennas and communications systems for satellites. With backing from Airbus, Honeywell, and Analog Devices, it's attracted more, and more varied, interest from industry investors than many other of the companies discussed so far. And Cesium also has customers -- including the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, NASA, the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, and Northrop Grumman. Kolmostar Kolmostar is something of an outlier here -- a Chinese space start-up. (It's also received even more investment, from Momenta Ventures, since Space Angels' report came out). Kolmostar's claim to fame is that it's developing algorithms to enhance the efficiency of devices using GPS for position location. According to the company, Kolmostar's tech can reduce power consumption by Internet of Things devices by "100x." HyperSciences In contrast to the many companies focusing on satellite communications from space, HyperSciences' aim is to get to space -- faster -- based on expertise it gained in, of all things, the mining industry. HyperSciences believes that rather than build rockets with multiple stages, the best way to reach orbit is to get there very fast, by blasting off rockets at supersonic speeds -- as fast as Mach 5. Whether or not this is practicable when launching delicate electronics payloads to orbit (much less humans) remains to be seen, but there's an outside chance HyperSciences could succeed in an area that it hasn't even targeted -- hypersonic missiles for defense. (For that reason, I'd put a pin in this one as a potential acquisition candidate by Boeing or Lockheed Martin). ZeroG Lab Last but not least, we come to ZeroG Lab. This is a second Chinese start-up on Space Angels' list. ZeroG Lab hasn't given many details about its business -- only that it supplies satellite components, and that it focuses on the high-growth segments of nanosatellites and microsatellites. Nonetheless, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. By introducing these companies to you today, I hope I've at least put them on your radar, so you can continue following their progress -- all the way to eventually perhaps going public. https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/05/18/10-top-space-start-ups-youve-probably- never-heard.aspx Back to Top Back to Top ICAEA Industry Survey Hello all, The ATC-PILOT Radio Communication Survey is now live: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ATC-PILOT_radio_communication It'd be great to get ATCOs and pilots to participate, so please help use your connections to get this to them. I plan to leave this open for as long as it takes to collect some meaningful data - hopefully enough even by the workshops in October and November to present a little. Best wishes, Michael Kay President (+66) 851098230 www.icaea.aero Back to Top The Steps to Organizational Reliability Reliable Organizational Performance Does regulatory oversight & compliance alone make an organization reliable? The answer is No. Organizations can be reliable today, and for variety of reasons, be less reliable tomorrow. While regulatory compliance programs satisfy an important function, high reliability requires sustained high performance - at the system, individual, and organizational levels. And this goes well beyond regulatory compliance. Simply put, reliability equals performance over time. There's a pattern to how bad things happen, and a science to preventing them. SG Collaborative Solutions shows you how to become sustainably reliable as an organization. The Steps to Organizational Reliability Whether your organization is an airline, manufacturer, Part 135, MRO, ATO, regulator, or other aviation company, there are five steps to organizational reliability, each one a crucial component of success. There are no shortcuts. The steps are: 1. Prepare - Schedule an introductory session and learn the Hidden Science 2. Commit - Engage leadership and train Transformation Advisors 3. Develop - Select and train a Reliability Management Team 4. Sustain - Build and refine a Reliability Management System 5. Qualify - Achieve ongoing Enterprise Leadership Qualification Click here To learn more about the steps. Once you've reviewed the information and are interested to learn more, click on the SCHEDULE AN INTRODUCTORY SESSION button under the first step to contact us for details. What Is the Sequence of Reliability™? The Sequence of Reliability is our proven approach to sustainable high performance: 1. First see and understand risk 2. Manage reliability in this order: a. System performance b. Human performance c. Organizational performance Why is this sequence important? Because successful results depend on it. There's a pattern to how bad things happen, and a science to preventing them. Our approach is guided by that science, and how it can help you get better results for your organization and in your everyday life. It's the hidden science of reliability. And it's been hiding in plain view. Why? Because it evolved in a crooked line, coming from diverse areas of expertise, segregated by specialties. The hidden science synthesizes engineering, behavioral psychology, neuroscience, ethics and the legal system. Harmonizing these specialties solves a fundamental problem: how to achieve sustainable reliability in a complex world. Engineers know system design but don't always understand human behavior because they don't think like typical humans. Psychologists and neuroscientists understand how people think and act, but don't always know how systems work because they don't think like engineers. And lawyers think differently than all of us. SG Collaborative Solutions combines all of these disciplines into a cohesive, connect-the-dots strategy for success. Contact Us to Learn More SG Collaborative Solutions, LLC Email: info@sg-collaborative.com Office Phone: 682-237-2340 Fax: 888-223-5405 Website: https://sgcpartners.com Curt Lewis