Flight Safety Information May 22, 2019 - No. 103 In This Issue Boeing acknowledges flaw in 737 MAX simulator software Incident: Iberia A346 over Atlantic on May 21st 2019, flaps problem Incident: Jet Time B738 at Helsinki on May 21st 2019, flaps problem Incident: Porter DH8D near Montreal on May 13th 2019, fuel hiding Boeing 777-3F2ER - Ground Collision (Turkey) Report: Brazilian Cessna Citation VII loss of control accident after pitch trim failure Pilot flying to Orlando has eyes burned by laser Airbus Cautious On Regulator And Safety Questions Following Boeing 737 MAX Troubles Strengthening Accountability for Aviation Safety More than 50 aviation accidents occur each year due to fuel management issues China's big three airlines seek Boeing compensation over 737 MAX grounding Airbus prepares counter-punch to new Boeing mid-sized jet Bermuda Aircraft Registry Reaches 900th Registration SpaceX's Starhopper moves closer to its first flight Senior Manager, Advanced Qualification Program Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection and Investigation...Course Leading Change in Safety Management Systems ICAEA Industry Survey The Steps to Organizational Reliability ISASI - DFW Regional Chapter Meeting Boeing acknowledges flaw in 737 MAX simulator software Boeing did not indicate when it first became aware of the problem (AFP Photo/Jason Redmond) New York (AFP) - Boeing acknowledged Saturday it had to correct flaws in its 737 MAX flight simulator software used to train pilots, after two deadly crashes involving the aircraft that killed 346 people. "Boeing has made corrections to the 737 MAX simulator software and has provided additional information to device operators to ensure that the simulator experience is representative across different flight conditions," it said in a statement. The company did not indicate when it first became aware of the problem, and whether it informed regulators. Boeing's statement about the flight simulator marked a first acknowledgement of shortcoming since the two accidents led to the grounding of the top-selling 737 MAX plane. The plane's MCAS anti-stall software has been blamed in large part for the Ethiopian Airlines tragedy. According to Boeing, the flight simulator software was incapable of reproducing certain flight conditions similar to those at the time of the Ethiopian Airlines crash in March or the Lion Air crash in October. The company said the latest "changes will improve the simulation of force loads on the manual trim wheel," a rarely used manual wheel to control the plane's angle. "Boeing is working closely with the device manufacturers and regulators on these changes and improvements, and to ensure that customer training is not disrupted," it added. Southwest Airlines, a major 737 MAX customer with 34 of the aircraft in its fleet, told AFP it expected to receive the first simulator "late this year." American Airlines, which has 24 of the aircraft, said it had ordered a 737 MAX simulator that will be delivered and put into operation in December. "As a result of the continuing investigation into both aircraft accidents, we are looking at the potential for additional training opportunities in coordination with the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and Allied Pilots Association," it added. - Certification process - The planes have been grounded around the world, awaiting approval from US and international regulators before they can return to service. Only Air Canada has a MAX simulator, industry sources told AFP. Currently, there is only one flight simulator specific to the 737 MAX in the United States, and it is owned by Boeing, according to FAA documentation. US airlines train their pilots flying the MAX on a simulator built for the 737 NG, the version preceding the 737 MAX in the 737 aircraft family. Southwest said that is because during the certification process for the MAX, Boeing stressed that there were only minor differences with the NG and simple computer and online training could accommodate for the differences. The FAA, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency and Canadian regulators had approved those recommendations, Boeing stresses. However, the 737 NG lacks an MCAS, specially designed for the MAX in order to correct an aerodynamic anomaly due to its heavier motors and to prevent the plane from stalling. Pilot training will likely be at the heart of the meeting of international regulators in Fort Worth, Texas on Thursday when the FAA will try convince its counterparts of the robustness of its certification process for the modified 737 MAX. The American regulator has maintained that training pilots on a simulator is not essential, a position with which pilots and its Canadian counterpart disagree. Boeing said Thursday that it completed its software update on the 737 MAX. The proposed fix, which addresses a problem with a flight handling system thought to be a factor in both crashes, must now win approval from US and international regulators before the planes can return to service. US airlines have targeted August as the date they expect to resume flying on the 737 MAX. https://www.yahoo.com/news/boeing-acknowledges-flaw-737-max-simulator-software- 025706984.html Back to Top Incident: Iberia A346 over Atlantic on May 21st 2019, flaps problem An Iberia Airbus A340-600, registration EC-IZY performing flight IB-6827 (sched. dep May 20th, act dep May 21st) from Madrid,SP (Spain) to Sao Paulo Guarulhos,SP (Brazil), was enroute at FL350 about 580nm southwest of Madrid when the crew decided to return to Madrid. The aircraft descended to FL340 for the return, subsequently descended to FL190 and FL120 while dumping fuel and positioned for an approach to Madrid's runway 32L. The aircraft landed safely at a higher than normal speed (195 knots over ground). A passenger reported after the aircraft had been shut down back in Madrid the crew informed the passengers they had suffered a problem with the flaps. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground about 19 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c83bdca&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Jet Time B738 at Helsinki on May 21st 2019, flaps problem A Jet Time Boeing 737-800, registration OY-JZJ performing flight J4-946 from Larnaca (Cyprus) to Helsinki (Finland) with 187 people on board, was on approach to Helsinki descending through 4000 feet when the crew stopped the descent due to a problem with the flaps and entered a hold at 4000 feet. About 15 minutes later the crew positioned for an approach to the longest runway available, runway 04R (length 3500 meters/11,500 feet), and landed safely at a higher than normal speed (196 knots over ground) about 23 minutes after aborting the descent. The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 10 hours, then positioned to Copenhagen (Denmark) where the aircraft performed a normal landing at a normal speed. The aircraft returned to service about 3 hours after landing in Copenhagen. http://avherald.com/h?article=4c83bc2d&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Porter DH8D near Montreal on May 13th 2019, fuel hiding A Porter Airlines de Havilland Dash 8-400, registration C-GKQA performing flight PD-242 from Halifax,NS to Ottawa,ON (Canada) with 72 passengers and 4 crew, was enroute at FL240 when the crew noticed a fuel imbalance and initiated a fuel transfer from the right hand main to the left hand main fuel tank. The crew subsequently realized that the left fuel tank was indicating only 200 lbs and stopped the fuel transfer. Cabin crew did not observe any fuel leak. The crew declared PAN PAN and diverted to Montreal,QC (Canada). During the approach the left hand fuel quantity indication returned to normal, the crew cancelled PAN and continued for a safe landing in Montreal. The Canadian TSB reported the operator's maintenance identified the left wing fuel indication system was faulty. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/POE242/history/20190513/1620Z/CYFC/CYOW http://avherald.com/h?article=4c83b7b4&opt=0 Back to Top Boeing 777-3F2ER - Ground Collision (Turkey) Date: 22-MAY-2019 Time: 05:04 UTC Type: Boeing 777-3F2ER Owner/operator: THY Turkish Airlines Registration: TC-LJE C/n / msn: 44126 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Minor Location: Istanbul Airport (IST/LTFM) - Turkey Phase: Taxi Nature: Domestic Scheduled Passenger Departure airport: Istanbul Airport (IST/LTFM) Destination airport: Ankara-Esenboga Airport (ESB/LTAC) Narrative: THY Turkish Airlines flight TK2108, a Boeing 777-300ER, sustained damage to the right- hand wing tip leading edge after hitting a mast at the side of the taxiway. The aircraft taxiing out for departure at the time of the incident. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/225340 Back to Top Report: Brazilian Cessna Citation VII loss of control accident after pitch trim failure Status: Final Date: Tuesday 10 November 2015 Time: 19:04 Type: Cessna 650 Citation VII Operator: Banco Bradesco Registration: PT-WQH C/n / msn: 650-7083 First flight: 1998 Engines: 2 Garrett TFE731-4R-2S Crew: Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2 Passengers: Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2 Total: Fatalities: 4 / Occupants: 4 Aircraft damage: Destroyed Aircraft fate: Written off (damaged beyond repair) Location: near Guarda-Mor, MG ( Brazil) Phase: En route (ENR) Nature: Executive Departure airport: Brasília-Presidente Juscelino Kubitschek International Airport, DF (BSB/SBBR), Brazil Destination airport: São Paulo-Congonhas Airport, SP (CGH/SBSP), Brazil Narrative: The Cessna 650 Citation VII corporate jet took off from the Congonhas Airport in São Paulo, Brazil to Brasília in the morning and was scheduled to return at the end of the same day. This flight was intended to transport executives from the company that owned the aircraft. During preparations for the return leg to Congonhas Airport, the primary pitch trim system failed. As a consequence the autopilot could not be used. According to Brazilian Regulations the aircraft was not allowed to depart in this state, however the flight crew elected to depart. The flight took off on the flight back to Congonhas Airport at 18:39. During the initial climb, the secondary pitch trim system was activated. At 18:53, some 14 minutes after takeoff, the flight crew attempted to engage the autopilot and the primary pitch trim system was switched on again. It was not possible to engage the autopilot and the secondary pitch trim system was again activated. As the aircraft was climbing through FL340, the flight crew requested to continue to FL410. This was authorised. At 19:03 the crew again switched to the primary pitch trim system. The horizontal stabilizer then moved to a nose-down position and the warning clacker sounded in the cockpit. The aircraft had reached a highest altitude of 36800 feet and from that moment on it entered a rapid descent. The crew switched back to the secondary pitch trim system but failed to perform the 'Pitch Trim Runaway or Failure' emergency procedure. Control could not be regained and the aircraft impacted a farm field near Guarda-Mor, Brazil. All four aboard were killed. Probable Cause: Contributing factors. - Control skills - undetermined. It is possible that, after inadvertent movement of the horizontal stabilizer, the crewmembers did not operate on the control switches of the secondary pitch trim system, since no other warning sound (Clacker) was recorded on the CVR recordings. The action prevised in the emergency procedures Pitch Trim Runaway or Failure, item 3, regarding trimming of the aircraft through the secondary system, possibly, was not performed. The performance of the crew may have been restricted only to the elevator control on the aircraft controls or to the control of the stabilizer associated with the primary trimming mode. - Attitude - undetermined. The decision to make the flight without the proper functioning of the primary pitch trim and autopilot system may have been the result of the pilot's self-confidence because of the successful previous flight under similar operating conditions. Considering the hypothesis that the updated Shutdown Checklist, which should incorporate the Stabilizer Trim Backdrive Monitor - TEST, was not performed after the pre-crash flight, one could consider that there was a lack of adhesion to the aircraft operating procedures. Such an attitude could be associated with the pilot's self-confidence about the aircraft's operating routine, whose acquired experience could have given him the habit of ignoring some of the procedures deemed less important during the flight completion phase. - Crew Resource Management - a contributor Throughout the flight, there was an absence of verbalization and communication of the actions on the checklist. Similarly, in the face of the emergency situation of the horizontal stabilizer (Pitch Trim Runaway or Failure), no statements were identified regarding the actions required to manage this situation among the crew. These characteristics denote inefficiency in the use of human resources available for the aircraft operation. - Training - undetermined. It is possible that the absence of a periodic training in simulator, especially the emergency Pitch Trim Runway or Failure, has affected the performance of the crew, as far as the CVR did not record statements related to the actions required by the abnormal condition experienced. - Organizational culture - undetermined. The operator did not usually properly fill out the PT-WQH flight logbook. This condition evidenced the existence of informal rules regarding the monitoring of the operational conditions of the aircraft. In this context, it is possible that the history of failures related to the pitch trim system has not been registered. - Piloting judgment - undetermined. Moments prior to takeoff, it was recorded in the CVR speeches related to the flight without the autopilot, possibly related to a failure or inoperativeness of the primary pitch trim system. The takeoff with a possible failure in the pitch trim system of the aircraft, showed an inadequate assessment of the risks involved in the operation under those conditions. - Aircraft maintenance - undetermined. It was not possible to establish a link between the maintenance services performed on the aircraft in September 2015 and the events that resulted in the accident occurred on 10NOV2015. However, it was not ruled out that an incomplete crash survey was carried out in the pitch trim system of the aircraft, due to the lack of detail of the service orders. - Decision-making process - a contributor. The sounds related to the test positions of the Rotary Test Switch have not been recorded in the CVR recording, so it is possible to conclude that the Warning Systems - Check item of the Cockpit Preparation Checklist has not been performed. The decision to perform the flight without the complete execution of all items of the Cockpit Preparation Checklist, prevented the correct verification of the primary longitudinal Trim system of the aircraft and reflected an inadequate judgment about the risks involved in that operation. - Interpersonal relationship - undetermined. According to the CVR data, there was a possible rush of the crew to take-off, even though it was verified that the aircraft's pitch trim system did not work properly. It was not possible to determine if this rush was motivated by passengers' pressure or self-imposed by the pilot. - Support systems - undetermined. It is possible that the Pilots' Abbreviated Checklist - NORMAL PROCEDURES, aboard the aircraft, was outdated, without the incorporation of the Stabilizer Trim Backdrive Monitor - TEST procedure in the Shutdown Checklist. The possible completion of Shutdown Checklist with outdated procedures would have hampered the manufacturer's suggested verification for identification of abnormalities in the aircraft's pitch trim system. - Managerial oversight - undetermined. The records and control of the operational check flights, both by the maintenance shop and by the operator, prevised in documentation issued by the manufacturer (SB650-27- 53 and ASL650-55-04) were not performed in an adequate manner, indicating possible weaknesses in the supervision of the maintenance activities. FINAL REPORT Back to Top Pilot flying to Orlando has eyes burned by laser Pilot has been put on medical leave VOLUSIA COUNTY, Fla. - A pilot flying a WestJet aircraft from Canada to the Orlando International Airport had his eyes burned by green laser light, according to an incident report from the Volusia County Sheriff's Office. A Federal Aviation Administration employee said the plane was 10,000 feet in the air above Sanford when the the pilot was hit by the green laser. The Boeing 737 landed safely in Orlando. During the laser attack, the crew could not determine where the laser was coming from due to a risk of exposure, according to the FAA. The FAA employee told investigators after the attack they could see a green light coming from Covington Drive in Deltona. The crew was not certain if this was the location where the laser came from, according to the incident report. The incident report shows the pilot has been put on medical leave and will be evaluated in the upcoming days. This past Sunday, a Volusia County deputy responded to a home on Covington Drive in reference to the laser complaint, according to the incident report. The deputy said people living at the home had no knowledge of the incident they did not own any lasers. The home does have a bright green front porch light. WestJet released a statement on the incident: Laser incidents pose a serious concern to crew and aircraft safety and have serious repercussions for those found to be shining lasers in a manner that could result in injury or damage. These incidents are reported immediately to local authorities for further investigation. Pilots are extremely focused during all phases of flight, but especially during take-off and landing, when most laser incidents occur. When any sort of light enters the flight deck, pilots are trained to look away and maintain focus but they must also maintain vigilant with respect to their surroundings and monitor the apron prior to landing. Pilots take on an incredible responsibility controlling an aircraft, and it is WestJet's duty to ensure a safe work environment for them to operate in. Any pilot who reports being struck by a laser is required for safety and health reasons to have an ophthalmology evaluation. https://www.clickorlando.com/news/pilot-flying-to-orlando-has-eyes-burned-by-laser Back to Top Airbus Cautious On Regulator And Safety Questions Following Boeing 737 MAX Troubles Airbus showed caution Tuesday addressing questions from the press on the relationship between manufacturers and regulators in the wake of the 737 MAX grounding and allegations of a too cozy relationship between Boeing and the FAA. Boeing 737-8 MAX Landing at Seattle's Boeing Field after a successful Maiden Flight for this new airliner. Airbus Chief Commercial Officer Christian Scherer said during a press event in Toulouse, "I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong in the relationship [between Boeing and the FAA] that I can judge ... no reason to question the integrity of that relationship." Scherer also disagreed with assertions that the 737 MAX design had been pushed to its limits: "The MAX is not one stretch too many, in my humble opinion." Airbus, like Boeing, is in a position to advise regulators on the technical capabilities of its products when submitting new products or changes for approval and certification. And the practice of acceptance and approvals via FAA designee applies to all other aviation industry manufacturers. Any changes in these practices would be disruptive to the aviation industry, far beyond Boeing. However, Scherer seemed to credit Europe's aviation safety regulator, EASA, with having an advantage, saying: "EASA has a slightly different mandate than the FAA. EASA is a purely safety orientated agency." EASA is responsible to the European Commission and not a single government. It also has a mandate limited to aviation safety oversight, while the various countries in the EU are responsible independently for some of the FAA's other mandates including management of Air Traffic Control and airport infrastructure. Scherer credited Boeing's safety culture saying, "Safety is the first and the last word and concept and obsession that aircraft manufacturers go through in every decision that they make. Whenever there is an accident out there, the first question that gets asked in an Airbus management meeting is: can we learn from it?" Philippe Mhun, Airbus' Executive Vice-President Programmes & Services, said that safety is part of the company's DNA as well its suppliers and the broader aviation industry. "We comply with regulations both in terms of certification and in terms of operation for the airlines," he said. "We have a product safety process internally. We are learning a lot also from the data that we collect from operations. We can anticipate early signals of any degradation of performance, which is the job of everybody in the company, especially in the support and engineering side. We are not just reactive, we are pro- active in terms of safety. We go further than purely regulation, just to create the barriers in terms of safety that will enhance the safety behaviour of our products." Rémi Maillard, Head of Services by Airbus, added: "We work hand in hand with the regulators, and with the OEMs to adopt the safety standards. But, to be clear, our internal safety standards are even more stringent than what is required by the regulators." https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2019/05/21/airbus-cautious-on-regulator- and-safety-questions-following-boeing-737-max-troubles/#c2ee246395cc Back to Top Strengthening Accountability for Aviation Safety Requiring airplane manufacturing CEOs to certify airplane safety could prevent tragedies. The aviation industry has a stellar safety record. Yet tucked into a report filed with the federal government in 2015, the Boeing Corporation acknowledged the existence of "significant risks" related to its ability to "satisfy performance and reliability standards" in rolling out the MAX version of its popular 737 airplane. Those risks have now been realized in the tragic deaths of 346 passengers and crew members in crashes of 737 MAXs in Indonesia and Ethiopia. Policymakers and the public are questioning the oversight provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), especially as further reporting in the media raises the possibility of more widespread safety lapses at Boeing. Ultimately, the key challenge is to find ways to instill an even stronger commitment to safety at companies like Boeing. To that end, Congress should consider borrowing a tool from an entirely different domain: securities regulation. Under the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, CEOs of publicly traded corporations must personally certify the accuracy of their companies' accounting statements and the adequacy of their internal financial controls. Backed by a criminal penalty provision- which authorizes up to $5 million in fines and 20 years in jail-this certification requirement makes it crystal clear that top leadership will bear personal liability for knowingly signing false accounting statements. Studies indicate that Sarbanes-Oxley's certification requirement has achieved its end of preventing fraud. In a 2006 survey of auditors, for example, 68% reported that the requirement improved the integrity of financial reporting. One of the auditors noted that previously "it was very easy for people to say ... I wasn't involved in that, I didn't know anything about that." A similar survey of corporate directors indicated that the requirement heightened CEO diligence. One director said, "now the CEO also wants a good audit," while "previously it used to be like . . . passing the buck kind of mentality." That is because, under Sarbanes Oxley, the CEO is clearly "on the hook." Surprisingly, CEOs of aircraft manufacturers have no such requirement to sign off on safety certifications or their companies' internal safety control systems. In its 2015 report, Boeing admitted that "the introduction of new aircraft programs...such as the ... 737 MAX...involves increased risks associated with meeting development, testing, production and certification schedules." At the same time, the company acknowledged that its managers would "continue to seek opportunities to reduce the costs of building our aircraft." These cost considerations, and intense competition with Europe's Airbus, may have led Boeing to cut corners in producing its cutting-edge 737 MAX aircraft, not as a new plane, but as a derivative of a design originally approved in 1967. Under current FAA rules, only lower-level engineers and managers at the company participated in certifying the safety of the 737 MAX. These employees could face criminal charges for false reporting to the government-but prosecutions of lower-level employees would do nothing to assure the public that incentives at the very top of the organization align with passenger safety. It's true that, if found negligent, Boeing could have to compensate the victims' families. But tort liability only arises after an accident occurs-and it does not come out of the CEO's pocket. Ex post liability may never do enough to promote safety in advance. Given that Boeing's CEO already signs off on financial reporting-under threat of potential criminal sanction-would it be too much to ask him to sign off on safety reporting, too? Surely the accuracy of aircraft safety testing is as important as the accuracy of financial statements. Of course, some might object that CEOs lack the expertise and time to review the hundreds of complex, technical tests that go into building aircraft. But that is also true with respect to financial reporting. CEOs cannot know firsthand every bookkeeping entry that underlies a complex financial statement for a major public corporation. And in Boeing's case, its CEO holds a bachelor's degree in aerospace engineering and a master's in aeronautics. Presumably he has greater expertise in aviation safety than in financial accounting. Even when CEOs lack technical expertise, they still have the responsibility to select capable people who carry out detailed safety work, to oversee the management of internal controls, and, most importantly, to set the right tone about their organizations' values. If an aircraft manufacturer fails to balance properly the pressures of a highly competitive, global marketplace with paramount safety imperatives, their passengers and crew members bear the ultimate risk. It is the responsibility of policymakers to ensure that top corporate leaders share some of that risk. https://www.theregreview.org/2019/05/20/coglianese-blazer-strengthening- accountability-aviation-safety/ Back to Top More than 50 aviation accidents occur each year due to fuel management issues ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. - Minutes before a single-engine Piper airplane made an emergency landing on the Maitland Boulevard ramp to Interstate 4 last week, the pilot notified air traffic controllers at Orlando Executive Airport that his aircraft had a problem. "I am about 11 miles north of the airport and I just ran out of fuel in one tank, so I need to go straight to the (runway)," the pilot said in a recorded radio transmission. It remains unclear why the pilot did not have enough fuel to complete his trip from South Carolina. An average of more than 50 aviation accidents occur each year due to fuel management issues, according to a 2017 Safety Alert issued by the National Transportation Safety Board. A News 6 review of NTSB accident investigations reports found several recent crashes in Central Florida were blamed on the aircraft running out fuel, a situation known as fuel exhaustion. In May 2018, a pilot was seriously injured after crashing in Port Orange. He later told NTSB investigators he "should have made a positive determination of fuel on board prior to takeoff." Only a cup of fuel was recovered from the plane's two tanks, according to the agency. A pilot whose plane crashed in Ormond Beach in December 2016 was impaired by alcohol before and during a flight, likely leading to fuel exhaustion, according to the NTSB. A pilot told federal investigators that he failed to fill his planes fuel tanks before taking off from Ocala in October 2016. The plane later crashed into a fence as the pilot tried to land it on the driveway of a local farm, records show. "You just don't run out of gas as a pilot. That's not what we do," said Charles Davis, an aviator with the Orlando Sanford Flying Club. "If you do your pr-flight prep and follow the rules, usually you'll eliminate situations like this." Davis said Florida has many fueling facilities and so-called fixed based operators such as Million Air in Sanford where pilots can quickly land to top off their tanks. "There are a number of airports that you could divert to to get fuel," said Davis. "You would be looking at your fuel gauge and seeing it bouncing on the E. That should be your first sign that you have a problem going on. And at that time you would divert to another airport." Prior to takeoff, pilots must consider factors such as distance, wind speed and passenger load to determine how much fuel the aircraft will need to travel to the destination. "If you're going to have anticipated headwinds, it's going to take you longer to get there. You're going to burn more fuel," said Bob Joyce, the director of aviation safety at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach. "Aircraft have a limited amount of cargo and weight capacity, so that might limit the amount of fuel you take." Federal Aviation Administration rules require pilots flying without instruments in clear weather conditions, known as Visual Flight Rules, to carry enough extra fuel to fly for a minimum of 30 minutes longer than it will take to reach the destination. At night, that minimum requirement extends to 45 minutes. "Most pilots like myself, I will (plan for) an hour to an hour and 10 minutes," said Davis. "I just want that extra cushion because you never know (what could happen)." Besides checking the fuel gauge, Davis said it is easy to verify the fuel level in some aircraft by simply removing the fuel cap. "One of things in the preflight checklist is to visually look at your tanks to see if they're topped off with fuel," Davis said. At Embry-Riddle, students are taught to keep their eyes on the fuel gauge while airborne. "Every pilot should be monitoring the fuel," said Joyce. "In fact, we have it built into our checklist to monitor the fuel en route at certain phases of flight. So it's really something you should be doing all along, because conditions can change." https://www.clickorlando.com/news/investigators/more-than-50-aviation-accidents- occur-each-year-due-to-fuel-management-issues Back to Top China's big three airlines seek Boeing compensation over 737 MAX grounding BEIJING (Reuters) - China's three biggest airlines have asked U.S. planemaker Boeing Co to compensate them for losses caused by the grounding and delayed deliveries of 737 MAX jets, just as regulators gather to discuss design changes for the troubled aircraft. The triple compensation requests come at a sensitive time in Sino-U.S. relations, with a string of tit-for-tat import tariffs culminating in Washington accusing Beijing of backtracking on almost all aspects of a proposed trade deal. The U.S. administration's latest tariff increase on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports - and hints of more - has prompted fear that China could retaliate against U.S. companies. On Wednesday, Air China Ltd and China Southern Airlines Co Ltd told Reuters the pair have added their voices to a compensation request from China Eastern Airlines Corp Ltd announced a day earlier. The latest requests were first reported by Chinese state TV. China was the first country to ground the 737 MAX two months ago after a crash in Ethiopia killed 157 people in March, in the second such incident for Boeing's newest aircraft. "China has grounded 96 aircraft, which is about 4 percent of its airplanes. The grounding causes huge losses for Chinese airlines," China aviation expert Li Xiaojin told Reuters. Daily losses are likely to be at least 100,000 yuan ($14,469.90) per aircraft for each airline, Li estimated. "The potential costs are huge too. Slower growth in passenger volume across China's major airports for March and April was largely due to the grounding of 737 MAX jets, according to my calculations," Li said. China's state-asset regulator put the number of 737 MAX jets operated by the three biggest Chinese carriers at 53. Outside of China, carriers that have requested compensation include Turkish Airlines, United Airlines, Ryanair and Flydubai. COORDINATED EFFORT Bloomberg last week reported the big Chinese airlines were considering teaming up to seek compensation. On Tuesday, state newspaper People's Daily said China Eastern had not communicated with the other carriers on the topic before making its request. China Eastern confirmed the content of that report to Reuters. On Wednesday, however, widely read tabloid Global Times reported that the action appeared to be a "concerted effort". "China seems to be ready now to put more pressure on Boeing as the company happens to have a genuine safety issue, and the trade friction between the U.S. and China started to go into a downward spiral," Global Times quoted Shen Yuxin, a partner at law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, as saying. The latest compensation requests also come a day before the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration hosts global regulators in Dallas to review 737 MAX software and training proposals from Boeing before regulators decide whether to end the grounding. China and the European Union each have their own aerospace industries and so are likely to determine their own conditions for allowing 737 MAX flights to resume, analysts said. The International Air Transport Association has also convened a meeting of airlines with grounded 737 MAX jets on Thursday in Montreal. ($1 = 6.9109 Chinese yuan renminbi) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-air-china-boeing/chinas-big-three- airlines-seek-boeing-compensation-over-737-max-grounding-idUSKCN1SS0A1 Back to Top Airbus prepares counter-punch to new Boeing mid-sized jet TOULOUSE, France (Reuters) - Airbus hinted on Tuesday at a price battle and imminent aircraft revamp to counter a possible new Boeing mid-sized jet, promising a "left hook, right hook" from two of its established models. U.S. planemaker Boeing is studying whether to launch a 220-270-seat jet wedged between traditional twin-aisle models like the Airbus A330 or its own 787, and the industry's bread-and-butter single-aisle models like the A320/321 and Boeing 737. Airbus aims to defend that space with its own A330neo at the top end and the best- selling A321neo at the bottom - two models boasting new engines on older airframes. "Those programs are both so mature that it gives Airbus pricing flexibility to address this middle-of-the-market segment," sales chief Christian Scherer said. He promised what he described as a "left-hook, right-hook approach" to that part of the market, using the two Airbus jets, as airlines replace Boeing 757 and some larger 767 aircraft. Boeing says its possible mid-market aircraft would be significantly more efficient than either Airbus model, but it is under pressure from airlines to develop it at the right price. Boeing continues to promote the project behind the scenes, while toning down public discussions as it focuses on resolving the crisis over its grounded 737 MAX, airline sources say. Airbus is meanwhile weighing plans to boost the A321 with a long-range version called A321XLR to pre-empt the Boeing jet. Chief Executive Guillaume Faury hinted confirmation could come at next month's Paris Airshow, saying the A321LR was the world's longest-range single-aisle jet plane "for the moment". The two giants are playing reverse roles at the top end of the $150 billion annual jet market, where Boeing's upcoming 406-seat 777X - a derivative of its 777 mini-jumbo with new engines - is up against the newer and slightly smaller A350-1000. Scherer mocked the 777X as a "re-engined Hummer" hobbled by excess weight compared with the carbon A350. Boeing, which recently won a deal to sell the 777X to British Airways after a gap in sales, maintains it is the most efficient plane per seat. Weight is one factor among several determining performance. Boeing has outsold the A350-1000 almost two to one with its 777X, but its order book is heavily dependent on Gulf carriers whose expansion plans look increasingly fragile, analysts say. MARKET REASSURANCE New operations chief Michael Schoellhorn said Airbus had launched studies on squeezing more efficiencies out of its core European factories and on whether it needed to buy capabilities currently left with its suppliers. Airbus is talking to Canada's Bombardier about a Belfast, Northern Ireland, wings plant that is up for sale. The plant makes wings for the 110-130-seat A220 jet program that Bombardier sold to Airbus last year. Airbus announced plans to bump up the range of the jet to stimulate more sales. As it ramps up production, Airbus also played down concerns from airlines that the aviation industry is reaching the top of its business cycle after a near decade-long expansion. "The market remains quite positive" and less dependent on economic cycles than before, Scherer said. Airbus officials nonetheless voiced concerns over the impact of renewed trade tensions on demand. [MKTS/GLOB] Airbus and Boeing have had a weak start to the year and last week global airlines body IATA said it expected to cut 2019 industry profit forecasts. Both companies have posted more cancellations than new business in the first four months of the year, with Boeing worst affected as it wrestles with the grounding of its 737 MAX. On Monday, Reuters reported Airbus had lost a bid to oust Boeing as sole provider of wide-body jets to Air New Zealand. But in a surprise European breakthrough, China Airlines this month forged a deal paving the way for the Taiwan carrier to switch its single-aisle fleet to Airbus from the Boeing 737 MAX. The deal to replace older 737s took years to complete and was originally drafted before the 737 MAX crisis. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-outlook/airbus-pledges-boxers-counter-punch-to-new-boeing-mid-jet-idUSKCN1SR0OU Back to Top Bermuda Aircraft Registry Reaches 900th Registration Bermuda Aircraft Registry, which is owned and managed by the Bermuda Civil Aviation Authority (BCAA, Stand C29), announced this week at EBACE that it has added a Dassault Falcon 8X as the 900th aircraft on its current registry. Covering around 2,000 aircraft during its 90-year existence, the registry includes both private and commercial aircraft that are domiciled all over the world. It is the oldest and largest offshore aircraft registry designed for aircraft operating under Article 83 bis agreements, which allows them to reap the benefits of being registered outside of their home countries. Recently the registry has found competition from other countries with tax-neutral treatment of aircraft and yachts, which are often subject to high value-added taxes (VAT) and sales taxes in certain jurisdictions. The BCAA recently began a marketing program to increase awareness of its online registration process and customer service. "We strive to be flexible, transparent and responsive to make the process of registering an aircraft as quick and easy as possible, while maintaining the highest standards of regulations, professional service, and courtesy," said registry Director General Thomas Dunstan. "The Bermuda Registry has earned a solid reputation internationally," he continued. The BCAA website walks potential registry clients through the process, including crew licensing, regulation, and even online payment of fees for the program. To place an aircraft on the registry, a person must be a UK national, Commonwealth citizen, or national of any European economic area state. Also qualifying are bodies incorporated in any part of the Commonwealth (including Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies) and have their registered office or principal place of business in any other part of the Commonwealth, or undertakings formed in accordance with the law of an European Economic Area state and have their registered office, central administration, or principal place of business within the European economic area. That said, there are plenty of entities that have been incorporated in Bermuda or one of the qualifying states to meet the above qualifications. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2019-05-21/bermuda- aircraft-registry-reaches-900th-registration Back to Top SpaceX's Starhopper moves closer to its first flight The test rocket might finally see some air An artistic rendering of SpaceX's future Starship vehicle Image: SpaceX SpaceX hopes to launch its Starhopper test vehicle skyward on its first flights soon. The short tests, which will take place out of SpaceX's launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, will send the rocket to just under 1,640 feet (500 meters) high for its low-altitude flights and up to 16,400 feet (5,000 meters) high for its high-altitude flights, according to a modified application filed with the Federal Communications Commission. The heights match those that the company indicated in a similar filing last year. The Starhopper is a very basic version of Starship, the massive passenger rocket that SpaceX wants to build to send people to the Moon and Mars. In order to prepare for the first Starship's flight to space, SpaceX has been tinkering with the test Starhopper in Boca Chica. The vehicle boasts a similar structure to the final rocket, though it's slightly smaller in size. Starhopper's most important task is to test out the new, powerful Raptor engines that SpaceX has developed for the future deep-space rocket. TESTING THE LANDING CAPABILITIES THE ROCKET WILL USE TO TOUCH DOWN ON OTHER WORLDS SpaceX fired up a Raptor engine on the bottom of the Starhopper for the first time in April. It only lifted a few inches since the vehicle was tethered to the ground. But now, SpaceX plans to perform what are known as "hop" tests with the vehicle (hence the nickname Starhopper), which will send the rocket to a low altitude above the Earth. The company will then attempt to touch the Starhopper back down on the ground with the vehicle's three landing legs. The idea is to test out the landing capabilities the rocket's going to use to touch down on Earth and other worlds. SpaceX performed similar tests with a vehicle known as Grasshopper back in 2012 and 2013 to try out the landing technique its Falcon 9 rockets now use. Starhopper's tethered tests only had one Raptor engine attached, but SpaceX CEO Elon Musk indicated that, eventually, three engines would be added to the vehicle for higher flights. For now, images of the vehicle show that the Starhopper in Boca Chica doesn't have any engines attached. That will change as the company gears up for the inaugural flights. Cameron County, which is where Boca Chica is located, issued road closures around the launch site for May 28th, indicating that the flights could take place as soon as a week from now. However, SpaceX's first round of tests occurred many weeks after the first round of road closures were issued, so it's possible the first hop tests may still be a few weeks out. https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/21/18634411/spacex-starhopper-starship-low- altitude-test-flights Back to Top Senior Manager, Advanced Qualification Program Location:Ft Worth, TX, US Location: Flight Training Academy (DFW-FTRN) Additional Locations: None Requisition ID: 29419 Overview Join us for a career with endless possibilities. Looking for a job where a passion for innovation, a culture of teamwork, and opportunities for growth are valued and rewarded? You've come to the right place. You don't have to be an airline aficionado to join American Airlines. It takes more than cool planes to keep us ahead of the curve, and thanks to our team of behind the scenes professionals, we do just that. As the largest airline in the world, American Airlines is in the business of serving the global travel needs of our customers. At the core of the Company is our commitment to each customer and each employee. We are dedicated to developing and delivering what our customers value and are willing to pay for. Customer-centric planning, innovative marketing, and an exceptional customer experience are supported by a cadre of talented people. What does it take to join us? We're glad you asked! We expect exceptional skills in your discipline and a dedication to being the best as we relentlessly pursue our goal of being not just the largest airline in the world, but also the best airline in the world. Fortunately, we're building on almost a century of innovation and firsts in our industry - and we plan to continue that tradition of excellence. About The Job Responsible to the Director, Standards, to assist in achieving the objective of providing a corps of proficient pilots, flight attendants, dispatchers, instructors/evaluators, and assist with department support programs which ensure a safe and efficient flying operation. The Senior Manager, AQP will coordinate application, update and continual improvement of the Advanced Qualification Program, and ensure regular updates to all American Airlines pilot training curricula, as required. Specifically, you'll do the following: * Coordinate the development and standardization of all flight training curriculum including Distance Learning * Subject Matter Expert for all training curriculum * Oversee content, currency and standardization of training curriculum and documents * Coordinate revisions of training curriculum and documents * Oversee flight training data collection, analysis and reporting; monitor for trends and/or anomalies * Provide leadership for AQP development * Develop and manage the ISD process mechanisms * Communicate program objectives, goals, and accomplishments to management and check airmen * Supervise development of software requirements/specifications for database/program changes related to flight training * Primary contact with FAA for AQP document approval About The Job (Continued) * Primary contact with FAA and other external organizations for training development issues * Ensure compliance with FAA, Department of Defense, One World Alliance, and IATA Operational Safety Audits (IOSA) and other training requirements * Participate in safety risk management processes within Flight Operations and Flight Training and Standards that support the principles of Safety Management System (SMS) described in FAA Advisory Circular 120-92 (as amended) and the company Operations Policy Manual * Oversee Instructor/Evaluator Standards Program * Interface with Training Planning and Scheduling to coordinate and approve TMS master-plan changes * Verify policy and procedure compliance and communicate to Instructors/Evaluators * Co-chair Operations Data Analysis Working Group (ODAWG) Qualifications Required Qualifications * Bachelor's Degree in related field or equivalent experience/training * 5 years related job experience * Experience in data analysis & statistical methods such as regression modeling, forecasting, and process control * Experience with document publishing, including document creation, distribution, and management * Experience with Instructional System Design (ISD) processes * Experience with project management * Demonstrated ability to effectively prioritize, organize, and multi-task in a dynamic work environment * Expert level expertise with Microsoft Office (emphasis on Word, Excel & PowerPoint) * Proficiency in the use of Microsoft Access * Flexibility with work schedule and excellent attendance record * Ability to multi-task Qualifications (Continued) Preferred Qualifications * 5 years of aviation training or safety experience in FAR Part 121 or 135 operations, military operations, or equivalent experience * Development experience with software such as Cognos, Tableau, or Microsoft Power BI * Demonstrated database management skills * Ability to demonstrate proficiency with Adobe Framemaker * Experience with document publishing, including document creation and distribution * Experience with regulatory compliance and audit processes APPLY NOW Back to Top Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection and Investigation Course presented by N. Albert Moussa, PhD, PE July 9 to 11, 2019 BlazeTech Corporation 29 B Montvale Ave, Woburn MA 01801 USA. Dear Colleague, While commercial air transport is very safe, the advent of new technologies poses fire safety challenges that will be treated in this course. This offering draws upon Dr. Moussa's work in this area since 1971 as well as related courses that BlazeTech has been teaching since 1998. Lectures will include Li and Li-ion battery fires, flammability of carbon fiber and glass fiber composites, emerging aviation fluids, engine fires, fuel tank fire/explosion, fire extinguishment methods, protection methods, aircraft accident investigation, and fire/explosion pattern recognition. Recent accidents are continuously added to the course. For each type of fire, this course will provide a cohesive integrated presentation of fundamentals, small- and large-scale testing, computer modeling, standards and specifications, and real accident investigation - as outlined in the course brochure. This integrated approach will enable you to address safety issues related to current and new systems and circumstances, and to investigate one of a kind fire and explosion accidents. The course will benefit professionals who are responsible for commercial aircraft, helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles including design, equipment selection, test, operation, maintenance, safety management system, hazard/risk assessment, and accident investigation. View Brochure for course content and registration form (also embedded below). View Testmonials of previous attendees and their Companies. View some of the technical references discussed in this course. We also offer this course at the client site as well as customized courses on fire and explosion in other areas. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Albert Moussa, Ph.D., P.E. BlazeTech Corporation 29B Montvale Ave. Woburn, MA 01801-7021 781-759-0700 x200 781-759-0703 fax www.blazetech.com firecourse@blazetech.com LinkedIn 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