Flight Safety Information October 28, 2019 - No. 220 In This Issue FAA's lax oversight played part in Boeing 737 Max crashes Boeing's 737 MAX jet could soon fly again despite damning probes U.S. lawmakers will press Boeing CEO for answers on 737 MAX crashes Accident: Abeer Services L410 at Bor on Oct 27th 2019, forced landing Incident: Jeju B738 at Busan on Oct 25th 2019, autopilot malfunction Incident: Lufthansa B748 at Frankfurt on Oct 26th 2019, could not retract landing gear Incident: Indigo A20N near Mumbai on Oct 25th 2019, engine shut down in flight Fokker 50 - Ground Collision (Kenya) Maintenance van crashes into Gulfstream private jet in Russia, damages fuselage British Airways plane which filled with smoke has had two more 'fume incidents' - despite new engine Brazil working to bring Boeing 737 MAX plane back into service this year Flying is a big part of life in Alaska. We all have a role in ensuring safety comes first Baker Aviation introduces larger fire containment kit for mobile phones American Airlines Launching Nonstop Flights to New Zealand From DFW This once-a-day flight from DFW Airport brings in over $400 million a year Orders for a New All-Electric Airplane Now Top 150. Hong Kong carrier Cathay Pacific launch new aircraft for Australian flyers Batik Air Flies to Timika, Govt Reminds of Safety Issues Air Force's mysterious X-37B space plane lands after spending 780 days in orbit CABIN CREW FATIGUE RESEARCH PROJECT IFR Pilot SAFE SKIES FOR ALL: INTRODUCING SPACEFLIGHT INTO OUR SKIES FAA's lax oversight played part in Boeing 737 Max crashes, but agency is pushing to become more industry-friendly Boeing 737 Max airplanes parked at Grant County International Airport in Moses Lake, Wash. (David Ryder/Getty Images) The Federal Aviation Administration's deferential, industry-friendly approach to oversight allowed Boeing to submit documentation that obscured the dangers of its 737 Max, which was involved in two deadly crashes, documents, interviews and the findings of investigations show. However, instead of trying to reclaim its oversight powers after the deaths of 346 people over the past year, the FAA has been pressing ahead with plans to further reduce its hands-on oversight of aviation safety, current and former officials said. The FAA has been pushing for changes intended to speed approval on critical safety questions and remake regulations using "voluntary consensus standards," interviews and documents show. That could result in outsourcing policymaking on airplane safety to industry groups outside the public's view, experts said. FAA leaders say their approach is based on the premise that companies such as Boeing, and not regulators wielding the stick of enforcement, are best placed to guarantee safety. Rather than focusing on the nitty-gritty details of verifying Boeing's claims that its airplanes are sound, FAA leaders say the agency should be doing more to make sure companies have their own formal systems in place for managing safety - and overseeing those systems to make sure they are working as promised. Nurcahyo Utomo, head of the flight accident subcommittee at Indonesia's National Transportation Safety Committee, during a news conference in Jakarta, Indonesia, on Friday. Investigators found several problems and missteps in connection with last year's fatal Lion Air crash. (Dimas Ardian/Bloomberg) Critics inside and outside government say the FAA's oversight system, which relies heavily on a structure known as Organization Designation Authorization (ODA), presents a fox-guarding-the-henhouse scenario, arguing that the FAA's history of delegating far-reaching oversight powers to Boeing essentially gave the company an opportunity to cut corners on safety, with deadly consequences. An internal Department of Transportation watchdog has repeatedly reported shortcomings in the FAA's oversight of its own oversight system. Boeing, in a statement to The Washington Post, said "the history of commercial airplane development from the 707 to today shows that delegated authority from the FAA has improved the safety of commercial air travel. Even with steadily increasing traffic, the accident rate has consistently decreased." FAA officials have repeatedly defended the agency's delegation of authority to Boeing, saying the system has helped produce an extraordinary U.S. safety record. Following recommendations for improvements from U.S. and international safety experts, Administrator Steve Dickson earlier this month said, "We welcome this scrutiny and are confident that our openness to these efforts will further bolster aviation safety worldwide." With its ties in Washington, Boeing has taken over more and more of the FAA's job Failure to catch safety breaches The FAA gives Boeing employees the job of finding whether the company has met minimum FAA safety standards for its airplanes. But the agency often does not receive the information it would need from Boeing to make many crucial judgments about safety, a group of U.S. and international aviation safety experts said earlier this month. And in many cases, agency officials don't ask for it, current and former FAA officials said. Key agency officials lacked critical information about the automated feature on the 737 Max that investigators say contributed to two crashes within five months, one in Indonesia and one in Ethiopia, according to the group, which was convened by the FAA and led by Christopher Hart, former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. The feature, known as the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or MCAS, repeatedly engaged based on faulty data from a single sensor that investigators say had probably been poorly repaired. The noses of both planes were pushed down over and over again as the pilots struggled unsuccessfully to regain control. Under its oversight system, the FAA failed to catch several major safety breaches, according to Indonesian investigators who on Friday issued their final report on the Oct. 29 Lion Air crash in Indonesia that killed 189 people. NTSB cites competing pilot warnings and flawed safety assumptions on Boeing 737 Max The investigation concluded that the pilots' efforts to save the plane were hampered by the lack of a warning message that would show when two crucial sensors disagreed. That warning message was a standard feature of older 737s and was supposed to work on the Max, but was mistakenly only activated as part of an optional upgrade, according to the investigators. "The software not having the intended functionality was not detected by Boeing nor the FAA during development and certification of the 737-8 Max," the investigators wrote. Boeing was so hungry to create an aircraft that wouldn't require current 737 pilots to go through expensive retraining that it ran an active company effort to remove information about MCAS from the Flight Crew Operating Manual. "Delete MCAS," Mark Forkner, then Boeing's chief 737 technical pilot, wrote to an FAA official in 2017 as the plane's five-year certification was nearing the finish line. The deletion served Boeing's commercial interest at the time, which was to minimize the regulations it had to follow and the amount of costly training required of its customers. Amid hundreds of thousands of pages of records collected so far by investigators is Boeing's original brochure saying pilots would not need new training, according to Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, who is leading one of the investigations. Southwest Airlines was offered a $1-million-per-plane rebate if training was ultimately required, putting pressure on Boeing executives and engineers alike, DeFazio and his investigators confirmed. An internal Boeing presentation highlighted the conflicts that can occur when company engineers are also serving as representatives of the FAA in the safety certification process, according to the document, which is being examined by the committee. The presentation conceded that "lines are frequently blurred" between the two roles. DeFazio said he is seeking to understand how the Max could have been approved by the FAA. "The law and the oversight failed," DeFazio said. Hart's group found that Boeing's information on the ways the 737 Max's systems might fail - known as a Functional Hazard Assessment - was given to the FAA in summary form. "Therefore, the FAA does not have the details of the analysis, which are documented in Boeing's internal" documents, according to the report. Without key details behind Boeing assumptions, the FAA's "visibility" into important safety information was "incomplete and fragmented," the group found. One of Boeing's safety assumptions was that pilots would "take immediate action" to get the aircraft's nose up and get the plane leveled out if problems arose. But the pilots' actions in the crashes were "not consistent" with Boeing's assumptions, the Hart report said. One reason the assumptions were off: MCAS wasn't in the operating manual. Lion Air crash investigators fault Boeing 737 Max's flight-control system, regulatory lapses and pilot training The FAA group that oversees Boeing, known as the Boeing Aviation Safety Oversight Office, has a staff of 45 people, drastically outnumbered by the 1,500 Boeing employees that were supposed to be working on the FAA's behalf as part of the oversight system, according to the Hart report. But that inequality of resources was by design, part of a years-long effort, in some cases directed by Congress, to give many of the FAA's oversight responsibilities to Boeing itself. Supporters cited the company's deep technical expertise, and complaints of bureaucratic FAA slowdowns, as justification for the shift toward industry. A month before the Indonesia crash, Congress passed a bipartisan FAA funding bill that included highly technical but potent provisions meant to broaden the realm of safety responsibilities the FAA must delegate to Boeing. Shortly after the crash, Justice Department criminal investigators began probing whether Boeing provided misleading information about the training required to fly the new jet. Forkner also raised concerns related to MCAS in a 2016 instant message exchange disclosed to the Justice Department in February of this year. The feature had recently been changed so that it would work at lower speeds. Forkner wrote that it was "running rampant" in the simulator and kicking in "like craxy." FAA discovers new safety concern during Boeing 737 Max test Forkner wrote "so I basically lied to regulators (unknowingly)." A fellow technical pilot responded: "it wasn't a lie, no one told us that was the case." A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss concerns about the exchange, said getting those instant messages to the FAA closer to when the Lion Air crash happened, rather than this month, "might have been useful in homing in on" the problems with MCAS before the Ethio¬pian crash, though it's unclear if events would be different. Instead, the U.S. official added sardonically, the messages were handed over to the Justice Department, "which is always looking out for your aviation safety." A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment. In a 2016 email, Forkner told an FAA official he was "doing a bunch of travelling through the next few months" and that he would be "jedi-mind tricking regulators into accepting the training that I got accepted by FAA etc." Forkner moved to Southwest Airlines last year. In a statement, Boeing said it had not been able to speak to Forkner directly, but "he has stated through his attorney that his comments reflected a reaction to a simulator program that was not functioning properly." Plan is to roll back existing rules Despite the oversight failures with the Max, FAA leaders have pressed ahead with plans that would increase industry sway over certification and move the agency toward rolling back existing rules, interviews and documents show. "Aviation safety within the Federal Aviation Administration will be enhanced by reducing the number of regulations, and focusing on the achievement of performance standards," according to an agency strategic plan covering 2019 through 2022. That is a reference to plans being overseen by top FAA officials, several of whom came to the agency from stints representing industry, to overhaul the vast body of federal regulations that set minimum safety standards for large passenger planes. The regulations were created over decades through at times excruciating levels of safety and engineering analysis and cost-benefit calculation. Many of the regulations grew out of individual crashes. The rules can be time consuming and expensive to follow. But certification experts said the exacting requirements are a big part of the success story of aviation safety in the United States, which has until recently been viewed as a model. The way the FAA has gauged whether Boeing and other companies meet safety standards has been called into question following the Max crashes, less so the safety regulations themselves. Boeing and other manufacturers have often chafed at the regulations, arguing that they can be cumbersome without adding to safety, and have lobbied against making them more stringent and for more influence over how they must be followed. In an internal email Aug. 2, the director of the policy and innovation division of the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service announced the hiring of a deputy who will make creating "an integrated program for FAA involvement in voluntary consensus standards" one of her primary focuses. FAA officials face scrutiny over rigor of its oversight The work represents a major expansion of an effort launched years ago with an overhaul of safety regulations for small planes. Boosters had promised less onerous regulations, with better safety results, though the results are not yet clear. And the stakes for large passenger planes are much higher. The general concept in that earlier case was that industry would come together in private standard-setting organizations to figure out companies' preferred methods for meeting existing or changed safety standards for aircraft. The FAA would decide whether to go along with the proposals. Supporters say the efforts will unleash corporate creativity and make passenger planes even safer. Detractors warn that opening the door to a wholesale revision of safety regulations for jetliners in an era when regulations are frequently dismantled without careful analysis could prove damaging for safety. The FAA said it is pushing ahead with a "transformation" of its certification operation. Part of that is a major and ongoing reorganization of its offices responsible for certification. Some FAA officials said the new structure is expected to be used to spur the further delegation of oversight authority from the FAA to Boeing as instructed by Congress last year. As part of its work to "reduce the time for approval decisions" on airplane safety, the FAA plans to gauge success by measuring "Hours per AIR approval," using the shortened name for the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service, according to an FAA presentation outlining the changes. Current and former FAA officials, most of whom requested anonymity to speak freely regarding internal agency disputes, said FAA leaders are pushing to enhance industry sway and further reduce hands-on oversight at precisely the moment the FAA should be reemphasizing such work. An FAA engineer said agency staff had been briefed in all-hands meetings about the reorganization. He said the changes have been presented as a way to ensure the FAA's approval process isn't a "bottleneck" for the industry. "The reason they keep giving is they need to get certification out of the path of the companies' ability to complete projects," said the engineer, who stressed that he was speaking for himself and not on behalf of the agency or his union. He called the organizational changes and move toward more industry-driven safety standards a "very dangerous path for public safety." Changes to flawed Boeing 737 Max were kept from pilots, DeFazio says "It should be obvious to anyone in the U.S. public that it's a very bad idea if the objective is public safety," he said. A second longtime FAA official said the idea that Boeing can effectively police itself under the highly-delegated, highly-leveraged oversight system is misguided. "Having a for-profit company basically given authority to do oversight and certification is just a fundamentally flawed concept," the official said. "Who's the gatekeeper that's going to require a safety upgrade? It sure isn't going to be Boeing, because they're driven by profits and costs and customer needs." In conversations with agency managers, "it's pretty consistent their view that there's not a fundamental flaw with the way we do oversight," the official added. He said he was glad a top FAA safety official appeared to leave the door open to making some changes recommended by Hart's group, but also remains concerned about contradictory efforts to further shift oversight responsibilities away from the FAA and to Boeing. He said there's "this fundamental belief system" among top FAA officials "that industry is going to produce the highest level of safety," but he does not share that confidence. "You can criticize Boeing all you want. But, to me, the buck stops with the regulator." In a statement following the release of Hart's report, Dickson said "the accidents in Indonesia and Ethiopia are a somber reminder that the FAA and our international regulatory partners must strive to constantly strengthen aviation safety." But Dickson also said at an industry conference last week that one of the themes emerging from reviews of the 737 Max certification process was a need to take "a more holistic approach versus a transactional approach to aircraft certification." Dickson, a former senior vice president of flight operations for Delta Air Lines, took the helm of the FAA this summer. Dickson's reference to the "transactional approach" to certification echoes language the FAA and industry boosters have used to build the case for pulling the FAA further from the front lines of certification. As a joint FAA-industry guide to certification from 2017 explained, the goal is "a shift of the cultural mind-set away from the traditional ways" in which a company such as Boeing would "show" how it complies with a minimum safety standard, and the FAA would "find" whether it actually does so. That's the "transaction" at issue. The guide says the eventual goal is for the FAA to accept company data showing it meets safety standards - but to do so without the FAA reviewing the data or having others review it on the FAA's behalf, as long as the company is deemed "competent." Applicants such as Boeing, not the FAA, already play the primary role, FAA leaders argue. "Something that is not well understood about the certification process is that it is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that an aircraft conforms to FAA safety regulations," deputy FAA administrator Daniel Elwell told Congress during a hearing in May on its role certifying the Max. Boeing defended the FAA's oversight system, saying safety improvements in recent years are "due in substantial part to the incorporation of new technologies into modern aircraft, the industry-wide collaboration and focus on safety improvement and the increased rigor that delegated authority has introduced in the process," a company statement said. Messages show Boeing employees knew in 2016 of problems that turned deadly on the 737 Max Beyond questions of Boeing's credibility and the future of the FAA's rigor as a regulator are lingering practical and financial concerns for Boeing, its airline customers and the flying public. The Max appears to still be months away from flying with passengers again. In a bid to get the Max back in the air, the FAA has agreed with demands from European and other foreign regulators to perform a far-reaching new safety analysis of the Max's flight controls. It has done so in conjunction with those foreign authorities, incorporating their questions into FAA interactions with Boeing. Instead of largely relying on Boeing's word, as it did originally, the FAA has required the company to "show its homework" each step of the way, a federal official familiar with the process said. With the eyes of the world on the FAA, and its credibility, the agency's typical high-degree of delegation was off the table. Dickson described tens of thousands of man-hours being put into the review of the Max by engineers and pilots. "It will have undergone more scrutiny than any machine flying out there today," Dickson said, "probably anything in history." https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/faas-lax-oversight-played-part-in-boeing-737-max-crashes-but-agency-is-pushing-to-become-more-industry-friendly/2019/10/27/bc0bf184-f4e1-11e9-ad8b-85e2aa00b5ce_story.html Back to Top Boeing's 737 MAX jet could soon fly again despite damning probes A Boeing 737 MAX airplane idles at a Boeing facility. Boeing's grounded 737 MAX could be cleared to return to the skies in the U.S. as early as this year, despite a continued cascade of damning revelations about the design and approval of the passenger jet that crashed in Indonesia and Ethiopia, killing a total of 346 people. If the MAX flies again soon, it will be a major test of the international credibility of U.S. aviation regulators, who risk finding themselves out of step with the rest of the world if authorities in Europe and elsewhere continue to prohibit the aircraft from flying in their airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration's evaluation process for returning the MAX to service is moving along even as the agency and Boeing continue to face questions about how the plane gained regulatory approval in 2017. Indonesia's government issued a report Friday faulting oversight by both the company and the agency, a week after congressional investigators released 2016 emails and text messages in which a former Boeing pilot had boasted of playing "jedi-mind" tricks on regulators. This week represents a crucial test for the future of Boeing, whose CEO, Dennis Muilenburg, will testify before Congress in what promises to be two days of brutal questions about the twin disasters. Restoring the trust of the flying public may be an even harder task. "The recertification of the aircraft is one thing, but the recertification of the trust and confidence is another," said Dennis Tajer, a spokesperson for the Allied Pilots Association, which represents pilots at American Airlines. "You can have an airplane out there flying, but unless it has the pilots standing behind it or passengers - it can fly all day long, if it's not flying with people on it, it's really not a product." Even so, Boeing said last week that it had completed a "dry-run" of a certification test flight for the MAX. The FAA has repeatedly said that the process for returning it to flight will take as long as required, but U.S. airlines that operate the plane are planning for a return to service early next year. FAA chief Steve Dickson - who days earlier had reprimanded Boeing for failing to show his agency the pilot messages - said last week that the company had hit several milestones, including handing over a key technical document. But he cautioned that testing and the consideration of training requirements would take "several more weeks." European regulators, meanwhile, have signaled that they won't necessarily follow the FAA's timeline. Instead they are relying on their own process, which includes testing and oversight independent of the FAA that will determine their timeline for allowing the MAX back in their airspace. Acknowledging this reality, Muilenburg has said a "phased" global return to service is possible. Jeff Guzzetti, a consultant who previously worked at the FAA, said the combination of the Boeing pilot's messages and emails, the reports that have been released about the MAX and the congressional hearings "may cause people to choose not to fly on a 737 MAX for a while," but that is "different than delaying the ungrounding." Still, Guzzetti said he expects that Boeing will be "pilloried" at this week's hearings. "And they deserve it. Those emails were pretty unprofessional," Guzzetti said. In a 2016 email, Boeing 737 chief technical pilot Mark Forkner told someone at the FAA that he was "jedi-mind tricking regulators into accepting the training that I got accepted by the FAA." In a separate chain of instant messages with a Boeing coworker, also in 2016, Forkner wrote that an automated flight control feature called MCAS was "running rampant in the sim" activating when it shouldn't. He also said that he had "unknowingly" lied to regulators, though it's unclear about exactly what. The messages and emails together again focused intense attention from media outlets and regulators on Boeing and the way the plane was certified, and led the two Democratic lawmakers in the House in charge of overseeing aviation - Reps. Peter DeFazio of Oregon and Rick Larsen of Washington - to state in the strongest terms yet that legislation to address the agency's flaws in aircraft certification is coming. "None of this looks good. None of it looks good for Boeing right now and none of it looks good frankly for the existing process we have that is supposed to have the FAA and the [Original Equipment Manufacturer], in this case Boeing, talking to each other," Larsen said in an interview with POLITICO. "I don't see how the current certification laws stand." On Friday, after Indonesian accident investigators released a report blaming the crash of a Lion Air 737 MAX on failures at virtually every level - with the FAA, with Boeing, with the plane's pilots, with the airline's maintenance - DeFazio issued a statement saying it's "clear that reforms will be needed to ensure that future safety-critical systems don't create single points of failure that bring down new commercial aircraft designs." "I will continue to use every tool at my disposal to get to the bottom of the failures in the system that led to not one, but two tragic crashes," DeFazio said. "And I will be introducing legislation at the appropriate time to ensure that unairworthy commercial airliners no longer slip through our regulatory system." DeFazio chairs one of the committees that Muilenburg will appear before next week. The Boeing CEO is sure to be grilled about a series of reports from crash investigators and international experts that found problems with Boeing's design assumptions, the FAA's certification process and the company's communication with the FAA throughout. But Guzzetti, the consultant, argued that the Lion Air report could actually "provide some relief to Boeing," since it points to maintenance problems and pilot shortcomings in addition to design issues. "I think it's going to mitigate some of the blame that Boeing is going to get," Guzzetti said. https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/28/boeing-737-max-probes-058030 Back to Top U.S. lawmakers will press Boeing CEO for answers on 737 MAX crashes An aerial photo shows Boeing 737 MAX aircraft at Boeing facilities at the Grant County International Airport in Moses Lake WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The head of a U.S. Senate panel reviewing two catastrophic Boeing 737 MAX crashes told Reuters ahead of hearings this week that the plane would not return to U.S. skies until "99.9% of the American public" and policymakers are convinced it is safe. Boeing Co Chief Executive Dennis Muilenburg will testify for two days before Congress starting on Tuesday, which is the anniversary of the Lion Air 737 MAX crash in Indonesia, the first of two crashes within five months that killed a total of 346 people. "Clearly the accidents didn't have to happen and I don't think there was sufficient attention to how different pilots would react to signals in the cockpit," Senator Roger Wicker, a Republican who chairs the Senate Commerce Committee that will hold the first hearing, said in an interview on Friday. Several reports have found Boeing failed to adequately consider how pilots respond to 737 MAX cockpit emergencies in designing the airplane. The Federal Aviation Administration has spent months reviewing Boeing's proposed software upgrades to a key safety system and other training and system changes but is not expected to allow the plane to return to service until December at the earliest. "That plane won't fly unless 99.9% of the American public and American policymakers are convinced that it's absolutely safe," Wicker said, adding he planned to raise Boeing's communication with the FAA during the 737 MAX's development and "the relationship between regulators and manufacturers" during the hearing. "The main question is how can we have a comfort level that they won't happen again," Wicker said. Wicker said he expected to see the results of all the various investigations before proceeding to legislative moves and whether Congress must reform the FAA's practice of designating some certification tasks to Boeing and other manufacturers. "Clearly there was a breakdown in the system somewhere and clearly changes needed to be made," Wicker said. "We need to make sure (the 737 MAX) is as safe as humanly possible." 'A LOT OF SCRUTINY' Muilenburg, who earlier this month was stripped of his title as board chairman, said on a conference call last week he was "looking forward to participating in those hearings. I anticipate there will be tough questions, challenging questions, a lot of scrutiny." Also last week, Boeing ousted its commercial airplanes chief. A report issued on Friday by Indonesian investigators found Boeing, acting without adequate oversight from U.S. regulators, failed to grasp risks in the design of cockpit software on its 737 MAX, sowing the seeds for the Lion Air crash that also involved errors by airline workers and crew. Earlier this month, the chairman of the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which will hold Wednesday's hearing, told Reuters that Boeing must shake up its management team. "Boeing's got to clean up its culture and I don't think you can clean it up with the people who were in charge when this all unfolded," U.S. Democratic Representative Peter DeFazio said. DeFazio said Congress must reform how the FAA certifies new airplanes. In the case of the 737 MAX, the FAA designated more than 40% of the tasks to Boeing. https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-lawmakers-press-boeing-ceo-222454614.html Back to Top Accident: Abeer Services L410 at Bor on Oct 27th 2019, forced landing An Abeer Air Services Let L-410, (invalid) registration YI-BYO performing flight from Walgak to Juba (South Sudan) with 2 passengers and 2 crew, made what appears to be a forced landing in Maatok about 6.5nm/12km south of Bor Airport due to worsening weather at about 13:00L (10:00Z). All 4 occupants survived and were taken to hospitals by UNMISS personnel. The aircraft sustained substantial damage beyond repair. Bor's Mayor reported the aircraft had been chartered to take cargo from Juba to Walgak (Bieh State of South Sudan). On the way back the weather worsened, the aircraft suffered the accident about 6.5nm south of Bor Airport at approximate position N6.09 E31.60. The captain is a Burundi citizen, the first officer a DRC citizen, both passengers are South Sudanese traders. Locals were first responders who rescued the occupants. By 21:00L Oct 27th 2019 all four occupants are reported in stable condition. Bor Airport, located 80nm north of Juba, features an unpaved runway 01/19 of 4200 feet/1280 meters length, position about N6.19 E31.60. The Iraqi registration seems to be invalid, there is no evidence of that registration existing, there are no photos of the aircraft prior to the photos by Bor's Mayor. There is a mention of the tailnumber by a ground observer in Juba in 2017, who described the aircraft with white/green livery, and another observation in Juba 2018 describing the aircraft with white/blue livery. Abeer Air Services is based at Juba Airport, the first mention of the company is in April 2019. The company received their L-410 on June 21st 2019 (see photo below). No weather observation information is available for both Juba and Bor, for Juba the following long TAF was published suggesting thunderstorms over Juba at the time of return (between 09:00 and 15:00Z): TAF HSSJ 270500Z 2706/2812 15004KT 9999 FEW030 SCT040 BECMG 2707/2709 VRB03KT 9999 SCT040 SCT120 PROB30 TEMPO 2709/2715 16005G15KT 6000 TSRA FEW045CB SCT120= http://avherald.com/h?article=4ce86479&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Jeju B738 at Busan on Oct 25th 2019, autopilot malfunction A Jeju Air Boeing 737-800, registration HL7780 performing flight 7C-207 from Busan to Seoul Gimpo (South Korea) with 184 passengers and 6 crew, was climbing out of Busan's runway 36R when the crew stopped the climb at about FL115 due to an autopilot malfunction. The aircraft returned to Busan for a safe landing on runway 36L about 40 minutes after departure. Passengers reported the aircraft shook and began to strangely roll left and right. Then the cabin lights went off, the captain announced an emergency landing back to Busan. The airline reported an autopilot problem prompted the crew to revert to manual flight and return to Busan. The problem is under investigation. South Korea's Ministry of Transport the master control panel would normally show heading and heading numerically however could not be restored to normal function. The severe shaking of the aircraft probably occurred during the transition from autopilot to manual flying. http://avherald.com/h?article=4ce85a48&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Lufthansa B748 at Frankfurt on Oct 26th 2019, could not retract landing gear A Lufthansa Boeing 747-800, registration D-ABYL performing flight LH-422 from Frankfurt/Main (Germany) to Boston,MA (USA), was climbing out of Frankfurt's runway 25C when the crew stopped the climb initially at FL180 reporting a gear problem. The aircraft subsequently climbed to FL200, dumped fuel and returned to Frankfurt for a safe landing on runway 25C about 85 minutes after departure. A number of ground observers along the route of the aircraft up to Cologne (Germany) reported seeing the aircraft with all gear extended and later dumping fuel. A passenger reported the crew announced a problem with the landing gear as reason for the return to Frankfurt. http://avherald.com/h?article=4ce79ba5&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Indigo A20N near Mumbai on Oct 25th 2019, engine shut down in flight An Indigo Airbus A320-200, registration VT-ITA performing flight 6E-375 from Mumbai to Coimbatore (India), was climbing through FL330 about 100nm south of Mumbai when the crew needed to shut one of the engines (PW1127G) down. The aircraft returned to Mumbai for a safe landing about 45 minutes after departure. India's DGCA reported the engine experienced high vibrations attributed to the low pressure turbine. http://avherald.com/h?article=4ce7966b&opt=0 Back to Top Fokker 50 - Ground Collision (Kenya) Date: 27-OCT-2019 Time: 07:25 Type: Fokker 50 Owner/operator: Silverstone Air Registration: 5Y-SMT C/n / msn: 20177 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: None Location: Nairobi-Wilson Airport - Kenya Phase: Taxi Nature: Domestic Scheduled Passenger Departure airport: Nairobi-Wilson Airport (WIL/HKNW) Destination airport: Narrative: A Fokker 50 of Silverstone Air (5Y-SMT) was taxiing from the ramp to the runway when the left-hand wingtip struck the rudder of a parked East African Air Beech Super King Air (5Y-SSB). Silverstone air plane collides with East African Air 5Y SSB kingair https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/230239 Back to Top Maintenance van crashes into Gulfstream private jet in Russia, damages fuselage A van drove right into a business jet, shortly after it arrived from Germany to Russia. Police say bad weather prevented the driver from noticing the aircraft on the tarmac. The unusual traffic incident occurred at the Pulkovo Airport in St. Petersburg on Sunday, the investigators said. Around 9pm local time one of the airport's vans drove right into a Gulfstream III business jet, damaging the fuselage near its right wing. The investigators say that the rain and snow could have prevented the driver from spotting the plane, which has just arrived from Cologne, Germany. It was not clear, whether the jet was standing still or taxiing on the tarmac when it got hit. There were no injuries. A much more tragic crash took place in Moscow's Vnukovo International Airport in 2014 when a snowplow collided with a Dassault Falcon 50 business jet, killing all four people on board, including an executive of the French oil giant Total, Christophe de Margerie. https://www.rt.com/russia/472009-russia-pulkovo-business-jet/ Back to Top British Airways plane which filled with smoke has had two more 'fume incidents' - despite new engine Pictures from social media showed the plane filling with smoke. The British Airways plane which was filled with smoke has had two further "fume events" onboard, despite it being fitted with a new engine, it has emerged. It comes as some passengers are considering taking legal action against the airline, after they claim the thick white smoke has left them with breathing difficulties. The London Heathrow to Valencia flight, BA422, was forced to make an emergency landing on August 5 after the cabin filled with smoke 10 minutes before landing. BA have said they are awaiting the conclusions of the Spanish authorities air accident report, from the CIAIAC, to determine the cause of the incident. But The Telegraph can reveal the aircraft was put back into operation just one month after the incident, following the replacement of one of its engines. Despite this, the A321 aircraft has gone on to experience two further "fume events" onboard. BA would not give details of what the incidents were, but said fume events were caused by a variety of issues, including "burnt food in the oven, aerosols and e-cigarettes, strongly-smelling food in cabin bags, and de-icing fluid". Cabin air enters the plane via a system which compresses air from the engines, and campaigners say a "fume event" occurs when the air becomes contaminated by chemicals such as engine oil, hydraulic fluid, or other potentially hazardous chemicals. The airliner confirmed the plane was put back into service after an extensive investigation by BA engineers who ruled it was safe to fly, but they have not commented on what caused the smoke. In a letter seen by The Telegraph, sent to passengers onboard the flight, BA said "it appears at this stage that the incident was caused by a failure of an engine bearing". Despite the engine being replaced, two more fume events have been recorded on the same aircraft in the last two months. The first occurred just one day after the Airbus 321 was put back into operation on September 6, on a flight from Copenhagen to London Heathrow. The second on October 9, on a flight between London Heathrow and Aberdeen. Passengers had to evacuate the plane via the emergency chutes. The 175 passengers onboard the August 5 flight had to slide down emergency shutes onto the runway at Valencia airport and were left "hyperventilating" and "crying". Zannah Marchand wrote on Twitter: "Just been evacuated off a flight to Valencia after plane filled with smoke. No water, no first aid. People crying. No BA representative. Help." Professor Vyvyan Howard, a emeritus professor of pathology at the University of Ulster, has researched the effects of fume events upon crew and passenger health. "As this fleet (of aircraft) ages, I would suspect these sorts of events will increase in frequency," he said. "In the long run they will probably have to redesign aircraft, as they have done in the Dreamliner 787." The air system on the Boeing Dreamliner 787 is pumped into the cabin separately from the engines. Prof. Howard said if the "oil seal" on an engine fails then it is "pretty much guaranteed" that fumes will enter the cabin. He added previous studies have shown the presence of dangerous chemicals in cabin air after these fume events. "(Airlines) say 'oh it's something burning in the gally', but you can't see in front of your nose," Prof. Howard said. "They always mention that it might be due to other things, but here you've got an acrid fume throughout the cabin, and there is not much doubt about where those have come from." British Airways said there were typically 151 engineering checks before an aircraft is cleared to continue flying. In a statement BA said: "We are legally unable to comment on causes until the Spanish air accident investigation is concluded. "We would never operate an aircraft if we believed it posed any health or safety risk to our customers or crew. "Research commissioned by the European Aviation Safety Agency, in 2017 concluded that the air quality on board aircraft was similar or better than that observed in normal indoor environments. "We always encourage our colleagues to tell us about any concerns they have, with reports passed onto the Civil Aviation Agency. "Safety is our first priority and every report is thoroughly investigated, with typically 151 engineering checks before an aircraft is cleared to continue flying." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/26/british-airways-plane-filled-smoke-has-had-two-fume-incidents/ Back to Top Back to Top Brazil working to bring Boeing 737 MAX plane back into service this year FILE PHOTO: Aerial photos showing Boeing 737 Max airplanes parked at Boeing Field in Seattle, Washington, U.S. October 20, 2019. REUTERS/Gary HeBRASILIA (Reuters) - Brazil is working to bring the Boeing 737 MAX airplane back to service "by the end of the year," Civil Aviation Secretary Ronei Glanzmann said on Sunday. The MAX has been grounded for months after two deadly crashes, and U.S. airlines do not expect to see it return to service before 2020, according to their flight schedules. Glanzmann's statement is the first by Brazil's government on the Boeing issue. Brazil's civil aviation regulator has been working closely with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration on getting the plane back in the skies. Brazil's largest domestic airline, Gol Linhas Aéreas Inteligentes (GOLL4.SA), is a major MAX customer, and has ordered over 100 of them. Glanzmann made his remarks during an airline industry conference in Brasilia organized by ALTA, a group that represents the interests of Latin American carriers. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-airplane-boeing/brazil-working-to-bring-boeing-737-max-plane-back-into-service-this-year-idUSKBN1X60KA Back to Top Flying is a big part of life in Alaska. We all have a role in ensuring safety comes first. Is it safe to fly in Alaska? That may sound like a rhetorical question to a frequent traveler. But all eyes are on a crash in Dutch Harbor last week, when a PenAir plane skidded off the end of the runway, resulting in one death. PenAir is owned by the Ravn Air Group. Flights from Anchorage to Dutch Harbor are marketed by Alaska Airlines. Alaska and Ravn have not yet resumed the flights to Dutch Harbor. "Flying is the safest thing we have," said Will Johnson of Fairbanks. "But we could make it better." Johnson owned a commuter airline, Yute Air, between 1990 and 2000. He also ran a flight school in Bethel for four years and has survived two plane crashes. "As a passenger, be careful who you get in the plane with," he cautions. The PenAir accident is the latest to grab the attention of travelers. Back in May, there were two fatal accidents with Taquan Air, based in Ketchikan. Last summer K2 Aviation had a crash with fatalities on Denali. Last month, the chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board convened a rare roundtable discussion to address aviation safety in Anchorage. The daylong session, attended by many of the state's air carriers, focused on accident statistics and possible solutions in four areas: training, risk management, technology and infrastructure. The NTSB forum was designed to address safety issues for so-called "Part 135" operators, or those air carriers who take up to nine passengers per flight. The Part 135 operators represent the majority of flights in Alaska. But airlines like Alaska and PenAir operate under more stringent "Part 121" rules. Mark Stigar is an aviation safety auditor with 40 years of flying experience. In the Army National Guard, he oversaw flight facilities around Alaska and at Fort Richardson. After getting out of the military he had a safety consulting business and worked as a lead safety auditor for the Medallion Foundation, an FAA-funded aviation safety organization that is no longer in operation. "When people climb on a plane, they think they're getting on board an Alaska Airlines jet," he said. "There's this blind trust that all pilots are created equal. And they're not." As an aviation safety auditor, Stigar worked with operators as large as Alaska Airlines, all the way down to single-plane operations. "About 80% of accidents are caused by human factors," he said. "It's just like leaving a cup of coffee on top of your car, but the results are much bigger. Good, conscientious people can make those sorts of errors. We're all human." After decades of flying, Stigar says he's a "fair weather flyer" now. To get to his cabin in Iliamna, he favors a company with a pressurized aircraft that can fly over the weather in Lake Clark Pass. "Flying in Alaska is so much better than it used to be," said Stigar. Some of the improvements, he said, came from the insurance companies who had to settle expensive lawsuits. Aviation safety covers a broad spectrum, too. Witness the grounding of entire fleet of Boeing 737 MAX aircraft. Investigators and inspectors still are working to resolve the safety problems that led to two fatal crashes. There's also the matter of airplanes being used as terrorist weapons. The events of Sept. 11, 2001, spawned an entirely new federal agency, the Transportation Security Administration. Whether it's unruly passengers, an abundance of alcohol, someone who tries to open the exit door for fresh air or spilled cleaning fluid that renders crew members unconscious, there are plenty of hazards in the air. Some safety issues come out of having too many people in too small of a space for too long. Usually, those issues center on larger jets. Aside from Alaska Airlines and a handful of other airlines flying travelers out-of-state, Alaskans count on smaller planes. This type of small-plane flying in Alaska is baked into our lifestyle. Many Alaskans count on airplanes to get to work, get to the doctor's office or go to school. Travelers must rely on regulatory agencies like the NTSB and the Federal Aviation Administration to do the necessary oversight to ensure safe operations. Still, it's right to be concerned about the integrity of your air carrier. It's appropriate to know the airline's operational reputation and its safety record. You should get more involved than when you're shuffling aboard a big jet headed to Hawaii. In a small plane, pay attention when the pilot is giving your safety briefing. It's important to be aware of the weather and to dress appropriately. It's crucial to know where the fire extinguisher is as well as any survival gear and emergency locator devices. You should know how to get out of the aircraft in an emergency. On a helicopter trip from Anchorage to Fairbanks, my pilot told me: "You're part of the crew today." "Keep your eyes open for other traffic and obstacles in the air," he said. Then I listened to him methodically go over his pre-flight checklist. I'm sure he'd done it many times before, but he read the list out loud as he completed each step. I felt safer on that flight, knowing he was paying close attention to ensure a safe flight. Tomorrow, I'll get on another plane - and I'll be listening closely to the safety briefing. "If these aviation safety issues were easy, they would have been fixed," said Stigar. https://www.adn.com/alaska-life/travel/2019/10/26/flying-is-a-big-part-of-life-in-alaska-we-all-have-a-role-in-ensuring-safety-comes-first/ Back to Top Baker Aviation introduces larger fire containment kit for mobile phones Baker Aviation has introduced a new larger HOT-STOP 'L' Fire Containment Kit. The new 14" x 10" sized fire containment solution is deemed fireproof, as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations 14 CFR 1.1, meeting the same strict testing criteria that all the HOP-STOP 'L' products achieve and available to the business aviation industry. Ray Goyco, Jr., CEO for Baker Aviation Services Group LLC stated: "We realised many of our customers carry larger, more powerful waterproof phones with cases. Therefore, we made this new bag larger and tested it to be fireproof with zero tolerance for toxic smoke and gasses associated with these fires. As the pioneers in this market, we ensure our product is fully capable of containing the latest waterproof phone technology without the need for water," added Goyco. The new 14" x 10" HOT-STOP 'L' phone containment solution is burn-certified and designed to safely contain popular smart phones with their oversized cases and eliminate the risk of battery related fires and toxic smoke on board aircraft. Its light-weight design is easy to store on any aircraft and does not require the use of aqueous liquids (but the vessel allows the use of water if operators choose to follow SAFO guidance). Customers have the option of purchasing the phone unit with electromagnetic frequency (EMF) shielding that can be added to any HOT-STOP 'L' fire-containment kit upon request. In addition, 14" burn-certified safety gloves may be purchased with the phone unit. The HOT-STOP 'L' bags are made up of multiple durable fabrics with a felt inner core that has a 3,200ºF melting point which is sandwiched between two outer layers that have a 2,080ºF melting point and are proven to absorb energy and fire while eliminating the escape of smoke, sparks, and flames. Multiple sizes are available to fit various devices up to the large 27" x 26" vessel designed to contain defibrillators and oversized all-in-one computers. Custom solutions are available. Larger kits include a carry/stowage sling, and optional accessories comprise of an exterior carry bag with zipper and Velcro wall mounting kit. The HOT-STOP 'L' EVO series was first introduced to the airlines that were looking for containment solutions that will minimise the risk of unknown devices being brought onboard, including portable charger/battery packs, e-cigarettes, and internal equipment, such as defibrillators, and electronic flight bags that are carried inside the cockpit. The added military-grade zipper technology offers an additional layer of security with its zero tolerance, airtight closure that is designed to contain a device in full thermal runaway until it has burned out. https://www.hmgaerospace.com/news/inflight/nbaa-bace-baker-aviation-introduces-larger-fire-containment-kit-for-mobile-phones/ Back to Top American Airlines Launching Nonstop Flights to New Zealand From DFW The flight will take about 16 hours aboard the Boeing 787-900 Dreamliner American Airlines is launching nonstop flights from Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport to Aukland, New Zealand, beginning next year. (Published Oct. 28, 2019) Fort Worth-based American says the seasonal service runs from Oct. 25, 2020 through March 25, 2021. Flights will leave DFW Airport on Wednesday, Friday and Sunday for the first weeks of service before becoming daily beginning Dec. 1, 2020. The 16-hour journey will be flown on American's Boeing 787-900, which has 30 seats in Flagship Business and 21 Premium Economy seats. American says the new route linking DFW with Aukland comes as part of a business deal with Australian carrier Qantas. The codeshare agreement means Qantas customers will be able to book the flight, which is operated by American, and still redeem Qantas points and status credits on American. Tickets will be available beginning Nov. 30. American is also adding nonstop service from Los Angeles International Airport to Auckland and Christchurch, New Zealand, beginning next year. https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/business/American-Airlines-Launching-Non-Stop-Flights-to-New-Zealand-From-DFW-563969561.html Back to Top This once-a-day flight from DFW Airport brings in over $400 million a year International routes generate the most revenue for airlines, even with fewer flights. Australian carrier Qantas' DFW-to-Sydney flight is the highest-grossing flight from DFW International Airport. That daily Airbus A380 flight over North Texas is more than a photo opportunity for plane spotters -- it's bringing in more than $400 million a year for Australian carrier Qantas. The DFW-to-Sydney flight is the highest-grossing flight from DFW International Airport, according to aviation data firm OAG. It's one of nine flights that brought in more than a quarter-billion dollars between June 2018 and May of this year. It made $428 million for Qantas during the period. The data from OAG shows exactly how lucrative those long-haul flights can be to carriers like Qantas and American Airlines. Routes from DFW Airport to London and Tokyo can bring in as much revenue as flights to more frequent spots such as Los Angeles and Chicago. OAG doesn't have data for Southwest Airlines, which doesn't share its fare information as freely. "The majority of the top 10 markets undoubtedly meet performance expectations, but it's important to point out that highest-grossing doesn't always equal highest profitability in the airline business," said Will Berlichmann, director at Dallas-based Airlines Data Inc. and Volaire Aviation Consulting. " In some situations, flights between an individual city-pair might lose money on a standalone basis, but they operate because of the positive revenue contribution they make to an airline's network." That's the case for Qantas and American, which have a strong partnership and can use that Syndey to Dallas flight to connect passengers to hundreds of destinations in the U.S. and Australia. Of course, the Qantas flight to Sydney has some advantages over competitors. First, it's on an Airbus A380, one of the largest passenger airplanes in the world that can carry about 485 people. That's nearly triple the passenger load of a 737. It's also one of the longest nonstop flights in the world, taking 16 hours to fly to the Australian city. The daily Qantas flight to the Land Down Under brings in about $628,000 per flight, nearly 3 times as much as higher-frequency routes to London Heathrow Airport or Los Angeles International. American's DFW-to-Heathrow route was the second-highest-grossing route with $421 million in revenue, but flying almost four times as often as the Sydney flight. High-demand international routes are among the highest-grossing, at least per flight. The DFW-to-London flight brings in about $173,000 on each flight and DFW-to-Tokyo Narita Airport makes $197,000 per trip. DFW's most frequent flight, the American Airlines route to Los Angeles, ranked third with $324 million in revenue followed by American's flight to Miami, with $317 million. Another American hub in Charlotte was the fifth-highest grossing with $302 million in revenue. "The bottom line is that the top-grossing markets are a reflection of the strong DFW hub, which has increasingly added more and more connecting passengers this year as American has expanded to over 900 daily flights," Berlichmann said. https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2019/10/28/this-once-a-day-flight-from-dfw-airport-brings-in-over-400-million-a-year/ Back to Top Orders for a New All-Electric Airplane Now Top 150 Electric aircraft Alice at Le Bourget. Electric-plane startup Eviation Aircraft Ltd. says it has signed up two more customers for its pioneering commuter aircraft, taking the order backlog to more than 150 planes. Both buyers are American and are recognized names in the aviation industry, Chief Executive Officer Omer Bar-Yohay said Thursday in an interview, declining to name them before formal announcements early next year. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-24/eviation-lands-more-customers-as-electric-plane-orders-top-150 Back to Top Hong Kong carrier Cathay Pacific launch new aircraft for Australian flyers Hong Kong airline carrier Cathay Pacific has introduced a new aircraft in Australia - said to be one of the most advanced planes in the world. Hong Kong airline carrier Cathay Pacific has launched a new plane that's made its first flight to Australia - dubbed as one of the most advanced aircraft models in the world. The Airbus A350-1000 touched down at 12pm in Melbourne following its very first flight from Hong Kong, marking the first time the Airbus model that has been used on scheduled services to Australia. Able to carry 334 passengers, the airline is also set to launch the new 1000 aircraft on their Perth-Hong Kong route from Monday. The new plane joins the airline's three daily flights between Melbourne and Hong Kong, with the main difference between the A350-1000 and 900 models being the size of the plane. The new 1000 model - which is 7 metres longer - will be able to carry a total of 334 passengers, which is 54 more than the 900. The new A350 landed in Melbourne on Sunday. For passengers, some of the biggest difference will be the business class area of the plane. Instead of being split by a galley, all business seats will be in a single cabin on the aircraft. The airline says this new model - which isn't used by any other airline in Australia just yet - brings together the very latest in aerodynamics, design and advanced technologies, providing improved fuel efficiency as well as a state-of-the-art travel experience for passengers. Inside the Business cabin on the new Airbus A350-1000. The cabin itself features LED mood lighting, Wi-Fi and new in-flight entertainment offerings. "We are proud to be the first airline to launch the A350-1000 in Australia and to offer one of the youngest long-haul fleets in the sky," said Rakesh Raicar, Cathay Pacific Regional General Manager South West Pacific. "The launch of this aircraft will allow us to deliver further enhanced features that improve the comfort and overall travel experience of our guests." The plane is the first A350-1000 to be used in Australia. A further increase in A350-1000 services is planned for the end of the year, with Mr Raicar saying the plane was ideal for "long and skinny'' routes such as that between Hong Kong and Auckland. Engines are also more powerful on the new plane. Two Rolls-Royce Trent XWB engines generate 90,000 pounds of thrust each, 13,000 pounds more than the earlier plane. Rolls-Royce has had trouble with some of the Trent engines powering Dreamliners but has avoided problems with the engines powering Airbus XWBs (extra wide bodies). The bigger engines mean the takeoff weight can be 316 tonnes, almost 40 tonnes more than the earlier plane. This allows for extra cargo, critical to Cathay's global operations. Qatar Airways was set to be the first airline to launch the new Airbus in Australia, but the launch of the plane on the Doha-Sydney route has been delayed until mid-November. https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-advice/flights/cathay-pacific-lands-one-of-most-advanced-planes-in-auckland/news-story/fa91553448a5e9087aab32daa84068b3 Back to Top Batik Air Flies to Timika, Govt Reminds of Safety Issues TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The Transportation Ministry has responded positively to the inaugural flights of PT Batik Air Indonesia, which are direct flights from Jakarta and Makassar to Timika's Mozes Kilangin Airport in Papua. These routes will be available daily as of today. In light of the opening of the new routes, the ministry's Director General of Air Transport, Polana B Pramesti, has warned the airliner to priotize safety aspects. "The safety of the flights must adhere to the existing rules," said Polana in a written statement on Monday, October 28. The inaugural flight to Timika, Papua, today from Soekarno-Hatta to Mozes Kilangin Airport was attended by the Director of Air Transport Maria Kristi Endah, Mimika Regent Eltinus Omaleng, airport operational unit (UPBU) head Mozes Kilangin Ambar Suryoko, Timika's Airnav Indonesia and a representative of PT Lion Air Group's board of directors. https://en.tempo.co/read/1265386/batik-air-flies-to-timika-govt-reminds-of-safety-issues Back to Top Air Force's mysterious X-37B space plane lands after spending 780 days in orbit X-37B space plane The Air Force's X-37B space plane lands at the Shuttle Landing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. (Air Force Photo) The U.S. Air Force's X-37B space plane landed today after spending a record-setting 780 days in orbit testing hush-hush technologies for long-duration spaceflight. Touchdown at the Shuttle Landing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida came at 3:51 a.m. ET (12:51 a.m. PT), the Air Force said in a statement. The landing marked the end of the fifth test mission for the uncrewed mini-space shuttle, which experts say appears to be part of an effort to develop more versatile, faster-acting and longer-running spacecraft for remote sensing and satellite deployment. "The X-37B continues to demonstrate the importance of a reusable spaceplane," Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett said in today's statement. "Each successive mission advances our nation's space capabilities." Randy Walden, director of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, said the X-37B "successfully completed all mission objectives." "This mission successfully hosted Air Force Research Laboratory experiments, among others, as well as providing a ride for small satellites," he said. One of the experiments is known to have tested the long-term performance of oscillating heat pipes, which could provide a low-cost way to cool high-powered electronics in orbit. When the X-37 was launched from Kennedy Space Center back in September 2017, the Air Force said the mission would also check the space plane's performance and maneuverability in a high-inclination orbit. Boeing X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle This mission, known as OTV-5, marked the first time that an X-37B was launched on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket instead of a United Launch Alliance Atlas 5. The 780-day duration exceeded the 718-day record that had been set by the fourth test mission in May 2017. Three earlier missions took place in 2010, 2011-2012 and 2012-2014. Total test time over all five missions amounts to 2,875 days, or nearly seven years. The Air Force is thought to have at least two of the robotic space planes, which were built by Boeing as part of a project that started out under NASA's wing but was transferred to the Pentagon in 2004. The planes were designed for a 270-day mission duration in orbit but have now nearly tripled that time frame. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said the X-37B's success is "the result of the innovative partnership between government and Industry." "The sky is no longer the limit for the Air Force and, if Congress approves, the U.S. Space Force," Goldfein said. The next X-37B launch is set for 2020. https://www.yahoo.com/news/air-force-mysterious-x-37b-160613280.html Back to Top CABIN CREW FATIGUE RESEARCH PROJECT Fatigue is a pervasive issue that affects all airline cabin crew. Fatigue may impede cabin crews' ability to consistently and effectively manage passengers from safety, security and service perspectives. As part of our undergraduate research project at Swinburne University of Technology (Melbourne, Australia), we are conducting a survey of international cabin crew primarily engaged in long-haul (LH) and ultra long-haul (ULH) flight operations. This survey asks cabin crew for their views on various issues associated with work-related fatigue and stress. We also seek your views on the availability and effectiveness of various fatigue countermeasures. If you are working as LH or ULH cabin crew, you are invited to participate in this study. You will be asked to complete an online questionnaire, which also includes a consent form. The study takes approximately 20 minutes to complete. To access the study, please go to the following website: https://swinuw.au1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8qBLCKgmpWlraxT Participants who complete the study will be eligible to enter a draw to win the latest iPad (6th Generation). This research project is being supervised by Peter Renshaw at the Department of Aviation, Swinburne University of Technology. If you have any questions, please contact Peter at prenshaw@swin.edu.au Back to Top IFR Pilot: The Pilot is responsible for the safety and efficient conduct of the flight assignment. Education * High school diploma or equivalent (GED) * Hold the airman certifications and ratings necessary to serve as a pilot in command under FAR 135. * FAA airline transport pilot or commercial pilot. Experience * 1500 hours helicopter or 2000 hours total with 1200 hours helicopter required. * 500 hours cross country flight experience. * 100 hours instrument experience (50 hours in actual flight). * 250 hours turbine time. Licensure * FAA airline transport pilot or commercial pilot licensed with helicopter and instrument rating (helicopter) * Must pass an FAA Class II medical exam on an annual basis * Must pass drug and alcohol testing at initial hiring and then on a random testing basis * Valid Class D Driver's license in the state of residency with an acceptable driving record Apply Here: https://northmemorial.com/north-memorial-health-careers/ Back to Top JOIN US! SAFE SKIES FOR ALL: INTRODUCING SPACEFLIGHT INTO OUR SKIES www.alpa.org/safeskies October 31, 2019 | Hyatt Regency Hotel | Washington, D.C The Air Line Pilots Association, Int'l and the Commercial Spaceflight Federation invite you to a dynamic one-day conference as we highlight numerous, ongoing efforts to transform our airspace for the future. Curt Lewis