Flight Safety Information November 11, 2019 - No. 232 In This Issue Boeing Seeks Blessing to Deliver 737 MAX as FAA Reviews Pilot Training Incident: Atlas B763 over Atlantic on Nov 10th 2019, hydraulic leak Incident: Asiana A359 near Manila on Nov 9th 2019, engine shut down in flight Incident: United A319 at Vancouver on Nov 8th 2019, rejected takeoff due to bird strike Incident: Skywest CRJ2 at Akron Canton on Nov 7th 2019, flaps fail Incident: Hawaiian A332 near Los Angeles on Nov 8th 2019, generator failure Burning Odor Forces An Air France 777 On A 10 Hour Flight To Nowhere Westerner may face 7 years in prison for yanking open aircraft door as it taxied for takeoff Boeing 737-86Q (WL) - Fire Onboard (Egypt) Learjet 35A - Runway Excursion (Mexico) Airbus A380-842 - Ground Damage (Australia) ATC Audio: American Eagle Jet Loses Control Japan Raps 'Dangerous' U.S. Military Pilots PILOTS SOUND OFF ON GARMIN'S AUTOLAND U.S. aviation authority downgrades Malaysia's air safety rating Behind the scenes: What goes on in the flight deck during a diversion? European Aviation Safety Agency to open office in Budapest Conflict Over An-124 Program Continues U.K. Labour Politicians Suggest Business Aviation Ban Potentially The Most Revolutionary Aircraft You Have Never Heard Of Has Flown SpaceX set to launch another 60 Starlink internet satellites CABIN CREW FATIGUE RESEARCH PROJECT Flight Data Solutions Applied International Aviation Meteorology" course - Nov 2019' Position Available: Audit Production Manager; Air Carrier Boeing Seeks Blessing to Deliver 737 MAX as FAA Reviews Pilot Training Plane maker discussing whether it can deliver aircraft before pilots have undergone required training Boeing is running low on parking spots for the 737 MAX as finished planes pile up. Here, an employee works on 737 MAX planes at a Washington factory. PHOTO: JASON REDMOND/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES By Andrew Tangel and Andy Pasztor Boeing Co. BA -1.77% hopes to deliver 737 MAX aircraft to airlines before the end of the year even if regulators haven't approved related pilot training, people familiar with the matter said. As the plane maker prepares for the Federal Aviation Administration to lift a MAX flight ban as soon as December, Boeing is discussing with regulators whether it can deliver the aircraft before airline pilots have undergone required training needed to fly the jet, these people said. The emerging plan comes amid increasing signs there will be lag between an FAA's lifting of a flight ban and its approval of new training for pilots. Delivering aircraft before all the regulatory approvals are complete would relieve pressure on the manufacturer as it contemplates further cutting or halting MAX production amid the protracted grounding. It would also help airlines that have lost hundreds of millions of dollars and disrupted passengers' travel plans. Under the plan, airlines still wouldn't fly the plane with passengers until the training occurs. "Subject to strict regulatory approval, we continue to complete key milestones that put us on a path to certification of the MAX in December, with training approved in January, paving the way for the safe return of the MAX to commercial service," a Boeing spokesman said. The FAA's order is expected as soon as mid-December, barring any further engineering and testing delays that have kept the MAX fleet grounded since a second 737 MAX crashed in Ethiopia in March, the people familiar with the matter said. That crash followed another accident in Indonesia less than five months earlier; in all, 346 people died. Last week, Boeing cleared a key hurdle following a series of certification simulator tests with the FAA, a person familiar with the process said. But related pilot training isn't expected to be formally approved until a number of weeks after the FAA certifies the MAX as safe for flight, following a public comment period, the people said. That would effectively prevent airlines from carrying passengers until January at the earliest under the current expected timing. Airlines have been anxious for Boeing to resume deliveries of the MAX and want to avoid bottlenecks and long waits once the plane is cleared for service. Southwest Airlines Co. LUV -0.10% and American Airlines Group Inc. AAL -0.42% said last week they were taking the MAX out of their schedules through early March, longer than previously signaled. Carriers have a series of steps to prepare their aircraft to carry passengers. Not only do they need to take them out of storage, but they are also planning their own demonstration flights and public-relations campaigns. Southwest and American want to train all their 737 pilots before adding the MAX back into schedules to avoid scheduling issues that could arise if only some pilots are able to operate the plane. Since the spring, both FAA and Boeing officials sketched out a process that envisioned MAX deliveries resuming roughly simultaneously with completion of pilot-training efforts. Those earlier scenarios didn't take into account additional weeks needed for regulators to complete training requirements and for airlines to implement those changes. As the end of the year approaches, Boeing is running low on parking spots for the 737 MAX as finished planes pile up at locations in the Puget Sound area. Boeing has been producing the 737 at a rate of 42 planes a month at its Renton, Wash., factory since the aircraft's grounding, down from a previous monthly rate of 52. The manufacturer has stored planes at airfields in the Pacific Northwest and even put some in employee parking spaces. While Boeing has about two months' of parking spots available, the plane maker is identifying other storage space if needed, the person familiar with the process said. Boeing Chairman Dave Calhoun has said the FAA's ungrounding order would start a longer process to fully return the MAX to service around the world, an effort expected to last into early 2021. https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-seeks-blessing-to-deliver-737-max-as-faa-reviews-pilot-training-11573421213 Back to Top Incident: Atlas B763 over Atlantic on Nov 10th 2019, hydraulic leak An Atlas Air Boeing 767-300, registration N662GT performing flight 5Y-8327 from Frankfurt Hahn (Germany) to Portsmouth,NH (USA), was enroute at FL320 over the Atlantic Ocean about 410nm north of Shannon (Ireland) when the crew reported a leak of the right hand hydraulic system, most of the fluid had been lost. The crew advised they might have problems with the braking, however, they would be able to stop on runway 24 but would likely not be able to vacate the runway. The aircraft landed safely on runway 24 about 75 minutes after the decision to divert. The aircraft was able to take a left turn onto taxiway A, vacated the runway and stopped on taxiway A for an inspection by emergency services. Emergency services did not detect any trace of a leak, the aircraft taxied to the apron. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Shannon about 9 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4cf15431&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Asiana A359 near Manila on Nov 9th 2019, engine shut down in flight An Asiana Airlines Airbus A350-900, registration HL7579 performing flight OZ-751 from Seoul (South Korea) to Singapore (Singapore) with 310 people on board, was enroute at FL320 over the South China Sea near Manila when the crew needed to shut the right hand engine (Trent XWB) down. The aircraft drifted down to FL230 and diverted to Manila (Philippines) for a safe landing on runway 06 about 80 minutes after turning around. The airline reported the crew shut the right hand engine down due to a failur in the engine's fuel system. The passengers were taken to hotels while waiting for the replacement aircraft. A replacement Airbus A350-900 registration HL8362 reached Singapore with a delay of about 18 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Manila about 30 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4cf14f72&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: United A319 at Vancouver on Nov 8th 2019, rejected takeoff due to bird strike A United Airbus A319-100, registration N818UA performing flight UA-1184 from Vancouver,BC (Canada) to Denver,CO (USA) with 121 passengers and 5 crew, was accelerating for takeoff from Vancouver's runway 08R when the crew rejected takeoff at high speed reporting birds on the nose. The aircraft slowed safely and vacated the runway near the end onto taxiway D05. The crew requested emergency services to inspect their left hand brakes and reported it was a rather large bird, a crane or the like. The runway was closed for a runway inspection. Emergency services sprayed the brakes. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground 23 hours after the rejected takeof. http://avherald.com/h?article=4cf0a61c&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Skywest CRJ2 at Akron Canton on Nov 7th 2019, flaps fail A Skywest Canadair CRJ-200 on behalf of United, registration N947SW performing flight UA-5488 from Chicago O'Hare,IL to Akron-Canton,OH (USA) with 51 people on board, was on approach to Akron-Canton when the crew stopped the descent at 3000 feet reporting they had a FLAPS FAIL indication. The aircraft entered a hold while the crew worked the related checklists, the crew subsequently requested to divert to Cleveland,OH (USA) due to the longer runways available. The aircraft climbed to 5000 feet for the diversion and landed safely on Cleveland's runway 24L (runway 24R was closed due to snow removal) about 35 minutes after stopping the descent to Akron-Canton. The aircraft remained on the ground for about 14 hours, then completed the flight to Akron-Canton and landed at the destination with a delay of 15 hours. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SKW5488/history/20191108/0000Z/KORD/KCAK http://avherald.com/h?article=4cf0a356&opt=0 Back to Top Incident: Hawaiian A332 near Los Angeles on Nov 8th 2019, generator failure A Hawaiian Airbus A330-200, registration N378HA performing flight HA-51 from New York JFK,NY to Honolulu,HI (USA) with 237 passengers and 12 crew, was enroute at FL380 about 40nm north of Cheyenne,WY when the crew decided to divert to Los Angeles due to a generator failure. The aircraft continued for a safe landing in Los Angeles about 100 minutes later. The airline reported the aircraft diverted due to a generator fault, the passengers were rebooked onto other flights. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/HAL51/history/20191108/1510Z/KJFK/PHNL http://avherald.com/h?article=4cf0a0e2&opt=0 Back to Top Burning Odor Forces An Air France 777 On A 10 Hour Flight To Nowhere An Air France Boeing 777-200 was diverted after a burning odor arose in the cabin. The aircraft was in the air for over ten hours before landing back where it started, in Paris. The Air France Boeing 777 made two diversions before settling back in Paris. Photo: Air France Troubles across the Atlantic The Aviation Herald reports that the flight AF-852 left Paris Orly on November 5 to head to Cayenne, French Guiana. Aircraft registration F-GSPA was at FL350 and traveling at around 530nm southwest of Lajes in the Azores. However, the crew decided to divert due to a smell of burning. Subsequently, the plane turned towards the Canary Islands, which was 900nm southwest of its location. However, the crew then apparently changed their minds and decided to turn the plane once again, this time towards its original position in Paris. The 777 eventually made a safe landing at Paris Charles de Gaulle. The crew landed on runway 26L some six hours after the decision to turn around was made. Altogether, the plane was in the air for 10 hours and 15 minutes since it departed. Thankfully, there were no injuries and all 299 passengers arrived safely. However, they might have been a bit bored, as, during the flight, around 25 percent of the inflight entertainment screens became inactive. Air France has strong connections with French-administered territories outside the European continent. Photo: Air France Previous occurrence Earlier this year, a similar incident happened with an Air France Boeing 777 traveling to a French overseas department in the Caribbean. The Aviation Herald previously reported that in January, a 777-300 that flying from Paris Orly to Pointe-a-Pitre, Guadeloupe was diverted while traveling 330nm west of Lajes. The crew on this flight had also noticed a burning odor onboard. However, this time, rather than diverting twice and heading back to France, it simply landed at Lajes after 80 minutes. During this incident, a replacement aircraft was sent from Paris to the Azores to continue the journey. Other incidents Burning odors have been reported a few times this year on flights operated by different airlines. Earlier this week, a United Airlines Boeing 757 made an emergency landing at Newark airport due to the smell of smoke. Additionally, in September, An American Airlines Boeing 767 had been diverted after a burning odor was noticed in the cabin. Before that, an American Airlines A330 heading for London from Philadelphia had made a diversion to Boston after a fume incident. Strong odors in tight spaces such as an aircraft could indicate serious problems. Last month, An American Airlines A330 traveling from London Heathrow to Philadelphia had to divert to Dublin. This was after two cabin crew members fell unconscious due to strong cleaning chemicals that had spilled on the carpet. Simple Flying reached out to Air France for comment on the cause of the incident but didn't hear back before comment. We will update the publication with any further comment. https://simpleflying.com/air-france-777-10-hour-diversion/ Back to Top Back to Top Westerner may face 7 years in prison for yanking open aircraft door as it taxied for takeoff The incident occurred on Wednesday and the young man who looked to be in his twenties had to be controlled by security personnel and forcibly removed from the aircraft. However, for some reason, authorities have not revealed his identity as they examine his motivations and contemplate possible charges. A young western man could be facing up to 7 years in prison as Thai authorities take an increasingly serious view of an incident that occurred last Wednesday in Chiang Mai when he dramatically and violently opened an emergency exit of an aircraft as it taxied for takeoff on a flight to Bangkok. The young western passenger with blonde hair and baggy pants was restrained by armed security personnel before he was taken off the aircraft after suddenly opening the emergency exit on the left-hand side of the wing (inset). A complaint has been made by the airline Thai Smile (inset). Authorities are treating the matter is a serious one questioning the intent of the young man. His identity has not yet been released. Authorities are trying to understand what the young man's intentions were when he jumped up from his seat after passengers had been seated and the plane was already in motion. He forcefully opened the exit on the left-wing of the airplane. The door came free and an emergency chute was launched. The captain of the flight halted the takeoff and radioed for help from security. The foreign man was then forcibly removed from the flight. The investigation being conducted follows a formal complaint from the airline over the incident. Circumstances have sparked concern, criminal charges being considered Police are also involved in the probe into Wednesday's outlandish behaviour by the young westerner which seems to have sparked the concern of authorities. Section 232 of Thailand's criminal code makes it an offence to interfere with any mode of transport which may make it a danger to other people. The maximum prison sentence that can be imposed for the violation of the law is up to seven years. It is also being reported that officials are looking at a possible breach of the Air Navigation Act. Man's actions caused panic on the flight The incident on Wednesday caused panic and alarm in the aircraft. The passenger's actions were dramatic as he violently pulled the door of the Airbus A32o open. Some passengers told authorities that the young man appeared to be drunk. Airport security who quickly arrived onto the plane had to use force to grapple with and hold him down on the floor of the plane before he was restrained and then removed. He was taken into custody by police at Chiang Mai International Airport. Airline reported having lost ฿600,000 The loss to the Thai Smile airline as a result of the 'crazy' behaviour of the foreigner amounts to ฿600,000. The actions by the young passenger caused flight WE 169 to eventually take off as 5 pm on Wednesday, 1 hour and twenty minutes late. Statement for Thai Smile On Wednesday, the airline issued a statement outlining the event and apologised to the passengers inconvenienced. 'After the aircraft door had been successfully closed there was a wait for a taxi to take off. A foreign male passenger ran to open the emergency exit door next to the left-wing of the plane. The incident caused the emergency door to be opened entirely and an emergency slide unfolded.' https://www.thaiexaminer.com/thai-news-foreigners/2019/11/10/young-western-man-aircraft-door-thai-smile-flight-charges-7-years-prison/ Back to Top Boeing 737-86Q (WL) - Fire Onboard (Egypt) Date: 09-NOV-2019 Time: c 04:15 LT Type: Boeing 737-86Q (WL) Owner/operator: SkyUp Airlines Registration: UR-SQH C/n / msn: 30292/1451 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Minor Location: Sharm el-Sheikh International Airport - Egypt Phase: Taxi Nature: International Scheduled Passenger Departure airport: Kharkov Airport (HRK/UKHH) Destination airport: Sharm el Sheikh International Airport (SSH/HESH) Narrative: SkyUp Airlines flight PQ7153 suffered a fire in the left-hand main landing gear after arriving at the stand at Sharm el-Sheikh International Airport. Ground personnel grabbed portable fire extinguishers and started dousing the fire 53 seconds after it erupted. The aircraft resumed service 26 hours after the incident. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/230504 Back to Top Learjet 35A - Runway Excursion (Mexico) Date: 08-NOV-2019 Time: Type: Learjet 35A Owner/operator: AirLink Registration: XA-VBD C/n / msn: 35-287 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 4 Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Substantial Location: Los Cabos International Airport (SJD/MMSD) - Mexico Phase: Landing Nature: Private Departure airport: Destination airport: San Jose Cabo-Los Cabos Airport (SJD/MMSD) Narrative: A Learjet 35A, registered XA-VBD, suffered a runway excursion during a landing attempt at Los Cabos International Airport (SJD/MMSD). There were no injures. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/230490 Back to Top Airbus A380-842 - Ground Damage (Australia) Date: 08-NOV-2019 Time: Type: Airbus A380-842 Owner/operator: Qantas Registration: VH-OQB C/n / msn: 015 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 0 Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Substantial Location: Sydney Airport, NSW (SYD) - Australia Phase: Pushback / towing Nature: - Departure airport: - Destination airport: - Narrative: The aircraft had been undergoing routine maintenance in Hangar 96 at Sydney Airport, Australia and was being pulled out to resume service. At that time an open door struck scaffolding causing the door to be almost ripped off from the hinges. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/230493 Back to Top ATC Audio: American Eagle Jet Loses Control I first read about this story a couple of days ago, though it wasn't until I listened to the ATC audio that I truly realized how severe this situation was. On Wednesday, November 6, 2019, a Republic Airways Embraer 175 operating a flight on behalf of American Eagle had a serious situation. The flight was operating from Atlanta to New York LaGuardia as AA4439 with a total of six people. That's the first shocking detail here - given that there were two pilots and two flight attendants, that means there were just two passengers. WOW. Anyway, the plane took off from Atlanta's runway 9L, and the crew declared an emergency about four minutes after takeoff, noting that they had a trim runaway (essentially they weren't able to control the climb of the plane). The pilot noted that they were in a stall situation, and that they couldn't keep the pitch down (meaning that they couldn't angle the nose down). The pilot also mentions that they had been "fighting the aircraft." I got goosebumps when I heard the audio of the pilot saying "we're in a stalling situation... agh!" The plane kept climbing even though the pilots tried to stop it. The plane eventually made it up to nearly 15,000 feet, before the pilots managed to regain control and have the plane return to Atlanta. Apparently they managed to disable some of the controls, and make it so that the first officer's controls were working. The plane landed back in Atlanta just under 20 minutes after it took off, with no injuries or damage. You can listen to the full ATC audio here: [REAL ATC] Brickyard SUFFERS TRIM RUNAWAY | CONTROL ISSUES at Atlanta These pilots deserve huge credit for their fast thinking and handling of this situation. What absolute professionals, along with the air traffic controller as well. Given the trim runaway and stall "situation," I can't help but wonder if the results might have been different if there weren't just two passengers onboard? The plane could have had 74 more passengers, so with bags and everything that could have potentially been an extra 15,000+ pounds. The higher the weight the higher the stall speed. I'd be curious if any jet pilots could chime in on whether that could have impacted the performance in a situation like this? Regardless, I'm so relieved this ended the way it did, and huge credit goes to the pilots for their handling of this. https://onemileatatime.com/american-eagle-jet-loses-control/ Back to Top Japan Raps 'Dangerous' U.S. Military Pilots U.S. military pilots have been warned to straighten up and fly right by Japanese politicians concerned about the reported lapses in discipline by Marine pilots at a base in western Japan. The Japanese defence ministry is reportedly ready to formally request assurances from the U.S. that residents around Marine Station Iwakuni are safe after a report by the U.S. military on a fatal 2018 crash of a fighter and tanker aircraft revealed less than strict adherence to military procedures by pilots in the unit, including their CO. "Examples of such unprofessionalism included prescription and over-the-counter drug abuse, excessive alcohol consumption, adultery, orders violations, and failures in following fundamental principles of professional aviation training and operations," the report is quoted as saying. Four Marine officers were dismissed after they posted selfies of themselves in flight violating various regulations. The CO posted a picture of himself in the cockpit with his oxygen mask and visor off. Jungen Tamura, a member of Iwakuni city assembly, called for the Marines to stop flying. "They're extremely dangerous behaviours," Tamura said, according to local media. "They could cause an accident and (they) need to suspend flights immediately." The report was issued after the crash of an F/A-18 from Iwakuni and a KC-130 tanker from another unit that killed all six crew members on both aircraft. The crash was one of three serious incidents in 2018 that also included the loss of another F/A-18 off Okinawa and the crash of a Seahawk helicopter on the deck of the USS Ronald Reagan. Last week an Air Force F-16 pilot mistakenly dropped a dummy bomb outside a gunnery range in an unpopulated area. https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/japan-raps-dangerous-u-s-military-pilots/ Back to Top PILOTS SOUND OFF ON GARMIN'S AUTOLAND Some pilots were slow to warm up to airframe parachutes, and the initial reaction to Garmin's new emergency automatic landing system has been similarly mixed. As in the Piper installation, the Vision Jet's Garmin G3000 displays play an important role in informing passengers about what is happening. Some among us remain very touchy about handing control to a computer, and that's understandable in light of Boeing's recent travails with another iteration of digital flight control, albeit a very different system in every respect. Many readers of the October 30 report on Garmin's automatic emergency landing system by AOPA Editor in Chief Tom Haines spotted the upside of offering options and assistance for passengers in an emergency, in this particular case, an emergency involving a sick pilot with a healthy airplane. Autonomi, as Garmin dubbed its emergency automation, takes over at the push of a button, steers the airplane to the nearest suitable airport squawking 7700, and lands without human intervention. Synthesizing and building on Garmin's Emergency Descent Mode and Electronic Stability Protection, the new system briefs passengers through the multifunction display(s), makes radio calls (announcing location, aircraft type, and intention to land at the chosen airport), times the flare based on available data (radar altimeter and GPS), brings the aircraft to a stop, and shuts down the engine. It is the first system to bring this capability to general aviation, launching in the Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet and Piper's M600 turboprop. Importantly, it is designed to be used only in an emergency involving pilot incapacitation. Some readers, like Edouard Kohler, who emailed AOPA on November 1, nonetheless suspect Garmin has opened a Pandora's Box full of robots, and we are "only a few years away from no more pilots in airliners and robots flying GA when the owner will just push buttons to go places. The only good thing is that we wouldn't need medical exams anymore, I would hope. What all this does is taking more responsibilities away from people, our world is already decadent enough is this regard but it will only get worse." Among the dozens of comments attached to AOPA's Facebook post of a video version of the story, several concurred with Kohler's sentiment. "I've performed many autolands in commercial airliners and cannot imagine why anything other than a corporate jet would need this capability," wrote Facebook user Mark Danielson. "If this technology is considered necessary for a catastrophic event, then we must be ready for drones to take over piloting. (And yes, the captain's hands always ride the controls on any airliner autoland approach in the event of a go-around or malfunction.)" It's understandable that those among us who earn our living flying airplanes might see a computer programmed to perform pilot-in-command functions as a threat. Others, like Facebook user Matthew Fox, took a different view, noting that in the event a lone pilot becomes incapacitated, untrained passengers stand little chance of landing safely on their own. "So why not embrace this amazing technology and save your family and friends lives if or when the time comes it could be used! I can't believe people are against this capability," Fox wrote. Garmin spent years developing and testing the system, and is navigating carefully around a range of issues of pilot sentiments, as well as the sentiments of government regulators. The company emphasized to the FAA that automated landing is not intended for everyday use, only in cases when pilot incapacitation has already created an emergency. "The catastrophic event's already happened. So everything we do from there is just try to help," said Garmin's Bailey Scheel, in an interview with The Air Current, echoing that theme to AOPA: "We're here to make pilots safer and give them new options." Cirrus Aircraft is one of Garmin's first customers, with Autonomi to be installed in 2020 SF50 Vision Jets, as well as the Piper M600. Cirrus has some experience with safety systems getting a chilly reception from aviators. The Cirrus Airframe Parachute System, widely viewed by aviation safety experts as an aviation safety success story, struggled for years to earn its current place in the hearts of pilots. But as the tally of lives saved continues to increase, and pilot training emphasizes the need to prepare, plan, and act when the situation requires parachute deployment, few among us would seriously argue that CAPS has undermined or devalued the skills employed by pilots in normal operations. A 2018 study by Wright State University in Ohio found a 13-fold decrease in the odds of fatality when the CAPS system was deployed versus when it was not. Lead author Dean Olson told Air & Space that he has a theory about why parachute opposition persists among some pilots: "When you pull the parachute, you become a passenger, and I don't know if certain people really want to give up control in that situation," Olson said. "They may be potentially overconfident in their abilities, and I think that may be a factor associated with some of that contention." https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2019/november/06/pilots-sound-off-on-automation Back to Top U.S. aviation authority downgrades Malaysia's air safety rating - sources KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 11 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has downgraded Malaysia's air safety rating, restricting the country's airlines from adding flights to the United States, four sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Monday. Malaysia has been downgraded to Category 2, said the sources, who did not want to be identified as they were not authorised to speak to the media. The FAA's safety rating is based on a country's aviation oversight regime and is an assessment of the country's civil aviation authority. The Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia and the FAA were not immediately available for comment. The new rating means the air carriers from the country cannot start new services and are restricted to current levels of any existing service to the United States. The carriers would also be subject to additional inspections at U.S. airports. FAA will also not allow reciprocal code-sharing arrangements between U.S. carriers and Malaysian carriers when a country is rated Category 2. The downgrade places Malaysia in the same FAA category as neighbour Thailand, which was downgraded to Category 2 in December 2015 and has since tried unsuccessfully to restore the top Category 1 rating. Other countries in Category 2 include Bangladesh, Ghana and Costa Rica. At present, the only Malaysian airline route to the United States is AirAsia X Bhd services from Kuala Lumpur to Honolulu via Osaka. https://www.reuters.com/article/malaysia-aviation-usa/update-1-us-aviation-authority-downgrades-malaysias-air-safety-rating-sources-idUSL4N27R28Q Back to Top Behind the scenes: What goes on in the flight deck during a diversion? From takeoff until touch down, most flights run pretty smooth. As airline pilots, we do this hundreds of times a year. However, every so often, something happens that means we are unable to land at the planned destination. Be it bad weather, technical issues or problems in the passenger cabin, once in a while we have to change our plans and divert to another airport. Broadly speaking, most people are not a fan of change. We like to have a plan and stick to it. Yet, as airline pilots, we have to be constantly open to change and have the ability to mix up our plans at a moment's notice. This is how we handle an in-flight diversion. Why do flights get diverted? Whilst an in-flight diversion isn't a regular occurrence, flying an airliner is an ever-changing environment. We are always aware that we may need to change our plans at any time, no matter what the stage of flight. Most diversions occur for three main reasons: bad weather at the destination airport, technical problems with the aircraft or issues with passengers. Weather Before every flight, we check the weather forecast for our estimated time of arrival at the destination airport. On short-haul flights, this is normally only a couple of hours away. However, on long-haul flights, this arrival time could be almost 24 hours later. As a result, the accuracy of weather forecasts is extremely important. When approaching the destination airport, to ensure the safety of the aircraft and its occupants, there are is a minimum criteria of weather in which aircraft are allowed to make an approach to land. Broadly speaking, this is determined by the visibility on the ground and, to a certain extent, how low the cloud is. These limits vary from airport to airport, runway to runway and aircraft type to aircraft type. Bad weather at the destination is a common reason for flight to divert to another airport. If the reported weather is worse than the published minima, the pilots are legally not allowed to make an approach to land. Sometimes, the weather may be reported as good, but as we approach the runway, if we do not see the visual clues out of the window that we require to land, we must perform a go around and head back up into the air. If there is no improvement to the weather, it may be necessary to divert to another airport with better weather conditions. Technical problems Modern airliners are hugely complex machines with millions of different parts. Like with any machine, systems do go wrong. With that in mind, aircraft designers have anticipated this and built in back-up systems should the primary system fail. In some cases, there are even back ups for the back-up systems. This not only enhances flight safety, but it also reduces the impact on punctuality when there are technical issues. That said, every so often, technical problems occur that make it necessary for the pilots to divert the aircraft. This is very rarely a safety issue, but more of an operational issue. For example, an aircraft taking off from London to fly to New York develops a problem with one of its systems when over Ireland. Whilst this isn't a safety issue and the pilots could safely continue to New York, the engineers in New York may not have the spare parts to fix the problem when the aircraft lands. It could then potentially be stuck there for days on end, causing disruption across the airline's entire network. As a result, the airline's operations department may deem it better for the aircraft to return to London to be fixed at the main maintenance facility, rather than continue to New York. Passenger issues If you take 400 random individuals off the street and put them in a room, you're going to get a real mix of people. Some old, some young. Some healthy, some fit. Some with mental health problems, others with physical disabilities. No matter who we are, we're are all fighting our own battles, battles which are quite often invisible to those around us. If you then take that mix of 400 people and load them into a pressurised metal tube for 20 hours, some crammed in tight economy seats, often with alcohol readily available, it's easy to see how problems may arise. The greater the number of passengers, the greater the scope of problems. (Photo by Lori Zaino/The Points Guy) On most long-haul flights, at least one passenger will suffer from some sort of medical issue. Long journeys combined with age and ill health are a perfect recipe for an individual to feel a little unwell. Fortunately, the cabin crew are trained to deal with a number of medical conditions and are able to deal with most of these issues. Should a passenger become seriously unwell, it may be necessary to divert the aircraft so that they can receive better medical care from doctors and paramedics on the ground. Human behaviour can also be a cause of problems in the passenger cabin. As an industry, we are seeing more and more incidents of disruptive passengers. As pilots, we have a responsibility to ensure not only the safety, but also the customer experience of all passengers on board the aircraft. If the behaviour of an individual is deemed a threat to the safety of the aircraft, or those in it, the decision may be made to divert the aircraft and offload that person. Fuel An aircraft's time in the air is always limited. There's no option to just pull over and think things through. As a result, the decision on how much fuel to take at the start of the flight is a complex and critical one. Careful study of the weather forecast will alert us to any potential problems at the destination. If the weather is bad enough to stop aircraft from making approaches, or the airfield needs time to clear snow from the runways, aircraft will have to enter holding patterns and wait. If these conditions are expected, pilots will most likely take more fuel than normal. In addition to this, all flights must carry separate fuel that enables them to fly from the planned destination airport to another airport where they can land safely. Depending on geographic location and weather, this may be an airport a few miles away. Or, in the case of islands like the Seychelles, the diversion airport could be several hours away. This planned diversion airport will be selected on the basis that the weather forecast will be good enough to land. Deciding to divert Like with many decisions in life, there's not always a simple answer. Depending on the problem and all the variables that come with it, there may be a number of viable options to take. In-flight, quite often the most important factor is time. How much time do we have to make this decision? If we have gone around after making an approach in bad weather but have enough fuel to hold for an hour, the time pressure to make the decision to divert isn't particularly high. If, however, a passenger has suffered a serious heart attack, the time taken to make the decision could be the difference between life and death. Two pilots at work during departure of Dallas Fort Worth Airport in United States of America. The view from the flight deck with high workload the beginning night through the wind shield Technical problems can vary, depending on the severity of the issue. If there's a problem with the toilets, there's plenty of time to have a conversation with the operations department as to what they feel would be best for the network operation. However, if we have to shut an engine down due to a surge or overheat, there's no time to have these chats. This is why, at any stage of flight, a good crew will know exactly where their closest diversion airfield is where they can safely land, given the current weather and aircraft conditions. In the flight deck Once the decision has been made to divert, the workload in the flight deck increases dramatically. There are a number of tasks that must be completed before we are able to land at the diversion airport, so dividing the jobs between both pilots (or three pilots on a long-range flight) is key. The time available is the driving force in prioritising those tasks. If you've read any of my previous stories, you'll probably be familiar with the "Fly, Navigate, Communicate" philosophy. If not, the basic premise is that before engaging in any other tasks, make sure one pilot's sole focus is on the flight path of the aircraft. Next, they need to make sure that the aircraft is travelling exactly where they want it to be. Finally, the other pilot can then communicate with the relevant people to arrange the diversion. Fly The first task is to get the aircraft pointing in the right direction. In most cases, permission will be required from ATC to deviate from our route. However, with technical issues, we may need to get the aircraft moving away from its current flight path before we are able to talk to ATC. In the case of an engine shut down over the Atlantic, this will be done within a few seconds. In the event of a medical or weather-related diversion, there will be time to relay our intentions to ATC before changing course. Sending a CPDLC Emergency Report is a quick way to let ATC know that we're changing course due to an urgent technical problem. (Photo by Charlie Page/The Points Guy) With weather-related diversions, we know in advance how much fuel we will need to fly to the diversion airport. With this in mind, we'll be able to calculate an exact time at which we will have to give up waiting to land at the planned destination and head to the diversion airport. By letting ATC know this well in advance, it won't come as a surprise to them when we do ask to divert. With medical diversions, whilst it may be important to get the sick passenger on the ground as soon as possible, the safety of everyone else on board is still the most important factor. As a result, coordinating a new route with ATC is imperative before starting the diversion. Navigate With the diversion approved by ATC, we can start to reprogram the Flight Management Computer (FMC) to navigate the aircraft towards the diversion airport. This requires one pilot to change the destination and then enter the route as prescribed by ATC. Once we know where we're going laterally, we also need to think about what we're doing vertically. The diversion may take us across a mountain range. If so, what's the lowest altitude we can safely descent to? A new Minimum Enroute Altitude (MEA) must be confirmed by checking the onboard charts. The next task is to obtain the latest airfield information from the diversion airport. This will provide the runway and approach in use and also the weather conditions. Once these are known, further changes are made to the FMC to ensure that the aircraft is set up to fly the desired approach type. The airfield charts must then be selected on both pilots' iPads to prepare for an arrival brief at the new airport. The alternate page allows us to start a diversion to the selected airfield. Communicate The final part of the process is nice to do but not necessarily required. As mentioned above, the time available is what prioritises the tasks. This is why the communicate part comes last. As we will already have spoken to ATC, this part will involve letting all the relevant stakeholders aware of our diversion. First up is normally the cabin crew. If it's a medical diversion, they will probably already be aware that the plan is to divert. However, with a technical or weather diversion, they most probably will not be aware. With the crew aware of the plan, we are then able to speak to the passengers over the PA system. The crew will then be able to answer any questions they may have. Finally, if there is time, we will try to let the airline's operations department know that we are diverting. This will give them the opportunity to contact the ground handling agents and give them time to prepare for our arrival. However, if time is short, this step will be omitted. Bottom line The decision to divert an aircraft is never taken lightly. There are always large costs involved with a diversion - both operationally and financially. That said, safety is your pilot's number one priority and nothing will come between them and the safe outcome of the flight. Once on the ground at the diversion airport, things often take time to progress. The airline's operations department may have no idea that the aircraft has diverted until the pilots call from on the ground. The safe flying of the aircraft always takes priority over communicating the plan with other people. This is why things often seem to be chaotic and disjointed once on the ground. The crew and the airline need time to come up with a plan. Whatever the reason for a diversion, rest assured that it was done purely for the safety for those on board the aircraft. https://thepointsguy.co.uk/news/flight-deck-during-diversion/ Back to Top European Aviation Safety Agency to open office in Budapest The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) will open a contact office in Hungary under an agreement signed by Minister of Innovation and Technology László Palkovics and EASA managing director Patrick Ky, state news wire MTI reports. The new office will enable the Hungarian transport authority to strengthen its supervisory activities on the basis of international know-how, the ministry said in a statement. The office will open in January 2020 with the involvement of an EASA expert. The agreement is meant to raise the standards of aviation safety in Hungary, it said. Set up in 2002, EASA has 32 member states. It employs some 800 specialists and operates permanent representative offices in the United States, Canada, China, and Singapore. https://bbj.hu/budapest/european-aviation-safety-agency-to-open-office-in-budapest_173904 Back to Top Conflict Over An-124 Program Continues Antonov An-124 Ukraine's Antonov An-124 is at the center of a heated dispute between the former Soviet republic and Russia. Ukraine has demanded that Germany seize five of the mammoth transports that are operated by Russia's Volga Dnepr. (Photo: Mark Wagner) A conflict over Ukraine's Antonov An-124 Ruslan that broke into the open last summer has escalated into a more heated dispute between the former Soviet republic and Russia. The row between the two has demanded that Germany, specifically the cargo operations center at Leipzig/Halle airport, seize five of the 12 An-124s operated from that facility by the Russian commercial cargo firm Volga-Dnepr. The dispute began on July 17, 2018, when the National Police of Ukraine launched criminal proceedings against Rosaviatsiya, the Russian federal air transport agency, and Volga-Dnepr over charges that the three had forged airworthiness certificates for the An-124. The Kiev law firm Ilyashev & Partners, which defends the interests of Antonov, told AIN that there were 15 people listed as responsible for this criminal activity, including the CEO of Volga-Dnepr. A pre-trial investigation specified by article 364(2) of the criminal code of Ukraine investigated charges that documents extending the airworthiness of An-124-100s were forged by Rosaviatsiya and the German company Amtes, the latter of which is an entity of Volga-Dnepr. Antonov obtained copies of the allegedly falsified documents and notified Volga-Dnepr they were withdrawing support for continued service life extensions of these aircraft. "Antonov is the sole entity authorized to maintain the structural integrity of the type designs of the existing AN aircraft fleet throughout the entire period of its operation," said Roman Marchenko, the law firm's senior partner. "By bypassing Antonov and forging documentation, the persons responsible are jeopardizing the safe operation of these aircraft and the cargo on board," read an official statement from Ilyashev & Partners. Aerospace industry analysts in Ukraine point out that the primary motivation for the Russians falsifying these documents is that Antonov charges very large sums for inspecting the An-124 aircraft and issuing these certificates. Additionally, the Russian company, which severed relations with Antonov three years ago, would be unwilling to allow its aircraft to be flown to Ukraine for inspection because they feared that they would be impounded as part of these criminal proceedings. BAIT AND SWITCH In the year since these initial actions by Ukraine, the Russians have decided to go forward with developing their own version of the massive cargo lifter. Russia's Ministry of Trade and Industry has turned to one of the former USSR's other major military transport aircraft entities, Ilyushin Design Bureau. Ilyushin has been reportedly working since 2017 on a deeply modernized version of the Antonov aircraft that would be designated An-124-100M. For its part, Antonov objects to major modifications being made without their approval. The company also has lodged a complaint against the aircraft still being labeled with an "An-" designation, implying it is an Antonov product. The State Company Antonov in Kiev declared on August 30 that it was not involved in the development of this new aircraft from Ilyushin. Therefore, the Moscow-based firm should be required to assign a new designation without employing the An- prefix, according to a statement on the Antonov website. "Antonov GP specialists do not deny the technical possibility of deep modernization of the An-124-100 Ruslan transport aircraft. However, the selection and installation of new modern equipment by Ilyushin Design Bureau will lead to significant changes in the aircraft's flight performance [when] compared to the base model. Thus, this will be a new aircraft in the history of modern aerospace industry. Accordingly, it should receive a new designation without the use of the An- brand, since Antonov is not involved in its development and [we] will not be responsible for its flight safety certification," said the company. The Ukrainian aircraft firm also reported that from 2004 to 2007 Antonov had developed and certified three modifications of the Ruslan, one of which has already officially received the same An-124-100M designation. The other two-the An-124-100-150 and An-124-100M-150-are characterized by increased payload capacities up to 150 tonnes and the ability to transport single cargo loads up to 120 tonnes. Antonov has also emphasized that traditional practices in the world of aircraft design are for new modifications and variants of a given aircraft to be developed only on the basis of concepts that are created by that aircraft's original designers. GERMANY IN THE CROSSFIRE In the meantime, the original criminal case from 2018 has carried forward, and in late June of this year, a Kiev court ordered confiscation of five of the 12 An-124s operated by Volga-Dnepr. The Ukrainians accuse the company of maintaining these five aircraft without proper airworthiness certification and of using unlicensed, non-factory-authorized spare parts. Ukrainian authorities are facing the complication that none of the aircraft are located in Ukraine. The court is relying on foreign aviation and transport safety authorities-to include the Germans-to enforce this court order. The Volga-Dnepr aircraft are currently based in Leipzig and are serviced by the cargo company's same subsidiary, Amtes. The German newspaper Leipziger Volkszeitung reports that the Ukrainian authorities are seeking seizure of these aircraft. Antonov's lawyers made a separate statement that all foreign airports and aviation authorities should forbid takeoffs and landings of these five An-124s. Privately, however, given what it says is the reluctance by German authorities to act against Russian interests, Antonov states that it has very little expectation of the decision of the Kiev court being enforced. Volga-Dnepr has described the Ukrainian court ruling as illegal and will be taking its own legal action to block these seizures. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aerospace/2019-11-11/conflict-over-124-program-continues Back to Top U.K. Labour Politicians Suggest Business Aviation Ban Some U.K. politicians think business aircraft are too dirty to use their airports and business aviation groups have jumped to their industry's defence. NBAA and the International Business Aviation Council have reminded members of the Labour Party, some of whom have called for an eventual ban on business aviation, that the industry is behind many of the energy and emissions saving technologies now widely used in aviation and is leading the charge on sustainable aviation fuels (SAF). "Instead of singling out business aviation for prohibitive restrictions on airport access, U.K. leaders should focus on efforts to make SAF more widely available in the U.K. through positive incentive policies to encourage production and use of SAF in greater quantities," said IBAC director general Kurt Edwards. NBAA CEO Ed Bolen noted that modern business aircraft emit 40 percent less carbon than they did 40 years ago by pioneering new materials, technologies and practices that have been widely adopted. "Instead of singling out business aviation for prohibitive restrictions on airport access, U.K. leaders should focus on efforts to make SAF more widely available in the U.K. through positive incentive policies to encourage production and use of SAF in greater quantities." https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/u-k-labour-politicians-suggest-business-aviation-ban/ Back to Top Potentially The Most Revolutionary Aircraft You Have Never Heard Of Has Flown The mysterious Celera 500L built by the silent Otto Aviation company has successfully taken to the skies. Over the last couple of years, virtually nobody has reported on the mysterious and bizarre-looking, but potentially revolutionary flying machine known as the Otto Aviation Celera 500L aside from The War Zone. Well, that is until our most recent article on the aircraft from June of 2019. That piece went viral, but nobody that we know of has followed up with any new information on the remarkably secretive civilian aircraft or the extremely shy firm that built it. Now, based on first-hand reports and images we have seen, we can state that the exotic, bullet-shaped flying machine has successfully taken to the skies. Before we proceed, take a moment and read about the Celera 500L in order to get up to speed on its proposed capabilities. Suffice it to say, the aircraft is all about shattering the traditional concepts and economies of commercial and private air travel and more. Word of the aircraft being finally spotted in the air near its Victorville, California home came early last week. A few days later, actual images of the unmistakable airframe flying with a twin-prop chase plane in tow surfaced. It isn't clear if this was the plane's actual first flight, but it is the first we or anyone I have talked to knows about. Considering how unique the plane looks and its commercial airport home, it's hard to imagine it has been flying for any considerable amount of time without anyone noticing. Now the big question is, when will Otto Aviation actually say anything about the aircraft that is basically their reason for being. Usually successful first flights are something to be grandly promoted and are a huge validation of so much tireless work by the project's team, yet this endeavor seems to have been run in a manner far more akin to a secretive military aircraft project than a potentially transformative civil aviation one. Hopefully this highly intriguing plane and the people that built it come out of the shadows soon, but regardless, the Celera 500L is now a very real flying machine. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30948/potentially-the-most-revolutionary-aircraft-you-have-never-heard-of-has-flown Back to Top SpaceX set to launch another 60 Starlink internet satellites A view looking up the stack of Starlink internet relay satellites before launch. A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket with a thrice-flown first stage and a previously used nose cone fairing is poised for blastoff Monday on a Veterans Day flight to boost 60 Starlink internet relay satellites into orbit. It is the second batch in a planned constellation of thousands intended to provide broadband service around the world. With an 80 percent chance of good weather expected, liftoff from pad 40 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station is targeted for 9:56 a.m. ET Monday. In keeping with SpaceX's drive to lower costs by re-flying its rocket hardware, the Falcon 9's first stage will be making a record fourth flight - following two missions in 2018 and another earlier this year - to launch two large communications satellites and a set of 10 Iridium satellite telephone relay stations. In another first, the nose cone protecting the Starlink satellites and their deployer will make its second flight after an April launch atop a Falcon Heavy rocket. A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket with a thrice-flown first stage was erected on its Cape Canaveral launch pad Sunday for blastoff Monday to boost 60 Starlink internet relay satellites into orbit. SpaceX For Monday's mission, the SpaceX droneship "Of Course I Still Love You" will be stationed several hundred miles northeast of Cape Canaveral to serve as a landing pad for the Falcon 9's first stage. Two other ships, "Ms. Tree" and "Ms. Chief," will be standing by with large nets to capture the two halves of the payload fairing as they descend under parachutes. The flight plan calls for the 60 solar-powered Starlink satellites, each weighing 573 pounds, to be released into a 174-mile-high orbit about one hour after launch. After tests and checkout, the satellites will be boosted into their operational positions using on-board ion thrusters. SpaceX has regulatory approval to launch nearly 12,000 Starlink relay stations in dozens of orbital planes. With multiple satellites within line of sight from any point on Earth's surface, the relay stations are designed to seamlessly hand off internet traffic, using satellite-to-satellite "cross links," to provide uninterrupted service. Monday's launch, along with 60 satellites launched in May and another four batches planned for the next year or so, will put about 360 satellites into orbit, providing coverage over much of the United States and Canada in 2020. Twenty four launches - more than 1,400 satellites - will be needed to provide global coverage starting in 2021, but SpaceX plans to continue boosting the total to provide additional bandwidth. The total number of satellites that might ultimately end up in orbit is not yet known. Astronomers raised concerns after the first Starlink launch in May, saying sunlight reflecting off the satellites could interfere with sensitive observations. SpaceX officials say they are taking steps to minimize reflectivity and ensure problem-free observing. Astronomy aside, the Starlink network is designed to provide "high-bandwidth, low-latency connectivity, ideally throughout the world," SpaceX founder Elon Musk said earlier this year. "This would provide connectivity to people that don't have any connectivity today or where it's extremely expensive and unreliable." The Starlink system will also serve "people who may have connectivity today in developed areas of the world but it's very expensive," he added. "This will provide a competitive option for them." https://www.yahoo.com/news/spacex-set-launch-another-60-030105167.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 Curt Lewis,