Flight Safety Information - September 5, 2023 No. 171   In This Issue : Incident: Malta A320 at Geneva on Sep 2nd 2023, we lost our automation, twice : Incident: Sun Express B738 at Frankfurt on Sep 4th 2023, burst tyre on landing : Accident: Lingus A21N at Washington on Aug 30th 2023, false landing and tail strike : Hawaiian Airlines Diversion: Hydraulic Failure + Landing Gear Smoke : Delta flight forced into emergency landing by passenger’s diarrhea: ‘This is a biohazard’ : Two Air Canada planes clip wings on the ground at Vancouver International Airport : FAA warns of possible defect in Boeing 777 engines : Russian Airlines Have Imported Over $1 Billion In Parts For Airbus & Boeing Aircraft Since May 2022 : 5 Advantages Of Preventive Maintenance : EASA warns of storage-related battery drain on all Airbus aircraft : Air India Hired 650 Pilots Since April : Former Canadian fighter pilots face RCMP probe over training work in China Incident: Malta A320 at Geneva on Sep 2nd 2023, we lost our automation, twice An Air Malta Airbus A320-200, registration 9H-AEP performing flight KM-483 from Geneva (Switzerland) to Malta (Malta), was climbing out of Geneva's runway 04 when the crew reported they had lost their automation. The crew stopped the climb at FL100 and entered a hold while troubleshooting the problem trying to reset the automation, subsequently decided to return to Geneva for a safe landing on runway 04 about 30 minutes after departure. The aircraft remained on the ground for about 2:15 hours, then departed again but this time stopped the climb at 9000 feet due to the same problem. The aircraft again returned to Geneva's runway 04 about 20 minutes after second departure. The flight was cancelled. The aircraft remained on the ground for 44 hours before departing again for flight KM-483 of Sep 4th 2023. A passenger reported the crew announced they had lost their automation on first departure and returned to Geneva, the passengers were kept on board, the aircraft departed again about 2.5 hours after landing back, the crew announced they had the same problem again, the aircraft returned a second time. https://avherald.com/h?article=50dff00d&opt=0 Incident: Sun Express B738 at Frankfurt on Sep 4th 2023, burst tyre on landing A Sun Express Boeing 737-800, registration TC-SOP performing flight XQ-148 from Antalya (Turkey) to Frankfurt/Main (Germany), landed on Frankfurt's runway 07R but burst at least one main tyre on landing. The aircraft rolled out without further incident, vacated the runway and became disabled on the parallel taxiway between runways 07R and 07C. The aircraft is still on the ground in Frankfurt about 11 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=50df7ec2&opt=0 Accident: Lingus A21N at Washington on Aug 30th 2023, false landing and tail strike An Aer Lingus Airbus A321-200N, registration EI-LRD performing flight EI-117 from Dublin (Ireland) to Washington Dulles,DC (USA), was landing on Washington's runway 01R at 15:37L (19:37Z) when the crew performed a balked landing and went around. The crew subsequently reported the reason for the go around was a "false landing", climbed the aircraft to 3000 feet and positioned for another approach to and landing on runway 01R. The aircraft taxied to the apron. The aircraft was unable to depart for the return flight and is still on the ground in Washington about 5 days later. https://avherald.com/h?article=50df4aef&opt=0 Hawaiian Airlines Diversion: Hydraulic Failure + Landing Gear Smoke Hawaiian Airlines Flight 156 (Flightaware) suffered a hydraulic failure and returned to Honolulu, where emergency services were ready on a taxiway following landing at HNL. The event took place a week ago but went unnoticed until mentioned by Aviation Herald. In any aircraft, hydraulics are responsible for controlling movement of the plane, both left and right, and up and down. A hydraulic failure can lead to potential loss of control. The plane departed Honolulu early at 7:25 AM, and was to have arrived on Maui on time at 8:11 AM. Instead, however, the plane diverted back to Honolulu, where it returned for a safe landing just 23 minutes later at 7:48 AM. The approximately 20 year old Boeing 717-200 jet was met on the taxiway then towed due to the crew reporting to Air Traffic Control the potential inability to make a right turn. “Emergency services reported a little smoke was coming from the left hand gear, but nothing glowing.” “Hydraulic low pressure and low quantity” resulted in Hawaii flight diversion. On its climb out of Honolulu Airport, at about 3,000 feet on its way up to a cruise altitude of 15,000 feet, the flight crew noted “hydraulic low pressure and low quantity, left hand side.” Procedures were implemented to terminate the flight via diversion back to HNL, where it landed safely soon thereafter. Airline hydraulic issues not entirely uncommon. Earlier this year, Hawaiian Airlines suffered hydraulic system problems of unknown type and severity on two flights that both resulted in emergency landings (which this incident did not). One of those two was on this same type of aircraft while the other one was on a widebody Airbus A330. Passengers arrived via an alternative aircraft with about a two hour delay. With the problem occurring at Hawaiian’s home base, it was able to readily summon a replacement 717-200 aircraft. As a result, passengers were only delayed by about two hours before arriving on Maui. How safe is the Boeing 717 airliner? Boeing 717 is considered to be among the safest passenger planes with a great track record. The plane type has been involved in a total of 6 aviation accidents and incidents. It has not, however, had any passenger fatalities or hull losses through its more than two decade history. New interisland fleet is coming to Hawaiian Airlines. The Boeing 717-200 fleet has served the airline very well. At the same time, they are old and their era is coming to the end. The plane never achieved great success and Hawaii may well be the last carrier flying the type soon. See the Boeing 717 replacement options Hawaiian is considering. A decision on which plane will be used for interisland flights should be announced within months. Hydraulic problems on airliners. Hydraulic faults can be of varying degrees, from small leaks to possible component or system failures. These problem are presented to flight crew via aircraft warning systems. https://beatofhawaii.com/hawaiian-airlines-diversion-hydraulic-failure-landing-gear-smoke/ Delta flight forced into emergency landing by passenger’s diarrhea: ‘This is a biohazard’ A Delta flight from Atlanta to Barcelona was forced to turn around and make an emergency landing after a passenger “had diarrhea all the way through the plane.” The Airbus A350 aircraft was two hours into a trans-Atlantic flight from Georgia to Spain on Friday when the pilot asked to come back because of the fecal fiasco. “This is a biohazard issue,” the pilot said to air traffic control, recorded from LiveATC.com and shared on X. “We’ve had a passenger who’s had diarrhea all the way through the airplane, so they want us to come back to Atlanta.” The identity of the passenger remains a mystery, but the passengers and crew were transferred and Flight DL194 finally made it to Barcelona at 5:10 p.m. the next day — eight hours later than scheduled, according to Flightradar24. It is not known if the passenger who had the digestive problem was aboard the plane when it touched down in Spain. An alleged Federal Aviation Authority flight strip was posted on Reddit, which appeared to confirm the situation involved “biohazard” all over the plane. A Delta Airlines Airbus A350 turned around back to Atlanta on Friday night because of diarrhea throughout the airplane. A Delta Airlines Airbus A350 turned around back to Atlanta Friday night because of diarrhea throughout the airplane from a passenger and it’s a biohazard. The flight had been scheduled to travel to Spain. News of the passenger’s unfortunate mishap and the flight delay went viral on social media. Cleaning crews were able to scrub down the aircraft once it landed in Atlanta since flight records show it was used for another flight. Delta officials confirmed there was a “medical issue” on the plane and it had to be redirected to Atlanta to be cleaned, according to Insider. The company did not elaborate on the medical reason. A Delta Airlines Airbus A350 turned around back to Atlanta Friday night because of diarrhea throughout the airplane from a passenger and it’s a biohazard. A Delta Airlines Airbus A350 turned back to Atlanta on Friday night because of the biohazard. “Our teams worked as quickly and safely as possible to thoroughly clean the airplane and get our customers to their final destination,” a Delta spokesperson said. “We sincerely apologize to our customers for the delay and inconvenience to their travel plans.” Delta passengers had a rough week in the air: Another flight en route to Milan, Italy, had to be redirected to the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport on Aug. 29 when it hit severe turbulence, injuring 11 passengers. https://nypost.com/2023/09/04/delta-flight-forced-into-emergency-landing-by-passengers-diarrhea/ Two Air Canada planes clip wings on the ground at Vancouver International Airport Passengers on a Q400 scheduled to fly to Nanaimo Sunday afternoon and on a A319 flight to Quebec City were rescheduled to night flights An Air Canada Rouge Airbus A319 clipped the wing of a parked Air Canada Jazz Express de Havilland Dash 8-400 at the domestic terminal at Vancouver International around 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Sept. 3, 2023. It happened while the A319 was being pushed back from its gate in preparation for taxiing. No one was injured. An Air Canada Rouge Airbus A319 clipped the wing of a parked Air Canada Jazz Express de Havilland Dash 8-400 at the domestic terminal at Vancouver International around 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Sept. 3, 2023. It happened while the A319 was being pushed back from its gate in preparation for taxiing. No one was injured. PHOTO BY Closeup of the two wingtips touching after an Air Canada Rouge Airbus A319 clipped the wing of a parked Air Canada Jazz Express de Havilland Dash 8-400 at the domestic terminal at Vancouver International around 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Sept. 3, 2023. It happened while the A319 was being pushed back from its gate in preparation for taxiing. No one was injured. Air Canada Rouge Airbus A319 clipped the wing of a parked Air Canada Jazz Express de Havilland Dash 8-400 at the domestic terminal at Vancouver International around 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Sept. 3, 2023. It happened while the A319 was being pushed back from its gate in preparation for taxiing. No one was injured. Closeup of the two wingtips touching after an Air Canada Rouge Airbus A319 clipped the wing of a parked Air Canada Jazz Express de Havilland Dash 8-400 at the domestic terminal at Vancouver International around 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Sept. 3, 2023. It happened while the A319 was being pushed back from its gate in preparation for taxiing. Passengers for the 28-minute flight to Nanaimo on the Dash 8-400 and for the five-hour flight to Quebec City on the A319 were put on other flights Sunday evening. Air Canada had no one available to speak on Monday but confirmed that one of its Rouge Airbus A319s made contact with a Jazz Express Q400 on Sunday afternoon while the Airbus was being pushed back from the gate. “The Rouge plane’s wingtip made contact with that of the Q400, which was parked at a nearby gate,” the statement read. “There were no injuries to customers or ground personnel. “Customers on both flights travelled to their final destinations on other aircraft (Sunday evening).” Both the A319 and the Dash 8-400 are considered particularly safe and reliable aircraft. The Transport Safety Board of Canada warns on its website that “there continues to be a risk of aircraft colliding with vehicles or other aircraft on the ground at Canadian airports,” as planes and support vehicles travel between ramps, taxiways and runways. It also began tracking the far-more-serious runway collisions in 2010, though the Nav Canada statistics it uses go only to 201. Of the total 2,041 runway incursions — meaning a plane entering a runway without permission — from 2011 to 2015, there were 27 deemed serious. “Given the millions of takeoffs and landings each year, incursions are rare, but their consequences can be catastrophic,” the board says. “Several TSB investigations have found a risk of collisions on runways and the board remains concerned that serious runway incursions will continue to occur until better defences are put in place,” the board said. Nav Canada follows the International Civil Aviation Organization’s manual on the prevention of runway incursions. In the U.S., the Federal Aviation Administration set up a safety summit in May to address the increasing number of in-air and on-ground near misses that data shows began creeping upward in 1997. “The vast majority of runway incursions are not serious occurrences,” but do cause alarm, the FAA said. YVR deferred to the airline. “The safety and security of our passengers and employees is our top priority,” an airport spokesperson said via email. “YVR Fire and Rescue responded immediately and there were no reported injuries. “Affected passengers were accommodated by their airline and operations were and continue to be normal at YVR.” The airline didn’t say how many passengers were affected, but the Q400 seats about 45 passengers and the A319 about 150, depending on configuarion. The airport said before the long weekend began it expected 315,000 passengers over the three days. Sylvie Barma, a Quebec City resident aboard the Airbus, told the CBC she saw a piece of her plane’s wing on the ground after the collision. “We were shaken by a rather strong blow,” she told the network while waiting for her rescheduled flight Sunday. “We were worried for a few moments.” https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/two-air-canada-planes-clip-wings-on-the-ground-at-vancouver-international-airport FAA warns of possible defect in Boeing 777 engines The defect is linked to ‘iron inclusion’ in the material. The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a new proposal to address a potential defect in some of the engines that power Boeing 777 aircraft. The defect is related to a substance called ‘iron inclusion’ that could affect the quality and durability of certain compressor components. As per FlightGlobal, the FAA’s proposal is the latest in a series of regulatory actions that have been taken in response to the discovery of iron inclusion in several types of GE Aerospace engines, including the GEnx and CFM International Leap turbofans. The GEnx powers Boeing 787 aircraft, while the Leap powers Boeing 737 Max and Airbus A320neo-family aircraft. GE90 turbofans The proposal, which was published on September 1st, would require airlines to replace the affected components in some GE Aerospace GE90 turbofans before the next flight. The FAA’s latest proposal came after GE Aerospace discovered that more components within GE90 engines were produced using material associated with iron inclusion. The components include high-pressure turbine discs, rotor spools, and compressor seals. According to the FAA, ‘iron inclusion’ is a result of manufacturing process flaws and could cause early cracks and failures in the components, leading to engine damage and debris release. GE Aerospace, which is a joint venture between GE and Safran Aircraft Engines, said that the proposal “is consistent with existing GE recommendations to operators and reflects our proactive approach to safety management”. They also said that the issue does not pose a risk to flight safety and that they are aware of the problem and have implemented corrective actions. Earlier directives In 2022, the FAA issued similar directives for other GE90s, GEnx, and CFM International Leap turbofan engines that may have components made with material suspected of containing iron inclusion. The proposal will be available for public feedback for a period of 45 days prior to becoming a finalized directive. Upon finalization, it will require the immediate replacement of particular GE90 high-pressure turbine stage-one and stage-two discs before the machinery can be operated further. Other impacted components will be granted an extended timeline for replacement. The FAA warned that failure to comply with this directive could result in uncontained engine failures, damage to the aircraft, and possible injuries. GE Aerospace has already notified the airlines about the issue. Other engine makers have also faced manufacturing defects related to metal components in their turbofan engines. In July, Pratt & Whitney reported that around 1,200 of its PW1000G geared turbofan engines, which are used in various aircraft, including the A320neo family, could have high-pressure turbine discs made with material that may be ‘contaminated.’ The problem was initially identified in an Airbus A321ceo plane operated by a Vietnamese carrier. This aircraft was equipped with an IAE V2500 turbofan engine, co-developed with Pratt & Whitney, and experienced a disc failure. Earlier, Pratt & Whitney discovered that the tainted powder was similarly used in the production of its most recent PW1100G Geared Turbofan Engines. The company has subsequently launched a preemptive recall for inspections, well in advance of its planned schedule. The GE90 engine The GE90 is a high-bypass turbofan engine by GE Aviation, designed for the Boeing 777 and first used by British Airways in 1995. It offers thrust ratings between 81,000 to 115,000 pounds-force and was the largest jet engine until surpassed by its successor, the GE9X, in 2020. Developed from NASA's 1970s Energy Efficient Engine and GE's own blade technology, the GE90 had multiple international partners including Snecma, IHI, and Avio. Originally one of three engine options for the 777, it later became the exclusive choice for newer 777 models. The enhanced -115B version was first tested in 2001 and is used in second-generation 777 aircraft. https://interestingengineering.com/transportation/faa-warns-of-possible-defect-in-boeing-777-engines Russian Airlines Have Imported Over $1 Billion In Parts For Airbus & Boeing Aircraft Since May 2022 Sanctions by the West were imposed in February 2022 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. SUMMARY • Russian airlines have circumvented Western sanctions by importing over $1.2 billion worth of Airbus and Boeing parts through countries unaffected by the restrictions. • Safety challenges plague the Russian aviation sector as inspections reveal components past their operational lifespan. • Security concerns in Moscow airspace arise from drone strikes, leading Turkmenistan Airlines to suspend operations between Ashgabat and Moscow due to safety fears. Russian airlines have managed to import approximately $1.2 billion worth of parts for Airbus and Boeing aircraft since May 2022, according to a report by Reuters. This loophole has allowed Russian-registered planes to continue flying, bypassing Western sanctions aimed at restricting the access of parts for their Airbus and Boeing fleets. The customs data seen by Reuters revealed that Ural Airlines has imported more than 20 US-made equipment pieces, including Northrop Grumman devices, cabin pressure valves, cockpit displays, landing gear, telephone headsets, and toilet seats. These imports were facilitated by countries like Tajikistan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Turkey, China, and Kyrgyzstan, according to the report. None of these nations have aligned themselves with Western sanctions against Russia. Safety challenges In the aftermath of Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the aviation industry has been subject to strict international sanctions. These sanctions have effectively barred Russian-registered and affiliated aircraft from accessing the airspace of Canada, the US, Europe, and several other countries. Also, the major aircraft manufacturers, including Airbus and Boeing, have halted the supply of spare aircraft parts for Russian aircraft. However, Russia's aviation sector remains heavily reliant on Western-made aircraft. To put it into perspective, the country's flag carrier Aeroflot Group currently operates a fleet of 366 aircraft, of which only 77 are Sukhoi Superjet 100s, Russia's domestically-produced narrowbody aircraft. Another large Russian airline, S7 Airlines, currently operates 99 aircraft, of which none are Russian-manufactured aircraft, according to Planespotters.net. Despite being able to import some of the crucial aircraft parts, the Russian aviation sector faces certain safety challenges. Multiple inspections conducted by Rostransnadzor, a Transportation Ministry agency, discovered that a minimum of 2,000 flights had operated with components that had already exceeded their operational lifespan, El Pais reported. In addition, an investigation by Proekt Media has found that Aeroflot instructed its aircraft personnel not to record in-flight malfunctions unless specifically directed to do so by the captain. Security concerns in Moscow airspace Besides the difficulties in sourcing aircraft spare parts, Russia's aviation sector has also had to contend with a series of drone strikes in Moscow, the country's capital. In August 2023, a drone strike targeted a skyscraper under construction, followed by another strike in central Moscow in June 2023 As a result of these drone strikes, Turkmenistan Airlines suspended its operations between the country's capital, Ashgabat, and Moscow, Russia, beginning August 1, 2023. The news was a direct response to these drone attacks, citing safety concerns. However, the airline did not suspend its services in Russia. It is worth noting that Turkmenistan Airlines was the sole airline to choose suspension of operations in the Russian capital. Moscow has repeatedly accused Ukraine of being behind these strikes, but Ukraine has not claimed any responsibility for any attacks. https://simpleflying.com/russian-airlines-imported-1-billion-dollars-parts/ 5 Advantages Of Preventive Maintenance Preventive maintenance reduces cost and downtime for the aircraft. SUMMARY • Preventive maintenance improves operational performance by ensuring that critical parts of the aircraft are regularly inspected and maintained to maximize safety and minimize downtime. • It allows for the identification and repair of small issues before they escalate into major safety concerns. • Implementing a preventive maintenance strategy enables operators to schedule aircraft downtime according to their specific needs. Air travel remains the safest mode of travel, thanks to the aviation regulations that require operators to keep their aircraft in the condition of safe operations. Preventive maintenance of aircraft and its components allows operators to stay on top of the issues that may result in the grounding of aircraft. Preventive maintenance techniques include timed inspections and continuous performance monitoring to identify potential mechanical failures in aircraft. Almost all critical and non-critical systems undergo periodic inspection and maintenance to prevent mechanical issues. Aircraft parts, assemblies, and systems are repaired or replaced regularly, irrespective of their current state. For example, the air conditioning system would go through dismantling and maintenance at specific intervals. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) defines preventive maintenance as, Simple or minor preservation operations and the replacement of small standard parts not involving complex assembly operations. Preventive maintenance aims to maximize the on-wing performance while minimizing downtime. It may become costly for operators if not done appropriately. Operators seek help from maintenance, repair and overhaul outfits (MROs) to optimize their maintenance schedules to remain financially viable in their decisions. In this article, we present five advantages of preventive maintenance. 1 Better operational performance Aviation regulatory authorities such as the FAA and the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA) require operators to comply with preventative maintenance of critical parts to maintain the aircraft’s airworthiness certificate. Routine inspections and trend monitoring is performed to identify the condition of various systems and the potential need for maintenance. Preventive inspections and health monitoring enable the aircraft to perform better. The operational parameters of the aircraft are routinely checked to ensure they function within acceptable limits. The practice significantly improves the safety of the aircraft. It is the responsibility of the operator to maintain the airworthiness status of the aircraft. Preventive maintenance does not necessarily interfere with the functional parts. Instead, the red line limits on those parts are checked to ensure they are within limits. This is to reduce the creation of new faults in perfectly functional systems. 2 Nip-in-the-bud repair opportunities During a flight, the aircraft structure is put through extreme stress. Whether it is pressure differential for the breathability of passengers or exposure to extreme outside temperatures, routine maintenance is required for safe operations. It is common for aircraft components to incur internal cracks during the expansion and contraction of materials. Such damages start as hairline cracks that do not have any significant effect on the safety of the aircraft. However, if not treated in time, they can propagate to become a safety issue. Preventive maintenance technique ensures that technical personnel nip the problem in the bud with suitable repairs before it escalates to become a major issue. For example, maintenance technicians use speed tape on the leading edges of the wings to prevent the surface roughness from deteriorating. While the roughness or the application of the tape does not have any safety implications, it is done as a preventive measure to minimize larger repairs. 3 Scheduled downtime of aircraft Preventive maintenance allows operators to schedule the aircraft (or engine) downtime according to their operations. The overall technique provides customized alerting for operators to device insight into their aircraft needs. For example, Boeing offers an Insight Accelerator platform that allows operators to derive predictive insights and create algorithms specific to the operators' needs. The system tracks trends and patterns of premature component failure and provides predictive maintenance information to prevent unwanted disruptions in scheduled operations. The advanced cloud-based solution allows users to uncover insights specific to their needs to make timely maintenance decisions. By opting for such platforms, airlines stay free from unscheduled maintenance unless an unforeseen circumstance (such as a bird strike) triggers a maintenance shop visit. Optimizing the maintenance schedule also includes aligning the removal and replacement of life-limited parts (LLPs) with shop visits. The LLPs expire at a certain number of hours or cycles. Specialized predictive maintenance platforms, such as the one offered by Boeing, come with machine learning technology to predict the maintenance time. 4 Maintenance work scope predictability While an operational failure or an in-flight incident may trigger a shop visit, routine maintenance checks are mandatory at regular intervals. During a shop visit, the maintenance work scope is defined by the personnel conducting the incoming inspection of the aircraft. The extent to which the aircraft (or the engine) will be looked at is based on the level of work scope defined. Preventive maintenance at regular intervals enables a certain level of predictability of the maintenance work scope for the aircraft. Greater predictability means that operators are able to control the downtime and cost of maintenance. Operators are also able to negotiate the maintenance terms with the MROs, given the typical scope of work their aircraft incur. It also helps in managing flight operations better. For example, operators can schedule shop visits during the off-peak time in their flight network. That way, there are minimum disruptions in peak times of the year. For engine wear predictability, atmospheric data is collected to periodically analyze aerosol concentration in a specific region or a city pair. The analysis shows dispersion patterns that can be used to highlight the potential impact on engine parts that are exposed to the environment. Through environmental data and flight history, exposure to environmental aerosols is estimated, and measures are taken for increased inspection and maintenance of engines. Preventive measures are taken to ensure that exposure to abrasive aerosols does not compromise the engines' safety. Interest in similar technical content? Check out our complete guides section here. 5 Reduced costs and turnaround times Depending on the scope of maintenance, shop visits for large aircraft may cost anywhere between $5 and $15 million. The maintenance of jet engines alone costs upwards of a few million dollars. Moreover, unscheduled maintenance caused by improper preventive measures can cost the operator an arm and a leg in maintenance. A preventive maintenance strategy ensures that not only the shop visits are scheduled, but the costs are also within the estimated ballpark. Boeing estimates that unnecessary maintenance can be reduced by up to 85% when predictive maintenance recommendations are implemented. Preventive maintenance may require routine downtime, but it significantly reduces the downtime during major shop visits. https://simpleflying.com/preventive-maintenance-advantages-list/#better-operational-performance EASA warns of storage-related battery drain on all Airbus aircraft The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has issued an airworthiness directive (AD) addressing a storage-related battery problem on all Airbus aircraft. The proposed AD, which is still open to comments from stakeholders, was issued following an investigation by Airbus and the unnamed manufacturer of the Nickel-Cadmium (Ni-Cd) battery. The two companies determined that “repetitive disconnection and reconnection of batteries during aeroplane parking or storage” carried out according to the aircraft’s maintenance manual, could result in the loss “of the capacity of those batteries”. “This condition, if not corrected, could lead to reduced battery endurance performance, possibly resulting in failure to supply the minimum essential electrical power during abnormal or emergency conditions,” EASA stated in the proposed AD. The potential unsafe condition was first addressed by Airbus issuing respective Alert Operators Transmissions (AOT) for A320, A330 and A340, and A380 aircraft “to provide maintenance instructions to restore an aeroplane to an airworthy condition and to preserve battery capacity during an aeroplane parking or storage period”. The AOT resulted in EASA publishing an AD in December 2020, which required operators of A320, A330 and A340, and A380 family aircraft to replace affected Ni-Cd batteries. However, now both Airbus and the battery manufacturer have determined that “the on-wing preservation procedures originally” in the AOT, as well as recommendations outlined in Airbus Operators Information Transmission (OIT) for A350 and A300/A310 family aircraft “did not ensure the expected preservation of the battery capacity”. As a result, the proposed AD will supersede the December 2020 directive, extending the applicability to the A350 and A300/A310 aircraft families and will require the replacement of the affected batteries on all Airbus aircraft. Replacing Airbus aircraft batteries For operators to comply with the latest directive, EASA outlined time limits for different Airbus aircraft families. For the Airbus A320 aircraft family, including the A318ceo, A319ceo and A319neo, A320ceo and A320neo, and A321ceo and A321neo, the batteries must be replaced before they reach six months of being on-wing during storage before the aircraft can be released back into service. The same six-month timetable applies to all Airbus A330 (A330ceo and A330neo) and A340, as well as Airbus A300/A310 family aircraft. For the Airbus A350 and A380 aircraft families, the batteries have an on-wing battery storage time limit of 12 months. However, the battery part numbers (P/N) differ, as defined by EASA’s AD. Stakeholders are invited to comment on the changes until October 2, 2023, with EASA planing for the directive to come into effect 14 days after that date, per the standard procedure. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/easa-warns-of-storage-related-battery-drain-on-all-airbus-aircraft Air India Hired 650 Pilots Since April As the Indian flag carrier begins to ramp up its large-scale growth plans, since April 1, 2023, Air India’s Chief Executive Officer, Campbell Wilson, has said that the group has hired as many as 650 pilots. “The Group Hiring Cell (GHC) has successfully recruited and onboarded more than 650 pilots since April 1. The first week of September and this week saw the addition of not one but two new Boeing 777 aircraft to our fleet — the fifth and sixth of the year so far.” The current Air India Group consists of three units, Air India itself and two subsidiaries, Air India Express and AIX Connect. Campbell Wilson has also said that the group is still actively recruiting more pilots. This will coincide with its growth plans of adding nearly 500 new aircraft to its fleet in the coming years. Since late 2022, the carrier has already taken delivery of 10 aircraft, five Boeing 777-200LRs, one Boeing 777-300ER and four Airbus A321neos. They have also brought back two of three Boeing 787s that have been grounded. In the coming months, Air India plans to bring in a total of 11 Boeing 777s to enable the carrier to expand its North American routes, minus the six they have already taken delivery of since late 2022, the carrier is due a further five Boeing 777-300ERs. This news comes as yet a plethora of new announcements that the carrier has recently been springing out. The first one was the leak of their new branding, read our article here. The second one was last week when the DGCA (Directorate General of Civil Aviation) found lapses in the carrier’s safety audits, read our article here. https://aviationsourcenews.com/airline/air-india-hired-650-pilots-since-april/ Former Canadian fighter pilots face RCMP probe over training work in China The RCMP are investigating three former Royal Canadian Air Force fighter pilots who are training military and civilian pilots in China, even though their employer, a South African flying academy, insists no sensitive information is being passed on to Chinese authorities. The work the three pilots are doing in China has also come under scrutiny from Canadian security officials, who reached out to the former top guns in late August. The Department of National Defence says it referred the matter to the RCMP. “The RCMP is aware of the report of former RCAF pilots taking part in training People’s Liberation Army Air Force pilots. As the RCMP is investigating these incidents, there will be no further comment on this matter at this time,” RCMP spokesperson Robin Percival told The Globe and Mail in a statement. The Globe contacted former RCAF pilot Paul Umrysh to seek comment on speculation in Canada’s aviation community that he and two other former fighter pilots, Craig Sharp and David Monk, have been teaching flying skills in China. Mr. Umrysh did not reply but instead forwarded the e-mail to his employer, Test Flying Academy of South Africa (TFASA), which is based in the Western Cape town of Oudtshoorn. Edward Lee, a spokesman for TFASA, confirmed that Mr. Umrysh, Mr. Sharp and Mr. Monk are under contract to train pilots in China, adding that the company would speak for its employees. In fact, it issued several statements to address questions. “Training always involves unclassified procedures, and materials are derived either from open source or from the clients themselves. The training TFASA provides never includes information about NATO,” Mr. Lee said. “TFASA has strict protocols and a code of conduct in place that are designed to prevent any TFASA employee sharing any information or training that is, or might be considered to be, legally or operationally sensitive, or security classified.” The issue of Western military pilots instructing Chinese students arose last fall after British media reports that as many as 30 former U.K. top guns were working as instructors. In June, the U.S. government targeted TFASA by imposing export controls on it and other companies for allegedly “providing training to Chinese military pilots using Western and NATO sources.” This activity “is contrary to U.S. national security and foreign policy interests,” the U.S. Department of Commerce said at the time. Mr. Lee confirmed that Canadian security officials identifying themselves as Public Safety Canada employees had contacted “a number of TFASA employees” on Aug. 24 to request that they stop working for the Chinese. He noted that “those conversations are ongoing.” However, he maintained that “any suggestion that the company, or its employees, offer assistance in equipping foreign powers with advanced tactics, techniques or procedures, or advanced technology, is simply incorrect.” Eric Balsam, a spokesman for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, declined to discuss any possible dealings with the three pilots. “In a world marked by economic competition and confrontation, some states pursue a strategy for geopolitical advantage on all fronts – economic, technological, political and military – and using all elements of state power to carry out activities that are a direct threat to our national security and sovereignty,” Mr. Balsam said. Former CSIS director Richard Fadden said it is very concerning that former RCAF pilots would be helping China’s military. “Just the fact that they are training is worrisome. But they are also taking with them all of their experience and knowledge of Western tactics and Western ways of thinking and, even inadvertently, if they pass this onto the Chinese, this is not helpful,” he said. Mr. Fadden acknowledged that legally it would be difficult to instruct the three men to stop what they are doing and come home, but in the future, he said, the government needs to change the terms and conditions of military service and employment to prohibit former military officers from co-operating with China and other hostile states. Mr. Lee insists TFASA is not doing anything illegal, citing discussions with U.S. and British officials. “Recent communications between the FBI, the USAF Office of Special Investigations and the Society of Experimental Test Pilots indicates TFASA has broken no laws, as have communications from the U.K. Ministry of Defence,” he said, without providing any supporting documents. When The Globe asked whether the Canadian men are training members of the People’s Liberation Army, the South African company said some students may end up in the military – but they are not being given Western defence secrets. “TFASA notes that to do so would be illegal and that false allegations of illegality from whatever source are, of course, defamatory,” Mr. Lee said. The Globe asked Mr. Umrysh in an e-mail to address speculation that the Canadians are training students on Chinese warplanes such as the Chengdu J-10 or J-11B, both multi-role fighters. He did not respond, and TFASA did not comment on this. The flying academy said it’s not the only company providing training to clients in the Asia Pacific, the Middle East and Africa. Mr. Lee pointed to recently published information by China’s Ministry of Transport that authorized it to contract pilot training with three Canadian-based schools. But none of those Canadian schools offers fighter jet training or operates in China. “We don’t do fighter training,” said Josée Prudhomme, president of Montreal-based Cargair Flight Academy. “The only thing we do is train for airlines.” Ian Kenney, vice-president of operations and training for B.C.-based Montair Aviation, said his company “does not send any of our instructors to China to deliver flight training,” nor does it have any former RCAF pilots on staff. “We do not do any training on jets – military or otherwise – nor does our Transport Canada flight training unit operator certificate allow for that,” he said. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canadian-pilots-china-training-rcmp/ Curt Lewis