Flight Safety Information - January 25, 2024 No. 019 In This Issue : Incident: Sichuan A21N at Changchun on Jan 21st 2024, engine shut down in flight : Incident: American B738 at Houston on Jan 22nd 2024, flaps problem : Boeing, not supplier, mis-installed piece that blew off Alaska Airlines MAX 9 jet, industry source says : An airline passenger could face a $120,000 bill after fighter jets were scrambled when he joked about blowing up the plane : EASA Lays Out Priorities in European Air Safety Plan : Boeing to Shut Down Facility for Day : Suspect arrested for making bomb threat onboard plane leaving Charlotte Douglas airport : Frontier Slows Pilot Hiring Pipeline : Gulfstream Occupies 2/3rds Of The USA's Ultra Long Range Private Jet Market Share : Best and worst airlines of 2023 revealed: Which one hit rock bottom? : NTSB Sends Human Performance Team To Boeing 737 MAX Factory : ACSF Annual Safety Symposium : CALENDAR OF EVENTS Incident: Sichuan A21N at Changchun on Jan 21st 2024, engine shut down in flight A Sichuan Airlines Airbus A321-200N, registration B-325H performing flight 3U-8424 from Changchun to Chengdu (China), was climbing out of Changchun's runway 06 when the crew stopped the climb at about 2200 meters (about 7700 feet) after the right hand engine (PW1133G) failed emitting streaks of flames and was shut down. The aircraft entered a hold to burn off fuel and returned to Changchun for a safe landing on runway 06 about 110 minutes after departure. The airline said, the aircraft returned to Changchun due to a malfunctioning alarm indication. There were no injuries. A plane spotter reported the right hand engine emitted loud bangs and streaks of flames for about 10 times in the initial climb out of the runway. A replacement A321-200N registration B-307E reached Chengdu with a delay of about 7.5 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground 3 days later. https://avherald.com/h?article=51414de8&opt=0 Incident: American B738 at Houston on Jan 22nd 2024, flaps problem An American Airlines Boeing 737-800, registration N935AN performing flight AA-1472 from Dallas Ft. Worth,TX to Houston Intercontinental,TX (USA), was on final approach to Houston's runway 08L when the crew initiated a go around advising their flaps did not fully extend. The aircraft positioned for a second approach to runway 08L, the crew however aborted the approach early and entered a hold while considering their options. The aircraft subsequently climbed to 15,000 feet to divert to Lake Charles,LA (USA) where the aircraft landed safely on runway 15 about 50 minutes after aborting the first approach to Houston. A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration N922NN reached Houston with a delay of about 7.5 hours. The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 19 hours, then positioned back to Dallas Ft. Worth and resumed service. https://avherald.com/h?article=5140b1b8&opt=0 Boeing, not supplier, mis-installed piece that blew off Alaska Airlines MAX 9 jet, industry source says SEATTLE — The fuselage panel that blew off an Alaska Airlines jet this month was removed for repair but reinstalled improperly by Boeing mechanics on the Renton final assembly line, a person familiar with the details of the work told The Seattle Times. If verified by the National Transportation Safety Board investigation, this would leave Boeing primarily at fault for the accident, rather than its supplier Spirit AeroSystems, which originally installed the panel into the 737 MAX 9 fuselage in Wichita, Kan. That panel, a door plug used to seal a hole in the fuselage sometimes used to accommodate an emergency exit, blew out of Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 as it climbed out of Portland on Jan. 5. The hair-raising incident drew fresh and sharp criticism of Boeing’s quality control systems and safety culture, which has been under the microscope since two fatal 737 MAX crashes five years ago. Last week, an anonymous whistleblower — who appears to have access to Boeing’s manufacturing records of the work done assembling the specific Alaska Airlines jet that suffered the blowout — on an aviation website separately provided many additional details about how the door plug came to be removed and then mis-installed. “The reason the door blew off is stated in black and white in Boeing’s own records,” the whistleblower wrote. “It is also very, very stupid and speaks volumes about the quality culture at certain portions of the business.” The self-described Boeing insider said company records show four bolts that prevent the door plug from sliding up off the door frame stop pads that take the pressurization loads in flight, “were not installed when Boeing delivered the airplane.” the whistleblower stated. “Our own records reflect this.” NTSB investigators already publicly raised the possibility that the bolts had not been installed. The account goes on to describe shocking lapses in Boeing’s quality control process in Renton. The work of the mechanics on the door plug should have been formally inspected and signed off by a Boeing quality inspector. It wasn’t, the whistleblower wrote, because of a process failure and the use of two separate systems to record what work was accomplished. Boeing’s 737 production system is described as “a rambling, shambling, disaster waiting to happen.” If that account of what happened is indeed fully documented in Boeing’s system it should be readily verified by the investigation. The Seattle Times offered Boeing the opportunity to dispute the details in this story. Citing the ongoing investigation, Boeing declined to comment. Likewise, so did Spirit, the FAA, the Machinists union and the NTSB. A convincing account Passengers on Flight 1282 were traumatized when a door-sized section of the 737 MAX 9 fuselage exploded out 16,000 feet over Portland. The door plug that blew out is a panel used to seal a fuselage cutout for an optional emergency exit door that is installed only by a few airlines with high-density seating. To a passenger seated at that location, it looks like just another cabin window. The incident has proved a monumental setback for Boeing, drawing outrage and mockery across the world. With large fleets of MAX 9 aircraft still grounded almost three weeks later, the chief executives of both Alaska and United on Tuesday sharply criticized Boeing. “I’m more than frustrated and disappointed,” Alaska CEO Ben Minicucci told NBC News. “I am angry.” [At Alaska and United airlines, frustration with Boeing’s manufacturing problems is boiling over] It was clear soon after the incident that the plug must have been mis-installed. When the cabin is pressurized, six small stop fittings on either side of the plug press against corresponding stop pads on the door frame. The only way for the plug to have blown out is if it moved up, so that the stop fittings were no longer aligned with the stop pads — which is how the plug is opened for maintenance. Four key bolts that prevent such upward movement in flight could not have been in place. The anonymous whistleblower posted his account online, in the comments appended to an article about the door plug incident on the Leeham.net aviation website. Before explaining what happened, the person states the motivation for posting it. Doing so, the whistleblower repeated complaints frequently offered by Boeing longtimers who contend the company’s 1997 acquisition of competitor McDonnell Douglas undercut the Boeing’s focus on quality. “There are many cultures at Boeing, and while the executive culture may be thoroughly compromised since we were bought by [McDonnell Douglas], there are many other people who still push for a quality product with cutting edge design,” the whistleblower wrote. “My hope is that this is the wake up call that finally forces the Board to take decisive action, and remove the executives that are resisting the necessary cultural changes.” The Seattle Times does not know the identity of the whistleblower. However, the details provided about the manufacturing process failures that led to the door plug blowout appear authentic and authoritative. The Seattle Times confirmed with a Renton mechanic and a former 737 MAX production line manager that the whistleblower’s description of how this kind of rework is performed and by whom is accurate. The Times also confirmed that the whistleblower accurately described the computer systems Boeing uses to record and track 737 assembly work, systems that mechanics and engineers sign into every day when they begin work. The whistleblower outlines how, because of a mistake, the removal and re-installation of the door plug in Renton was never entered in the computer system where every detail of the build process on each individual aircraft is recorded. As a result, no quality inspection was triggered. Ed Pierson, a former manager of the MAX production line and himself a whistleblower who raised concerns about quality control in Renton before the first MAX crash in Indonesia in 2018, said in an interview Monday the new account of the door plug mis-installation and the error in the recording of the work “is very consistent with what I saw in the factory personally.” After reading the whistleblower account, he said “I think there is a very high probability this is accurate.” “People, when they’re pressured and rushed, they think, well, I’ll catch up on the paperwork later,” Pierson said. “Then it goes from shift to shift and you don’t know if the next shift got it or not.” [Boeing hit by quality lapses and certification delays as Airbus soars to dominance] As the whistleblower describes, many routine fixes are done by a team of mechanics from Spirit who are permanently on site in Renton to do “warranty” repairs on parts built by Spirit in Wichita. Pierson confirmed that Spirit employees were stationed in Renton doing this kind of rework as far back as 2018. “We had Spirit employees in our factory when the fuselage came in that were doing what people call ‘warranty work,’ but we would just call it defects or non-conformances,” Pierson said. The records show a Spirit team did initial work on the door plug that later failed. But the aviation insider familiar with the details of the work, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the NTSB investigation, said it was Boeing who opened the plug and then closed it up, marking the job complete. How the quality process failed The online whistleblower described two systems Boeing uses to track the thousands of jobs performed to assemble each aircraft. The mistake occurred when a job was discussed in one system but not fully entered in the other. The first system, the formal record for the FAA of every job completed in the building of the airplane, is called the Common Manufacturing Execution System or CMES — pronounced “sea-mass” by the mechanics. The other system, called the Situation Action Tracker or SAT, is an informal Boeing factory messaging board used by mechanics, engineers and management to flag issues. The Renton mechanic, who asked not to be named to protect his job because he spoke without company permission, said he uses SAT when a defect shows up “to bring more eyes on what the problem is” and get it addressed. If nothing is amiss, there’s no need for Boeing to do anything more than visually check the door plug, which is fully installed in the fuselage when it arrives in Renton by train from Wichita. Opening it up is not normal procedure. However, the whistleblower states that Spirit produces “a hideously high and very alarming number” of defects. The whistleblower says Boeing’s records for just the past year document a total of 392 nonconforming findings at the location where the door plug is installed, including both MAXs with actual emergency doors there and those like the Alaska jet with permanent plugs. That doesn’t mean such faults were found on 392 MAXs. Ten loose rivets on a single door plug would be 10 non-conformities. Still, it’s not a reassuring number. On the jet that would become Alaska Airlines Flight 1282, mechanics found problems in the door plugs on both sides of the airplane. The whistleblower, confirming a previous report, says that on Aug. 31 mechanics found discrepancies on the door plug on the right side of the airplane, not the one on the left that was to blow out. The following day, a different team of mechanics found “damaged and improperly installed rivets” on the left door plug. The whistleblower says this defect was written up in both CMES and SAT. The SAT message thread shows the Spirit team repaired the rivets and sent it back to a Boeing quality inspector. At this point, the whistleblower says the process began to go badly wrong. The Boeing inspector recorded in CMES that the repair was not done properly, that the Spirit team “just painted over the defects.” As a result, the repair job was reopened. Looking at it anew, the Spirit mechanics then discovered that, in addition to the problematic rivets, the pressure seal sandwiched between the plug and the airframe was damaged and needed replaced. “The big deal with this seal,” the whistleblower wrote, was that the replacement part was not on hand in Renton and needed to be ordered, which could threaten to delay the jet’s delivery schedule. Plug removal isn’t logged in the system That elevates the repair to more urgency. The whistleblower cited an entry in the SAT system showing the Boeing and Spirit teams discussed whether the door plug would have to be removed entirely, or just opened. Critically, says the whistleblower, removal of the door plug has to be recorded in CMES and after it is re-installed requires a formal sign-off from a quality inspector that it’s been done properly and that the airplane complies with regulatory requirements. But regardless of whether the plug is just opened out on the bottom hinge or fully removed, to do so the four bolts have to be taken out so the plug can be moved upward a few inches, above the stop pads. “A removal should be written in either case” and a quality inspector required to verify install, the whistleblower wrote. Instead, someone decided that the door only needed to be opened and a formal Removal entry in CMES was not required — and hence no inspection. The whistleblower labels this “a major process failure.” In short, the crucial bolts were removed and no one inspected the plug afterward to ensure they were reinserted. The published whistleblower account does not explicitly state who removed and reinstalled the door plug in Renton. The information that it was Boeing mechanics who removed the plug is from a different source with knowledge of the repair, the person who cannot be identified because of the sensitivity of the ongoing investigation. The online whistleblower writes that the entire sequence of the work is documented in SAT and the damaged rivets and pressure seal are recorded in CMES. However, there is no mention in CMES of a removal and reinstallation, even though that had to happen to replace the seal sandwiched between door plug and airframe. Nor is there “any record of removed retention bolts” even though it’s physically impossible to open or remove the plug if those four bolts are in place. The critical procedural error, the lack of proper recording of the work done and what still needed to be done for completion, seems to reflect what former MAX assembly manager Pierson calls the “manufacturing chaos” he witnessed first hand in 2018 when mechanics were pushed to accelerate work to meet schedule. “If a mechanic on day shift removes the part and doesn’t fill it out properly and doesn’t document it properly, and then another comes in on second shift that doesn’t know it,” Pierson said “The first person not connecting with the second person, this is how these things happen.” Aside from the quality control process failures, Boeing employees see the labor turnover during the COVID-19 pandemic as a significant factor. The Renton mechanic, a veteran machinist, lamented that wage competition means Boeing is having trouble hiring employees to replace all the experienced people who left during the pandemic. Another mechanic, who also asked not to be identified to protect his job, echoed that, saying that new people “with very little to no experience working on this type of aircraft” have been hired to replace machinists with over 20 years experience. At the end of his online post, the whistleblower asks “So, where are the bolts?” then offers a guess: “Probably sitting forgotten and unlabeled ... on a work-in-progress bench. Unless someone already tossed them in the scrap bin to tidy up.” https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2024/01/24/boeing-not-supplier-mis-installed-piece-that-blew-off-alaska-airlines-max-9-jet-industry-source-says/ An airline passenger could face a $120,000 bill after fighter jets were scrambled when he joked about blowing up the plane • Aditya Verma was going on vacation to Spain in July 2022 with friends on an easyJet flight. • Per the BBC, he said on Snapchat: "On my way to blow up the plane (I'm a member of the Taliban)." • He's facing public-disorder charges in Spain after the country's air force scrambled jets. An airline passenger who prompted the Spanish air force to scramble fighter jets after he said he was going to blow up the plane he was on appeared Monday in court, the BBC reported. Aditya Verma was 18 when he and his friends traveled with easyJet from London Gatwick Airport to the Spanish island of Menorca in July 2022. The BBC reported that before departing, he told a friend on Snapchat: "On my way to blow up the plane (I'm a member of the Taliban)." Security services saw the message and flagged it to Spanish authorities, who sent two F-18 jets to follow the airliner until it landed, per the BBC. "The intention was never to cause public distress or cause public harm," Verma told the court. He faces a public-disorder charge, which could result in him being ordered to pay over $120,000 if he's found guilty. About $103,000 of that is from the Spanish Defense Ministry for the cost of scrambling the fighter jets. According to The Telegraph, Verma told the court he first thought the jets were flanking the plane as part of a military exercise related to the Russia-Ukraine war. https://www.businessinsider.com/passenger-faces-120k-fines-after-fighter-jets-scrambled-for-bomb-joke-2024-1 EASA Lays Out Priorities in European Air Safety Plan Latest safety plan includes 19 new rulemaking tasks EASA, which is headquartered in Cologne, Germany, has just published the 2024 edition of its European aviation safety plan. The 2024 edition of its annual European Plan for Aviation Safety published by EASA on Tuesday reflects the European air safety agency’s most current assessment of strategic priorities for its member states. The document includes updates to the Volume I strategic priorities document covering 2023 through 2025, as well as 19 new action items spelled out in Volume II and an updated safety risk portfolio in Volume III. Among the new rulemaking tasks set by EASA is an action to address safety concerns over “erroneous takeoff parameters and position errors” in airline operations. The new report also calls for a new regulatory framework to address the “trustworthiness” of artificial intelligence and the safe integration of higher airspace operations. The report identified the following three risk areas for general aviation operations as being of greatest importance: aircraft upset, airborne collision, and runway excursion. It indicated that the first two risks are mainly associated with leisure or personal flying. According to outgoing executive director Patrick Ky, EASA has adjusted and shortened the timeline for implementing the safety plan to make its work more focused. He also said the air transport industry needs greater stability to deal with the continuing fallout from Covid and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The agency has deprioritized some action items in its plan in response to acknowledged budget restrictions at EASA and national aviation authorities. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2024-01-24/easa-lays-out-priorities-european-air-safety-plan Boeing to Shut Down Facility for Day Quality stand-downs to start at the Renton, Wash. factory. Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton will halt its production line on January 25 so employees can focus on “quality.” On Thursday, Boeing’s 737 factory teams will conduct a “Quality Stand-Down” in Renton, Wash. According to Boeing, during the session the company’s production, delivery, and support teams will not build airplanes but instead “take part in a working session focused on quality.” In an internal communication sent to employees of Boeing’s Commercial Airplanes division, division CEO Stan Deal said this was the first of many quality stand-down days for the factories involved in the 737 program. “Production, delivery, and support efforts will pause for a day, so teammates can take part in working sessions focused on quality,” Deal said. “The sessions allow all teammates who touch the airplane to ‘pause, evaluate what we’re doing, how we’re doing it, and make recommendations for improvement.’ “During the stand-downs, teammates will participate in hands-on learning, reflection, and collaboration to identify where quality and compliance can be improved and create actionable plans that will be tracked to closure.” Quality Stand-Downs will be held over the next several weeks at other Boeing factories and fabrication sites to include all airplane programs. According to The Seattle Times, a whistleblower at the Renton plant allegedly has paperwork that claims the door plug was removed for repair from the fuselage of the Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 that lost the plug in flight, then reinstalled without the required four bolts that hold the door in place. If the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation confirms this, the blame for the event would fall on Boeing, rather than Spirit AeroSystems, the makers of the 737 fuselages. The aircraft was delivered to Alaska Airlines in October 2023. It did not have enough time in the air for it to be subject to a so-called “heavy maintenance” cycle. The door plug was found in the backyard of a Portland, Ore., area schoolteacher. It has been sent to the NTSB laboratory in Washington, D.C., for analysis. Investigators are trying to determine if the four bolts that are supposed to hold the door plug in place were installed correctly. In the meantime, the entire fleet of Boeing 737 Max 9 aircraft remains grounded and subject to extra inspections. The Max9 is primarily used by United Airlines and Alaska Airlines. Both carriers are having to cancel flights and adjust schedules to make up for the loss of aircraft while they continue to closely inspect their fleets. According to Alaska Airlines CEO Ben Minicucci, a close inspection of the 737 Max 9—which makes up 20 percent of the company’s fleet—uncovered loose bolts in many of the airplanes. “I am more than frustrated and disappointed,” Minicucci told NBC News. “I am angry. This happened to Alaska Airlines. It happened to our guests and happened to our people. And my demand on Boeing is, what are they going to do to improve their quality programs in-house?” Boeing and Alaska are facing lawsuits from passengers who were on board Flight 1282 on January 5. As the aircraft with the gaping hole in its side descended into Portland, several thought they were going to die and sent farewell messages to their loved ones via text. Among the concerns were that the airliner had three maintenance write-ups regarding the pressurization system, but the aircraft was permitted to remain in service as long as it did not fly over water. What Is a Door Plug? The door plug covers a space that can be turned into an emergency exit if the operator of the aircraft desires. The outline of the door plug can be seen from the exterior of the airplane. Inside, if the emergency exit option is not selected, the space looks like a bulkhead in the fuselage with windows. The fuselages for the 737 are made by Spirit AeroSystems, which is also investigating its quality-control measures. In December, two former employees at the Wichita, Kansas, facility filed a class-action suit alleging that a lack of quality control was endangering the company. https://airlinegeeks.com/2024/01/24/boeing-to-shut-down-facility-for-day/ Suspect arrested for making bomb threat onboard plane leaving Charlotte Douglas airport CHARLOTTE — A suspect was arrested Tuesday afternoon after making a bomb threat onboard American Airlines Flight 2185, which was taking off from the Charlotte Douglas International Airport bound for Miami. At about 3 p.m., law enforcement responded to the aircraft, which was still on a taxiway. Passenger Zach Cogswell said he thought the plane stopped because of a mechanical issue. “Everybody was like, “Woah,’” he told Channel 9. “I wouldn’t say a huge gasp, but you could hear murmurs going on.” He said about a half-dozen emergency vehicles showed up along with a stair truck. “Law enforcement come on, put a guy in handcuffs,” Cogswell said. “The plane was completely calm, no commotion.” Jerry Lee Manyette, of Minnesota, told someone there was a bomb on the flight before takeoff, according to court documents. Manyette was removed from the plane and CMPD’s Bomb Unit swept the aircraft. Flight attendant arrested for allegedly having hidden cameras in bathrooms, recording young girls “They come on the intercom and ask for five rows to come to the back to the plane and they brought on the dog,” Cogswell said. The threat was considered a non-credible security alert, which had minimal impacts on its operations, officials said. Manyette was charged with making a false bomb threat. He is being held in the Mecklenburg County jail under a $75,000 bond. The flight was delayed for about 90 minutes. “It gave me faith in the safety and security that the airlines and law enforcement put toward making sure when you fly,” Cogswell said. “You’re absolutely safe when you fly.” Statement from American Airlines: “American Airlines flight 2185, with service from Charlotte (CLT) to Miami (MIA), was met by law enforcement before departing CLT due to a report of a possible security threat on board. The aircraft was inspected and cleared by authorities and will depart CLT shortly. Safety and security is our top priority. We thank our team members for their professionalism and apologize to our customers for the inconvenience.” https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/non-credible-security-alert-reported-charlotte-douglas-airport/S4CO2QLZBFBCLBEE4N5HR6FOIA/ Frontier Slows Pilot Hiring Pipeline The ULCC is pulling back on hiring from its various pipeline programs. Ultra-low-cost carrier (ULCC) Frontier is slowing down hiring from its pilot pipeline programs, according to a report by Aero Crew News. The report states that the pipeline programs exceeded demand expectations and are subsequently at capacity. Citing a January 19 memo from Frontier’s Vice President of Flight Operations Brad Lambert, the Aero Crew News report goes on to add that lengthy wait times for a training slot prompted the decision. The airline has a variety of pipelines for new aviators, including rotor transition and cadet programs. A Frontier spokesperson confirmed the updated report in a statement to AirlineGeeks, adding that the airline is “slowing [its] hiring pipeline due to a full pool of pilots and smaller class sizes.” No specific timeline was provided on how long the slowdown will last. According to one Reddit post, Frontier will also suspend its $50,000 pilot new hire bonus indefinitely. Last year, fellow ULCC Spirit announced that it would be pressing the brakes on pilot hiring indefinitely following a net loss of $157.6 million in the third quarter of 2023. According to data from Future and Active Pilot Advisors (FAPA), major U.S. airlines hired 6% fewer pilots year-over-year in 2023. New Bases and Routes Frontier’s pilot hiring pull-down comes on the heels of the airline’s effort to pivot its network design to an ‘out-and-back’ model. As part of this effort, the airline has opened several new crew bases in recent months, including Chicago, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and most recently San Juan, Puerto Rico. With the new San Juan base, Frontier has a total of 13 crew bases with over 2,000 pilots in its ranks. On Tuesday, the airline announced over 40 new and resuming routes. https://airlinegeeks.com/2024/01/24/frontier-slows-pilot-hiring-pipeline/ Gulfstream Occupies 2/3rds Of The USA's Ultra Long Range Private Jet Market Share Bombardier and Dassault own the remaining market share. SUMMARY • Gulfstream dominates the ultra-long-range market with a 67% share, driven by the G550 model's exceptional range and luxury features. • Gulfstream's portfolio includes the G700, G650ER, and G550, all of which have distinct features and improvements. • Bombardier and Dassault follow Gulfstream in the ultra-long-range market, but Gulfstream's dominance in the US is unmatched, with over two-thirds of the market share. Gulfstream has now reached a staggering 67% share of the ultra-long-range market, according to the latest insights from JetSpy. This dominance of the ultra-long-range market is down to the strong models that Gulfstream offers in this niche. These include the Gulfstream G700, Gulfstream G650ER, and the Gulfstream G550. JetSpy highlights the G550 as the dominant model in the market, offering an exceptional range, high speeds, and luxurious interiors. Gulfstream and the ultra-long-range market Several of Gulfstream's jets slide into the ultra-long-range market, contributing to the company's dominance in the sector. Currently, Gulfstream has several large cabin jets flying in this market, including the G700, G650ER, and the G550. These jets do have some overlap in the market, but have individual features and improvements that differentiate them from one another. The Gulfstream G550 has over 600 units flying today. Originally certified in 2003, Gulfstream ceased its production in 2021. The G550 has a high-speed cruise of Mach 0.85 and a range of 6,750 nautical miles (7,770 miles). The G650ER has over 125 world speed records and over 500 aircraft flying today. It has a range of 7,500 nautical miles (8,630 miles). It even reaches a top speed of Mach 0.925. On this Day In 2009 The Gulfstream G650 Made Its First Flight The record-breaking jet is known for its ultra-high speed and ultra-long range The G700 is one of the company's newest aircraft, originally unveiled at the NBAA Convention and Exhibition in Las Vegas in 2019. The G700 has one of the company's largest cabins and lowest pressure altitudes. It also has a range of 7,750 nautical miles (8,918 miles). This aircraft is also designed with the same fly-by-wire cockpit controls as the G500 and G600. Gulfstream has continued to expand in this market, and of the 27 total aircraft it delivered in the third quarter of 2023, 22 of them were large-cabin jets. This was slightly up from the second quarter of 2023. The company also forecast more than 60 deliveries in the fourth quarter. Gulfstream generated a book-to-bill of 1.44 to one and had a large backlog of over $20 billion. This supports general growth in the private aviation industry. Diverse market In the United States, Gulfstream retains over two-thirds of this ultra-long-range market, while Bombardier and Dassault have remained in the second and third spots. Bombardier owns a 26% market share, while Dassault owns a 7% market share in the United States. Although these shares are less than Gulfstream, the other two companies have several aircraft in the market. Bombardier offers a variety of aircraft, including the Bombardier Global 7500 and Global 8000. The Global 7500 first flew in 2016, and over 150 are flying today. The aircraft was designed with a transonic wing. This allowed the aircraft to reach a 51,000-foot ceiling and a top speed of Mach 0925. The aircraft also had a range of 7,700 nautical miles (8,861 miles). The Global 8000 was a longer-range version and could reach 8,000 nautical miles (9,206 miles). Dassault Aviation Sees Private Jet Sales Falter As Falcon Deliveries Down 25% While demand for the Falcon is dwindling, the military fighter jet Rafale is seeing a boost. Dassault offers the Falcon 7X and Falcon 8X in the ultra-long-range market. The Falcon 7X first flew in 2007, and Dassault has produced over 300 aircraft. The Falcon 8X first flew more recently in 2015 and has been in production since 2016. Both of these aircraft have a 51,000-foot ceiling and a max speed of Mach 0.9. The Falcon 8X has a longer range than the Falcon 7X, which is 6,450 nautical miles (7,422 miles) compared to 5,950 nautical miles (6,847 miles). https://simpleflying.com/gulfstream-private-jet-ultra-long-range-market-share-usa/ Best and worst airlines of 2023 revealed: Which one hit rock bottom? The Wall Street Journal released its listing of the nine best and worst airlines in the U.S. for 2023 in a ranking that’s seen some shakeups since the year prior. The last-place airline blames its futility on New York City airports facing notable challenges with weather and air traffic. For a third year running, Delta was crowned top gun with an industry-high 83% on-time arrival rate, in addition to the lowest level of recorded complaints. It also reduced cancellations from nearly 2% to 1.2% in the prior 12 months. The silver medalist was Alaska Airlines, which gained recent infamy after a door plug blew off one of the airline’s flights as passengers gripped their seats for dear life. However, that incident was not accounted for on the list. A new ranking shows the best and worst airlines in the U.S. Delta was crowned the best U.S. airline for the third year in a row. A new ranking reveals the 10 absolute worst airports in the US for connecting flights — with two primetime hubs in the NYC region landing on the list. These 10 airports are the worst for connecting flights — you’ll have to hustle to your gate Instead, Alaska was lauded for strong on-time arrivals, an industry-leading, below 1% cancellation rate and might have surpassed Delta if not for a lagging score of seventh-worst out of the nine airlines in baggage handling. Southwest took the fourth spot because of a barrage of customer complaints that sullied travelers in the early winter of 2023. It was recently fined $140 million over the complete meltdown. United Airlines dipped two spots to sixth compared to 2022 because of bad bag handling and not enough of an improvement in cancellations. Worst of the worst JetBlue tanked as the worst airline in the U.S. for a third straight year. As for the bottom feeder, JetBlue placed nine out of nine for the third year in a row, according to the Journal, coming in last in four categories: on-time arrivals, cancellations, delays of more than 45 minutes and tarmac delays. The airline — which had a measly on-time arrival rate of 66.4% — was quick to point a finger at the weather around New York airports, plus alleged mismanagement of air traffic control. “We have the highest level of exposure to New York of any airline, and that continues to make an apples-to-apples comparison with other carriers difficult,” a spokeswoman told the Journal. New rankings reveal the best and worst airlines in the U.S. The airlines ranked for 2023 Delta Alaska Allegiant Southwest American United Spirit Frontier JetBlue https://nypost.com/2024/01/24/lifestyle/best-and-worst-airlines-of-2023-which-one-hit-rock-bottom/ NTSB Sends Human Performance Team To Boeing 737 MAX Factory The NTSB will continue its probe into potential human error at Boeing's Renton factor, with a second visit planned for Thursday. SUMMARY • The NTSB is sending investigators to Renton as part of its probe into possible human error in Boeing's 737 MAX 9 cabin panel blowout. • The investigation will review relevant documentation and build an accident timeline to determine the cause of the blowout. • Boeing will pause manufacturing at the facility on Friday to allow its production teams to participate in quality improvement sessions. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is sending its human performance “Go Team” to Boeing’s facilities in Renton, Washington, amid its ongoing investigation into Alaska Airlines Flight 1282. During the visit, the NTSB will review relevant documentation and build an accident timeline to determine if human error played a role in the recent 737 MAX 9 cabin panel blowout. In a statement shared with Simple Flying, a spokesperson for the agency clarified the nature of the visit, explaining, “As part of the investigation, NTSB investigators will build a timeline from the early stages of production of the door plug to the accident flight. As part of the investigative process, NTSB investigators will review documentation related to the airplane, including production, manufacturing and maintenance.” As outlined on its website, the NTSB’s investigation will delve deep into Boeing’s in-house facility operations and review the performance of its employees, covering fatigue, medical issues, training, and work environment, among other factors. The investigatory visit will occur before Friday’s planned “Quality Stand Down,” which will see the factory pause production for 24 hours to allow for further training on quality processes. Announced on Tuesday, the sessions will see production, delivery, and support teams participate in the first of several similar hands-on events to identify where the US-based aircraft manufacturer needs to improve quality and compliance. Boeing has announced a sweeping array of quality-strengthening actions in the wake of several high-profile hits regarding its 737 MAX 9 program. Alaska Airlines and United Airlines have reported loose bolts on several airframes, while the previous 737-900 generation has also been flagged for inspection by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). In the latest setback, Boeing’s own factory intervention may be behind this month’s blowout. As reported by The Seattle Times, the door on Alaska Airlines damaged 737 MAX 9 (N4704L) was reinstalled improperly after repair on the Renton assembly line. Details shared by an unnamed whistleblower online, which the newspaper has since verified, indicate that company records may show that the airframe was delivered to Alaska Airlines without certain bolts installed. “The reason the door blew off is stated in black and white in Boeing’s own records. It is also very, very stupid and speaks volumes about the quality culture at certain portions of the business.” Boeing’s 737 MAX program has been scrutinized, with quality control issues previously highlighted in the wake of the 737 MAX 8’s 2019 grounding. Company CEO Dave Calhoun described the issue as a "quality escape"; however, wider company culture has been highlighted as a cause for concern. While the FAA has approved an inspection and maintenance process to allow grounded 737 MAX 9s to return to service, the agency will not permit Boeing to scale up its entire narrowbody production until it can resolve any quality control issues uncovered during the investigation. https://simpleflying.com/ntsb-human-performance-team-boeing-737-max-factory/ CALENDAR OF EVENTS • SINGAPORE AIRSHOW 2024 - February 20 - 25 • HAI Heli-Expo 2024 - February 26 - 29 - Anaheim, CA • 2024 Women in Aviation International Conference - March 21-23 (Orlando) • SMU Air Law Symposium - March 21-22, 2024 ( Dallas, TX) • 2024 ACSF Safety Symposium – Air Charter Safety Foundation - April 1-3, 2024 • Airborne Public Safety Association, Inc. (APSCON 2024) - July 29 - August 3; Houston TX • Asia Pacific Airline Training Symposium - APATS 2024, 0-11 September, 2024, Singapore • • 2024 ISASI - Lisbon, Portugal - September 30 to October 4, 2024 • 2024 NBAA Business Aviation Convention & Exhibition - Oct. 22-24 (Vegas) Curt Lewis