Flight Safety Information - February 29, 2024 No. 044 In This Issue : Incident: Astana A20N at Mumbai on Feb 22nd 2024, runway incursion : Incident: Breeze BCS3 at Philadelphia on Feb 27th 2024, lightning strike : Incident: Flybondi B738 at Buenos Aires on Feb 28th 2024, rejected takeoff due to bird strike : Incident: Delta A332 near Syracuse on Feb 27th 2024, engine running rough : Boeing’s 90 Day Deadline from the FAA Follows Thousands of Days of Doing Not Much : Boeing given 90 days by FAA to come up with a plan to improve safety and quality of manufacturing : One arrested after laser aimed at pilots flying into Bremerton National Airport : New NTSB leaders bring data-driven approach to air safety : Revolutionizing Air Safety: FAA Proposes SMS Mandate for Part 135 Operators : EASA Grounds Air Pink: Serbian Airline's Licenses Revoked Over Safety Concerns : Understanding Airplane Safety: Essential Guidelines and Their Critical Importance : TSA officers stop firearm at Charlotte Douglas International Airport : Just Forget Safety Management System : AviationManuals Sees Uptick in SMS Business : Southwest Airlines Halts Hiring Of New Pilots : CALENDAR OF EVENTS Incident: Astana A20N at Mumbai on Feb 22nd 2024, runway incursion An Air Astana Airbus A320-200N, registration EI-KBP performing flight KC-7858 from Mumbai (India) to Almaty (Kazakhstan), was taxiing for departure and had been instructed to turn onto taxiway E but turned erroneously onto taxiway N1 and taxied across the hold short line runway 14/32. An Air India Airbus A319-100 registration VT-SCR performing flight AI-969 from Mumbai (India) to Doha (Qatar), was accelerating for takeoff from runway 32 at that moment and rejected takeoff at low speed. The aircraft returned to the apron and departed from runway 27 about 100 minutes later. The A20N taxied to the hold short line of runway 32 subsequently via taxiways W, Q, S, S1 and E1, departed about 25 minutes after the runway incursion and reached Almaty without further incident. India's DGCA reported they have opened an investigation into the occurrence. https://avherald.com/h?article=51586225&opt=0 Incident: Breeze BCS3 at Philadelphia on Feb 27th 2024, lightning strike A Breeze Airways Bombardier C-Series CS-300, registration N230BZ performing flight MX-8740 from Fort Myers,FL to Philadelphia,PA (USA), was on approach to Philadelphia's runway 28R when the aircraft was struck by lightning. The aircraft continued for a safe landing. The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT STRUCK BY LIGHTNING AND POST FLIGHT INSPECTION REVEALED DAMAGE TO VERTICAL STABILIZER, PITTSBURGH, PA." The aircraft is still on the ground in Philadelphia about 26 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=51585b18&opt=0 Incident: Flybondi B738 at Buenos Aires on Feb 28th 2024, rejected takeoff due to bird strike A Flybondi Boeing 737-800, registration LV-KEF performing flight FO-5900 from Buenos Aires Ezeiza,BA (Argentina) to Rio de Janeiro,RJ (Brazil), was accelerating for takeoff from Ezeiza's runway 35 when the right hand engine (CFM56) ingested a bird and emitted a serious of bangs and streaks of flames. The crew rejected takeoff and returned to the apron. A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration LV-KEH reached Rio with a delay of about 5 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Buenos Aires. Argentina's JST reported they have opened an investigation into the occurrence that happened to LV-KEF on Feb 28th 2024 at about 12:45 UTC at Ezeiza Airport. https://avherald.com/h?article=51585725&opt=0 Incident: Delta A332 near Syracuse on Feb 27th 2024, engine running rough A Delta Airlines Airbus A330-200, registration N861NW performing flight DL-86 from Detroit,MI (USA) to Frankfurt/Main (Germany) with 95 people on board, was enroute at FL370 about 20nm north of Syracuse,NY (USA) when the crew entered a hold at altitude due to a problem with one of the engines (PW4168A). The crew subsequently decided to divert to Syracuse and declared emergency advising they were to perform an overweight landing, one of their engines was running rough. The aircraft landed safely on Syracuse's runway 28 about 45 minutes after entering the hold. The crew advised the engines were not that much of a concern, however, the brakes were a concern. A replacement A330-200, registration N860NW, positioned to Syracuse, continued the flight and is estimated to reach Frankfurt with a delay of about 10 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Syracuse about 15.5 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=51584c64&opt=0 Boeing’s 90 Day Deadline from the FAA Follows Thousands of Days of Doing Not Much There’s something very theatrical about the Federal Aviation Administration’s announcement on Wednesday that Boeing had 90 days to clean up its act. It sounds serious. It sounds tough. And that is probably just what the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Whitaker had in mind. After a day-long meeting with Boeing executives, including company CEO, Dave Calhoun on Tuesday, Whitaker issued a statement saying that the planemaker “must take a fresh look at every aspect of their quality-control process and ensure that safety is the company’s guiding principle.” Boeing had 90 days to come up with a plan, Whitaker said, because the FAA’s safety standards were “non-negotiable”. Well, kudos to the FAA for finally making it clear to Boeing who is the regulator and who is the regulated. But before getting too excited about how swiftly all this will solve the problems at Boeing let’s just recap the many days gone by. It was nearly five years or one thousand eight hundred and 14 days ago, that Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crashed outside of Addis Ababa, becoming the second 737 Max to crash in less than five months. One thousand nine hundred 46 days ago, LionAir flight 610 went down in the Java Sea, killing all 189 aboard. And it was two thousand ninety days ago that Ed Pierson, who was then a then-senior manager at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, wrote to his boss warning that deteriorating factory conditions would lead to “inadvertently embedding safety hazards into our airplanes.” All of which is to say, no, to ask, what has Boeing been doing all this time? And what has the FAA been doing? And if we are reduced to shrugging our shoulders and saying, “Better late than never,” let me throw out a few more wasted days. Nine years ago, (32 hundred days more or less) the FAA issued a new rule to airlines. To move safety to the next level, carriers would be required to start using an organized set of procedures that together create a safety management system. Known as SMS, this might sound to the outside world like just another addition to the alphabet soup of aviation acronyms but SMS really was something to embrace. Even before the rule was put into effect many airlines were already using it. SMS has some core principles. It expands responsibility for eliminating hazards to every person in the organization from the manager who stops to pick up and properly dispose of litter on the hangar floor, to the secretary who corrects a typo that makes an essential safety instruction unclear. Everybody knows prediction is preferable to reaction when it comes to safety. In February 2011, or 47 hundred days ago, I was recruited by the International Air Transport Association to help several airlines in the developing world implement SMS. You may think I am trying to show you just how long safety management systems have been in use and yes, that is partially what I am getting at. But more significant was the instruction given to me, and the other safety specialists working with IATA on this program. My first introduction to those with whom I would be working was not to take place without the chief executive standing by my side. Everyone had to see that the safety mandate came from the top, it is the secret sauce. It is curious that a revolutionary program for elevating safety that has been around for more than a decade, a program airlines adopted even before they were required to, seems to be something Boeing – ostensibly at the top of the safety food chain – is having difficulty with. A panel of experts reviewing the past 365 days of SMS activity at Boeing for the FAA and Congress, could get no documentary evidence of the company’s “foundational commitment to safety.” This is a problem because SMS “obligates organizations to manage safety with the same level of priority that other core business processes are managed.” In what one would charitably call a gaffe, or more accurately cite as more “safety theater”, Boeing revised its overarching SMS manual between 2022 and 2023. The manual underwent a “Major Rewrite”. But the only revision was the addition of that description. The rest of the document was unchanged. Following Whitaker’s statement, Boeing’s Calhoun released a statement of his own. “We have a clear picture of what needs to be done,” he said, adding that the company “will develop the comprehensive action plan with measurable criteria that demonstrates the profound change that Administrator Whitaker and the FAA demand.” He’s got 90 days to do it. It is a good thing there are dozens of aviation companies with thousands of days of experience that Boeing can draw upon. Christine Negroni Author of The New York Times bestseller, The Crash Detectives, I am also a journalist, public speaker and broadcaster specializing in aviation and travel. https://christinenegroni.com/boeings-90-day-deadline-from-the-faa-follows-thousands-of-days-of-doing-not-much/ Boeing given 90 days by FAA to come up with a plan to improve safety and quality of manufacturing The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday it's giving Boeing 90 days to come up with a plan to fix quality problems and meet safety standards for building planes after a panel blew off a brand-new Boeing 737 Max jetliner last month. The agency said the directive followed all-day meetings Tuesday with top Boeing officials at FAA headquarters in Washington. “Boeing must commit to real and profound improvements,” said FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker. “Making foundational change will require a sustained effort from Boeing’s leadership, and we are going to hold them accountable every step of the way.” Boeing CEO David Calhoun said that “we have a clear picture of what needs to be done” because of company and independent reviews. “Boeing will develop the comprehensive action plan with measurable criteria that demonstrates the profound change that Administrator Whitaker and the FAA demand.” The FAA did not indicate what action it might take if Boeing fails to meet the 90-day deadline. The FAA is currently completing an audit of assembly lines at the factory near Seattle, where Boeing builds planes like the Alaska Airlines 737 Max that suffered a door-panel blowout on Jan. 5. Investigators say bolts that help keep the panel in place were missing after repair work at the Boeing factory. The incident has raised scrutiny of Boeing to its highest level since two crashes of Boeing 737 Max jets in 2018 and 2019 that killed 346 people. Whitaker toured the 737 factory two weeks ago. He met with FAA inspectors who are reviewing Boeing’s operations and talked with Boeing engineers and mechanics about safety issues, according to the FAA. This week, a panel of industry, government and academic experts issued a report that found shortcomings in the safety culture at Boeing, which the company says it has been working to improve. Earlier this month, Boeing replaced the executive who had overseen the 737 program since early 2021 and said it was increasing inspections at the 737 plant in Renton, Washington. The Boeing Co. is based in Arlington, Virginia. https://www.yahoo.com/news/faa-gives-boeing-90-days-153141427.html One arrested after laser aimed at pilots flying into Bremerton National Airport After five pilots and trainees flying into Bremerton National Airport reported laser beams striking their windows while above the runway along Highway 3 on Tuesday, a man contacted by police on a nearby side road was charged with unlawful discharge of a laser, a felony. On Tuesday morning three different aircraft reported to the airport's control tower that someone was shining a green laser from the ground at the planes, including one witness who said the laser struck her in the eye and caused a brief blindness and a headache that lasted approximately 20 minutes, according to court documents. Pilots in each of the three aircraft, two of which had students alongside flight instructors, identified the source of the laser as a silver sedan, seen from the air at different locations surrounding the airport. Bremerton police were dispatch to the airport just after 1 p.m., after an airport employee located a silver Honda Civic parked on Airport Way SW, just south of the runway between the Amazon warehouse and the roundabout at Old Clifton Road, and called 911. A 44-year-old Bremerton man was inside the car, and refused to answer when an officer asked why he was sitting in a parked car near the airport. The suspect also initially refused to provide his identification and told the officer that he was recording the interaction, according to a probable cause statement. No laser device was found in a search of his car, but due to multiple witnesses identifying his car as the source of the laser and the suspect's lack of an explanation for his behavior, the man was arrested and booked into Kitsap County Jail on $40,000 bail. He was charged in Kitsap County Superior Court Wednesday. Three planes reportedly see green laser beam The first pilot interviewed told police he had been doing "touch and go" landings at the airport, and when doing a southbound landing saw the green laser come at the cockpit from his right side, west of the airport. He told police he looked over to see a silver sedan driving southbound on Highway 3. A second pilot, who was instructing a trainee, told a different Bremerton officer that his plane was using the same runway, taking off in the same direction as the first plane, when it was struck by a green laser coming from the west as well, twice in about a ten-minute span. At one point the two filmed a silver car on Old Clifton Road that showed the laser light coming from it, and the pilot also had a clear view of a silver sedan as the plane flew overhead, parked west of Highway 3 on a short paved connector road to Imperial Way in the Port of Bremerton's Industrial Park. The trainee in that plane told police her eyes were "spotting" after seeing the laser, and she experienced a headache. The pilot also reported a feeling of temporary blindness. The third plane to report being struck, also with a flight instructor and student inside, told police that the laser struck their windows twice, also coming from the west at a site specifically described as on Imperial Way. The pilot also described a "silver car, like a Honda sedan," matching the testimony of witnesses in the first two planes. The Honda was contacted by police on Airport Way, just across Highway 3 from Imperial Way and before the road's roundabout with Old Clifton Road. State law specifically includes airplane pilots in the description of the crime of unlawfully discharging a laser, prohibiting action "causing an impairment of the safety or operation of an aircraft or causing an interruption or impairment of service rendered to the public by negatively affecting the pilot." The statute also applies to protection of law enforcement, firefighters, transit drivers and school bus drivers. https://www.kitsapsun.com/story/news/2024/02/28/bremerton-man-charged-after-reports-of-laser-aimed-at-planes/72778456007/ New NTSB leaders bring data-driven approach to air safety New NTSB appointees Warren Randolph, NTSB chief data officer, and Jen Adler, NTSB director of the Office of Safety Recommendations and Communications. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recently made significant appointments, signaling a pivotal moment in the agency’s leadership. Warren Randolph has been appointed as the first Chief Data Officer, while Jennifer Adler will head the Office of Safety Recommendations and Communications. We take a look into their backgrounds, roles, and the implications of their appointments. Warren Randolph: Chief Data Officer Background and Experience Warren Randolph joins the NTSB from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), where he held pivotal roles in data analysis and accident prevention. With a Bachelor of Science degree from Purdue University and extensive experience in aviation, Randolph brings a wealth of knowledge to his new role. His career trajectory includes supporting flight simulation platforms for the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Air Force to managing key programs at the FAA. This underscores his expertise in data governance and utilization. Role at NTSB Reporting to NTSB Managing Director Dana Schulze, Randolph’s appointment emphasizes the agency’s commitment to leveraging data for safety enhancement. His mandate includes utilizing data to expedite investigations and streamline agency processes. With a deep understanding of the NTSB’s mission, Randolph will integrate data-driven approaches into the agency’s operations. Jennifer Adler: Office of Safety Recommendations & Communications Professional Background Jennifer Adler brings a diverse background in government affairs, advocacy, and communications to her new role. Etihad affiliate link banner With prior experience in senior positions on Capitol Hill and advocacy firms, Adler is well-versed in navigating the complexities of transportation safety policy. Her academic background in political science further complements her expertise in driving legislative action and stakeholder engagement. Responsibilities As the director of the Office of Safety Recommendations and Communications, Adler’s primary focus is on advancing NTSB safety recommendations. Collaborating with Congress, the media, and industry stakeholders, she aims to facilitate the implementation of safety measures that save lives. Adler’s strategic approach underscores the agency’s commitment to maximizing its impact through effective communication and advocacy. Importance of Data in NTSB’s Decision Making Schulze and NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy underscore the pivotal role of data in informing agency decisions. Recent initiatives leveraging data have led to significant reductions in investigation timelines and case backlogs. The integration of data-driven approaches not only enhances efficiency but also reinforces the agency’s commitment to safety excellence. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is an independent U.S. government investigative agency responsible for civil transportation accident investigation. They don’t determine fault or assign blame, but rather focus on understanding the causes of accidents to prevent future tragedies. NTSB Releases Preliminary Report on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 Here’s a summary of their key roles: Investigate accidents and incidents: This includes aviation accidents and incidents, certain types of highway crashes, ship and marine accidents, pipeline incidents, bridge failures, and railroad accidents. They also investigate cases of hazardous materials releases that occur during transportation. Determine probable cause: The NTSB conducts a thorough investigation to identify the contributing factors and underlying causes of an accident. This helps to identify systemic safety issues and prevent similar accidents from happening again. Issue safety recommendations: Based on their findings, the NTSB issues safety recommendations to various stakeholders, including government agencies, industry, and manufacturers. These recommendations aim to improve safety regulations, procedures, and technologies to prevent future accidents. Advocacy: The NTSB advocates for the implementation of their safety recommendations. They work with various stakeholders to ensure that their recommendations are adopted and implemented to improve transportation safety. Conclusion The appointments of Warren Randolph and Jennifer Adler mark a significant milestone in the NTSB’s pursuit of safety excellence. Their expertise and strategic vision are poised to drive transformative change, ensuring that data and communication remain central to the agency’s mission. https://aviationsourcenews.com/airline/new-ntsb-leaders-bring-data-driven-approach-to-air-safety/ Revolutionizing Air Safety: FAA Proposes SMS Mandate for Part 135 Operators Discover how Safety Management Systems (SMS) are reshaping aviation safety standards post the Hawker 700 crash. Learn about the importance of proactive safety management, industry concerns, and the imperative of embracing change for enhanced safety. In November 2015, an aviation tragedy unfolded when a Hawker 700 aircraft crashed in Akron, Ohio, claiming the lives of the two pilots and seven passengers onboard. This incident, attributed to the flight crew's mismanagement and procedural deviations, spotlighted the urgent need for enhanced safety measures within aviation operations. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) identified the operator's lack of a Safety Management System (SMS) as a glaring deficiency, leading to recommendations for mandatory SMS implementation across all Part 135 operators. The Imperative of Safety Management Systems The aviation industry has long recognized the value of SMS in promoting a culture of safety and operational excellence. SMS is not merely a regulatory requirement but a comprehensive approach to managing safety risks. The proposed rule by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to require SMS for Part 135 operators marks a significant step toward elevating safety standards. However, this move has been met with mixed reactions, with some viewing it as an unnecessary regulatory burden. Addressing Industry Concerns Despite the controversy, it's essential to recognize that SMS embodies the proactive management of safety, akin to how businesses manage finances. A well-implemented SMS is tailored to an organization's specific needs, emphasizing documentation, risk management, safety assurance, and the promotion of a safety culture. Critics argue that the compliance aspect might overshadow the system's benefits, but the focus should remain on the ultimate goal: safeguarding lives. Customizing SMS to Fit Organizational Needs The flexibility of SMS allows for scalability, ensuring that organizations of all sizes can implement effective safety management practices without being overwhelmed by complexity or cost. A successful SMS is not about meeting regulatory checkboxes but about integrating safety into every aspect of operations. This approach not only meets regulatory requirements but also aligns with the ethical responsibility operators have towards their clients and the flying public. As the aviation community awaits the final rule on SMS implementation, the debate continues. Yet, the core message remains clear: enhancing safety is not negotiable. Whether through SMS or other means, the commitment to operational safety must be unwavering. The tragic crash in Akron serves as a somber reminder of the stakes involved, reinforcing the need for a systematic approach to safety that SMS offers. The future of aviation safety hinges on the industry's ability to embrace change, prioritize safety, and adapt to new standards for the well-being of all. https://bnnbreaking.com/world/us/revolutionizing-air-safety-faa-proposes-sms-mandate-for-part-135-operators EASA Grounds Air Pink: Serbian Airline's Licenses Revoked Over Safety Concerns Discover the implications of EASA's action against Air Pink for the airline's stakeholders and the regional aviation safety framework. Explore the challenges ahead for Air Pink and the aviation industry in upholding safety standards. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has made a decisive move against Serbia's Air Pink, stripping the private airline of its air operator's certificates (AOCs) and grounding its fleet due to significant safety irregularities. This action follows a meticulous inspection by the EU regulatory body, highlighting concerns over the airline's operational standards. Inspection Unveils Irregularities Last week's inspection by EASA revealed numerous operational and safety irregularities with Air Pink, a business jet charter airline based in Belgrade and established in 2004. The decision to revoke the airline's AOCs effectively halts its operations, impacting its fleet of nineteen aircraft. Air Pink, rooted in the Pink International Company and partly owned by notable figures Aleksandar Ilic and Zeljko Mitrovic, has been a significant player in the region's aviation sector. Stakeholder Impact and Response The grounding of Air Pink's fleet has stirred the aviation community, with attention on the implications for its owners and the broader aviation safety landscape. Aleksandar Ilic and Zeljko Mitrovic, who own substantial shares in the airline, face significant operational and reputational challenges following this development. The revocation of Air Pink's licenses underscores the EU's stringent adherence to aviation safety standards and its readiness to enforce these norms without compromise. Looking Ahead: Implications for Regional Aviation Safety This incident with Air Pink serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance of maintaining the highest safety standards in the aviation industry. It highlights the role of regulatory bodies like EASA in overseeing and ensuring the safety of air travel within and beyond the EU's borders. For Air Pink, the path forward will involve addressing the identified irregularities and working closely with regulatory authorities to potentially regain its operational status. The decision by EASA not only impacts Air Pink and its stakeholders but also sends a strong message to the aviation industry about the uncompromising nature of safety regulations. As the dust settles, the focus will inevitably shift to how Air Pink responds to these challenges and what this means for the future of aviation safety regulations in Europe and beyond. https://bnnbreaking.com/bnn-newsroom/easa-grounds-air-pink-serbian-airlines-licenses-revoked-over-safety-concerns Understanding Airplane Safety: Essential Guidelines and Their Critical Importance Explore the crucial safety measures of airplane travel, including the oxygen mask protocol and seat back positioning. Understand the reasons behind these instructions and their importance for passenger safety. In an era where air travel has become as common as taking a bus, the importance of adhering to safety instructions while aboard an airplane cannot be overstated. This piece delves into the critical reasons behind two often-overlooked safety measures: the oxygen mask protocol and the positioning of seat backs and tray tables during landing. Why Oxygen Masks First? It's a directive heard on every flight, yet its crucial importance is seldom fully understood by passengers. According to Raychel Armstrong, vice president of the Transportation Worker's Union Local 577, the requirement to secure one's own oxygen mask before assisting others is rooted in the rapid onset of hypoxia following cabin depressurization. Hypoxia can lead to unconsciousness in a matter of seconds, rendering passengers incapable of helping others, including their dependents. This safety measure is not arbitrary but a critical response to a potential life-threatening situation. Seat Backs and Tray Tables: More Than Comfort The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandates that seat backs and tray tables be secured in their upright positions during takeoff and landing. This requirement is often met with annoyance from passengers, unaware of its safety implications. The rationale is straightforward yet vital: in the event of an emergency evacuation, protruding tray tables and reclined seats could become significant obstacles, impeding passengers' exit from the aircraft. This protocol is designed to ensure that aisles and exit paths are as clear as possible, a necessity underscored by the FAA's evolving safety briefings since their inception in March 1965. Balancing Information with Passenger Comfort The challenge faced by airlines today is to convey these safety messages effectively without overwhelming passengers. Overloading passengers with information might lead to anxiety, reducing their ability to focus on essential instructions. Dr. Adam Borland, a clinical psychologist, suggests that providing passengers with tools to manage flight anxiety could be beneficial. However, information should be presented in a manner that educates without inducing fear. Moreover, experts suggest that safety briefings could explicitly address the dangers posed by carry-on bags during evacuations and the critical importance of adhering to the fasten seatbelt sign, particularly during turbulence. As air travel continues to evolve, so too does the approach to passenger safety. The incidents and challenges highlighted by recent scrutiny into aircraft manufacturers, like Boeing, emphasize the ongoing need for stringent safety protocols and transparent communication between airlines, manufacturers, and passengers. While safety measures may seem inconvenient at times, their design and implementation are rooted in a commitment to passenger welfare, underscoring the fact that when it comes to air travel, safety is paramount. https://bnnbreaking.com/safety/understanding-airplane-safety-essential-guidelines-and-their-critical-importance TSA officers stop firearm at Charlotte Douglas International Airport TSA officers detected this .45 caliber firearm along with nine rounds on Tuesday, CHARLOTTE – Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers stopped a man from carrying a loaded firearm onto an airplane at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT) on Tuesday, February 27. During Tuesday morning security screening at Charlie checkpoint, a TSA officer detected a firearm in a male passenger’s carry-on bag. TSA officers immediately alerted the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD) who confirmed there was a loaded .45 caliber firearm and a magazine containing a total of nine rounds in the man’s carry-on bag. During questioning, the South Carolina man stated he forgot the gun was in his bag. A CMPD trooper eventually took possession of the firearm and allowed the passenger to continue. “For the safety of the traveling public, I strongly urge all gun owners to double check the contents of their carry-on bags and ensure they know where their firearms are before traveling to the airport,” said Beth Walker, TSA’s Federal Security Director at CLT. TSA officers have now detected 16 firearms at CLT security screening checkpoints in 2024. TSA reserves the right to issue a civil penalty to travelers who have guns and gun parts with them at a checkpoint. A typical first offense for carrying a loaded gun into a checkpoint is $3,000 and can go as high as $15,000 depending on any mitigating circumstances. This applies to travelers with or without concealed gun carry permits because even though an individual may have a concealed carry permit, it does not allow for a firearm to be carried onto an airplane. The complete list of civil penalties is posted online. If a traveler with a gun is a member of TSA PreCheck®, that individual will lose their TSA PreCheck privileges. Passengers are permitted to travel with firearms in checked baggage if they are unloaded, packed separately from ammunition in a locked hardback case and declared at the airline check-in counter. TSA has details on how to properly travel with a firearm posted on its website. Travelers should also contact their airline as they may have additional requirements for traveling with firearms and ammunition. https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2024/02/28/tsa-officers-stop-firearm-charlotte-douglas-international-airport Just Forget Safety Management System Robert Sumwalt - March 01, 2024 "Safety Management" book Think of an SMS program as active safety management. In November 2015, a chartered Hawker 700 stalled and crashed while on a non-precision approach to Akron, Ohio. The two pilots and the seven paying passengers were killed. NTSB determined the probable cause was “the flight crew’s mismanagement of the approach and multiple deviations from company standard operating procedures, which placed the airplane in an unsafe situation.” The safety agency also identified the operator’s “casual attitude toward compliance with standards; its inadequate hiring, training and operational oversight of the flight crew; [and] the company’s lack of a formal safety program.” The NTSB, which I was part of at the time, noted that the operator did not have a Safety Management System (SMS). In citing the critical role that SMS can play, we wrote that SMS “has been recognized in the industry as an effective way to establish and reinforce a positive safety culture and identify deviations from [standard operating procedures] so that they can be corrected.” We concluded that SMS could benefit all Part 135 operators because they require the operators to incorporate formal system safety methods into their internal oversight programs. With that, NTSB recommended that FAA require all Part 135 operators to establish SMS. We reiterated that recommendation following seven other Part 135 crashes, which claimed 39 fatalities. We even placed the issue on our Most Wanted List. Congress apparently agreed with the our stance and, in 2020, mandated that FAA initiate rulemaking for Part 135 operators. In response, last year the FAA issued the long-awaited notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). Since then, there has been a great deal of hand-wringing and complaining about what some view as an overburdensome requirement. Of course, this is only the proposed rule, and what the final rule will contain, or when it will be issued, is anyone’s guess. By government rulemaking practices, the public is invited to comment on the proposed rule, via a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Before a final rule is enacted, the FAA must consider these comments and explain how it addressed them. Many of the comments I have read are supportive, but some among the 200 total writers remarked on suggested changes for the final rule. I also ran across some interesting comments, such as one that referred to an “onerous task of implementing a Safety Management System and all the administrative functions that come with such a program.” Another referred to “FAA's over-regulation [that] smothers more and more small operators.” That commenter ended with, “When does it stop—when we all go out of business?” For those who feel that SMS is onerous or over-regulation, here’s my advice: Just forget SMS. Instead, think of it this way: The things that are part of a fully functioning SMS are the very things a professionally run aviation provider should be doing in the first place. Yes, you need a safety policy. Yes, a professional flight department should be assessing risks and mitigating those that are unacceptable. Yes, there should be safety assurance to verify that risk controls are effective. And, yes, the organization should strive to have a positive safety culture and actively practice safety promotion. Each of these components is a prescribed ingredient of SMS. The late Don Arendt of FAA once told me that perhaps we should change the name of the Safety Management System to simply Safety Management. Don’s point was ingenious: The term Safety Management System makes people think the SMS is something they have or want. Safety Management, on the other hand, implies the active management of safety. SMS provides a businesslike framework for actively managing safety. Consider the business approach that organizations use for managing their finances: They have a chief financial officer. Their financial accounting is in line with generally accepted accounting principles. They conduct internal and external audits. They report irregularities before they become major issues. Why do they do these things? Because finances are important to them. By the same line of reasoning, if safety is important, should not safety be managed by a similar process? SMS provides that very process. Whatever you call it, a professional flight department does the things associated with having an SMS, regardless of whatever they call it. It is about doing the right things for those who rely on your company to provide the safe service for which they are paying. Why would you want to do anything less? As aptly stated in the NPRM: “As a fundamental matter, the flying public expects safe carriage from operators offering flight services for hire. Irrespective of whether an operator employs one pilot or a thousand, that company has the same responsibility to conduct safe operations.” My biggest concern with mandating SMS is that some organizations will simply buy an off-the-shelf product to show compliance. Although consultants can be helpful in assisting to develop an SMS, the system needs to be customized for the organization. As acknowledged in one NPRM comment: “A properly functioning Safety Management System can be a tremendous benefit to all the stakeholders, but merely satisfying regulatory requirements is not good business for either FAA or industry.” SMS needs to be scalable to fit the size of the organization. Certainly, the SMS for a two-aircraft Part 135 operator does not need to be the same as NetJets’ safety system. Even the FAA’s advisory circular on SMS (AC 120.92B) states, “An SMS does not have to be an extensive, expensive or sophisticated array of techniques to do what it is supposed to do.” Documentation and record-keeping are key components of SMS. I once ran a small Fortune 500 flight department with two aircraft. We started the SMS journey by writing down the manner in which we intended to operate. This evolved into a flight operations manual that included our safety policy. It was jointly signed by the CEO and myself, as the aviation department manager. This satisfied the SMS safety policy requirement. Before I arrived, corporate management would say they wanted to go to a certain town, and the pilots would dutifully comply. If there was an airport, they went. But, over time, we realized we were just blindly accepting risks. If you are going to accept risks, at least know what you are accepting. So, we changed. Before agreeing to go to a new airport or implementing a new procedure, we did our best to identify the potential hazards, followed by assessing the level of associated with those hazards. For those that were above our comfort level, we took measures to mitigate the risks. In SMS vernacular, that is the safety risk management component of SMS. The process provided us with quantitative information we could take to senior leadership to explain our decision-making. Instead of pushing back, they appreciated that we were looking out for their safety by taking a risk-based approach to decision-making. Safety assurance means, among other things, making sure you are following your processes and that the risk-management controls you have implemented are effective. It also involves data collection and analysis to seek out anything of safety significance. Sources of data may include reports submitted to the company incident-reporting system, flight dispatch logs and crew duty records. For a small flight department, “most of the data/information-gathering for monitoring of operational processes will likely occur as a normal business process by the management personnel who are directly involved in the day-to-day operations,” states FAA AC 120.92B. Safety assurance also involves continuous improvement. When safety deficiencies are identified, they must be corrected. The final element of SMS—safety promotion—involves cultivating a positive safety culture. It also necessitates effective communications. In addition to clearly communicating safety hazards, FAA states safety communications may be something as simple as periodic safety meetings and posting information on bulletin boards. Some of these requirements may sound onerous. If you do not like the term SMS, just forget it. However, do not forget that the things that are associated with SMS are the things that a good flight department should be doing in the first place. It is about ensuring you are providing the highest levels of safety for those who are paying for your services. Now that is something not to forget. Robert Sumwalt Robert Sumwalt, who writes BCA's Impact column, is executive director for the Boeing Center for Aviation and Aerospace Safety at Embry-Riddle https://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/safety-ops-regulation/impact-column-just-forget-safety-management-system AviationManuals Sees Uptick in SMS Business Increase comes as attention to safety intensifies and SMS rule looms As attention has sharpened on aviation safety in the wake of widely reported close calls last year, AviationManuals is seeing a jump in business for its safety management systems (SMS) programs. The safety and documents specialist has witnessed a 26 percent increase in participation in its ARC Safety Management System programs over the past six months. This increase also comes as the FAA’s SMS rulemaking is looming for Part 135, air tours, and manufacturers. Operators are increasingly prioritizing a proactive approach to safety through SMS software to stay ahead of risks, AviationManals maintained. The industry remains safe but is always striving to improve, the organization added. ARC provides a full SMS platform that can be tailored to the operator while automating processes and providing real-time insight into performance. Designed through collaboration with its clients, the program helps to reduce workload, the company said.“Increase in usage of SMS is a testament to our subscribers’ safety initiatives and how AviationManuals' Risk Assessment Tool conveniently provides what is appropriate for their operations,” said Charles Tresky, AviationManuals’ senior customer service success manager. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2024-02-27/aviationmanuals-sees-uptick-sms-business Southwest Airlines Halts Hiring Of New Pilots A year ago Southwest Airlines was so hard up for pilots that they became willing to hire them much earlier bringing them into training when they still had 1,000 hours of flying to go to get a commercial pilots license. Pilots had retired early during the pandemic. Not as many pilots were being trained and hired. And the pipeline of new pilots was pretty dry. The major pilot union had successfully argued for legislation that makes it both costly and time-consuming to become one. Southwest, like many carriers, found themselves without enough people to fly all of their planes at a full schedule. What a difference a year makes, and Southwest’s ambitions have been scaled back in the face of financial challenges and Boeing’s challenges. As reported by aviation watchdog JonNYC, Southwest Airlines has paused new pilot training. They will not run any first officer classes from April through the end of 2024. It was only last month that Southwest Airlines pilots approved a new contract. Late last summer American and United got pilot deals done. It may have been just in time for record-breaking pay, as demand for pilots could be cooling. https://viewfromthewing.com/southwest-airlines-halts-hiring-of-new-pilots/ CALENDAR OF EVENTS • 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 • Blazetech - Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection, and Investigation Course June 4 - 7, 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