Flight Safety Information - July 16, 2025 No. 141 In This Issue : Accident: Myanmar B738 at Kunming on Jul 14th 2025, main gear collapse during rollout : Incident: Azul E195 near Rio de Janeiro on Jul 14th 2025, loss of cabin pressure : Incident: Sun Country B738 at Los Angeles on Jul 14th 2025, engine trouble : Incident: Lufthansa B744 over North Sea on Jul 12th 2025, odour on board : Air India crash rekindles debate over cockpit video recorders : Passengers delayed for 7 hours after two ‘unruly’ men attempt to storm cockpit despite pleas from crew : KC-46 Crews Ordered To Drastically Curtail Use Of Jet’s Onboard Auxiliary Power Unit (Updated) : Emirates 777 Pilots Failed to Land Twice at Hong Kong, Flight Diverted : Air India crash: Boeing aircraft in the spotlight : Attorney: $1B suit against Boeing, Alaska Airlines in door plug incident settled out of court : UK Lifts 5-Year Ban On This Airline After Fake Pilot License Scandal : Next-Generation Aviation Safety: System-of-Systems Safety Concept Unveiled : Calendar of Events Accident: Myanmar B738 at Kunming on Jul 14th 2025, main gear collapse during rollout A Myanmar National Airlines Boeing 737-800, registration XY-ALV performing flight UB-805 from Yangon (Myanmar) to Kunming (China), landed on Kunming's runway 03 when during roll out the right main gear collapsed. The aircraft came to a stop on the runway and was disabled. https://avherald.com/h?article=52a57984&opt=0 Incident: Azul E195 near Rio de Janeiro on Jul 14th 2025, loss of cabin pressure An Azul Linhas Aereas Embraer ERJ-195, registration PR-AXG performing flight AD-6050 from Sao Paulo Guarulhos,SP to Brasilia,DF (Brazil), was enroute at FL290 near Rio de Janeiro,RJ (Brazil) when the cabin pressure was lost prompting the crew to initiate an emergency descent. The passenger oxygen masks were released. The aircraft diverted to Rio de Janeiro's Santos Dumont Airport for a safe landing. The aircraft remained on the ground for about 11 hours, then positioned to Sao Paulo Viracopos,SP (Brazil) and returned to service the following morning. https://avherald.com/h?article=52a5747b&opt=0 Incident: Sun Country B738 at Los Angeles on Jul 14th 2025, engine trouble A Sun Country Boeing 737-800, registration N830SY performing flight SY-430 (STD Jul 13th, ATD Jul 14th) from Los Angeles,CA to Minneapolis,MN (USA) with 166 people on board, was climbing out of Los Angeles' runway 25R when the right hand engine (CFM56) emitted sparks and flames prompting the crew to stop the climb at 14000 feet and return to Los Angeles for a safe landing on runway 25L about 25 minutes after departure. The FAA reported: "Sun County Airlines Flight 430 returned safely to Los Angeles International Airport around 1 a.m. local time on Monday, July 14, after the crew reported possible engine issues. The Boeing 737-800 was headed to Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. The FAA will investigate." A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration N829SY reached Minneapolis with a delay of about 9.5 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Los Angeles about 34 hours after landing back. https://avherald.com/h?article=52a57081&opt=0 Incident: Lufthansa B744 over North Sea on Jul 12th 2025, odour on board A Lufthansa Boeing 747-400, registration D-ABVM performing flight LH-470 from Frankfurt/Main (Germany) to Toronto,ON (Canada), was enroute at FL360 over the North Sea nearing Newcaste upon Tyne,EN (UK) when the crew decided to return to Frankfurt, where the aircraft landed safely on runway 25L about 2:15 hours after departure. The airline reported an unusual odour on board prompted the return. The passengers were rebooked onto other flights. The aircraft returned to service about 17 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=52a4d8a5&opt=0 Air India crash rekindles debate over cockpit video recorders SEATTLE (Reuters) -The deadly Air India crash last month has renewed a decades-old debate in the aviation industry over installing video cameras monitoring airline pilot actions to complement the cockpit voice and flight data recorders already used by accident investigators. One of the industry's most influential voices, International Air Transport Association head Willie Walsh, a former airline pilot, said on Wednesday in Singapore there was a strong argument for video cameras to be installed in airliner cockpits to monitor pilot actions to complement voice and flight data recorders already used by accident investigators. Aviation experts have said a preliminary report from India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) raised questions over whether one of the pilots of Air India flight 171 cut off fuel to the Boeing 787's engines seconds after takeoff, leading to an irrecoverable situation. The crash in Ahmedabad, India, killed 241 of the 242 people aboard, as well as 19 people on the ground. As of now, "based on what little we know now, it's quite possible that a video recording, in addition to the voice recording would significantly assist the investigators in conducting that investigation on the issue of mental health," Walsh said. Advocates for cockpit video cameras say the footage could fill in gaps left by the audio and data recorders, while opponents say concerns about privacy and misuse outweigh what they argue are marginal benefits for investigations. Video footage was "invaluable" to Australian crash investigators determining what led to Robinson R66 helicopter breaking up in mid-air in 2023, killing the pilot, the only person aboard, according to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau's final report, which was released 18 days after the Air India crash. The video showed "the pilot was occupied with non-flying related tasks for much of this time, specifically, mobile phone use and the consumption of food and beverages," the report said. The ATSB commended Robinson Helicopters for providing factory-installed cameras and said it encouraged other manufacturers and owners to consider the ongoing safety benefits of similar devices. In 2000, U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chairman Jim Hall urged the Federal Aviation Administration to require commercial airliners be equipped with cockpit image recorders. Hall's recommendation came in the wake of 1999's Egyptair Flight 990 crash, when the first officer intentionally crashed the Boeing 767, according to the NTSB, killing all 217 people on board. "In the balance between privacy and safety, the scale tips toward safety, unequivocally," air safety expert and former commercial airline pilot John Nance said. "Protecting the flying public is a sacred obligation." Another aviation safety expert, Anthony Brickhouse, said that as an accident investigator, he is in favor of cockpit video, but acknowledged that commercial pilots have real concerns. Video on Air India flight 171 "would have answered lots of questions," he said. Air India declined to comment. India's AAIB, which is expected to release a final report within a year of the crash under international rules, did not reply to request for comment. PILOT OBJECTIONS U.S. pilots' unions such as the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) and Allied Pilots Association (APA) say the voice and data recorders already provide enough information to determine the cause of a crash and that the cameras would be an invasion of privacy and could be misused. Calls for cockpit cameras are an understandable reaction to "the stress of not knowing what happened immediately after an accident," said APA spokesperson Dennis Tajer, an American Airlines pilot. "I can understand the initial reaction of the more information, the better," but investigators already have enough data to adequately determine an accident's cause, leaving no need for cameras, he said. To make flying safer, current safety systems should be enhanced to record higher-quality data, rather than adding video cameras, an ALPA spokeperson said. There are also concerns the footage could be used by airlines for disciplinary actions or that video could be leaked to the public after a crash, said John Cox, an aviation safety expert, retired airline pilot and former ALPA executive air safety chairman. A pilot's death being broadcast on "the 6 o'clock news is not something that the pilot's family should ever have to go through," he said. If confidentiality can be assured around the world, "I can see an argument" for installing cameras, Cox said. Cockpit voice recordings are typically kept confidential by investigators in favor of partial or full transcripts being released in final reports. Despite that, International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations said it was skeptical that confidentiality could ever be assured for cockpit videos. "Given the high demand for sensational pictures, IFALPA has absolutely no doubt that the protection of (airborne image recorder) data, which can include identifiable images of flight crewmembers, would not be ensured either," the organization said in a statement. Boeing declined to disclose whether customers are able to order cockpit video recorders, while Airbus did not reply to request for comment. https://www.yahoo.com/news/air-india-crash-rekindles-debate-035037386.html Passengers delayed for 7 hours after two ‘unruly’ men attempt to storm cockpit despite pleas from crew Two “unruly” passengers caused a seven-hour flight delay after bum-rushing the cockpit on board an aircraft. The disruptive incident reportedly occurred Monday aboard a flight from Delhi to Mumbai, Jam Press reported. The aircraft had been taxiing on the runway in preparation for departure when the “two attempted to forcefully approach the cockpit and caused a disruption” a SpiceJet spokesperson told the outlet. Both cabin crew and flyers pleaded with the men to return to their seats. That’s when the crew then made the executive decision to return to the terminal and “offload” the two air barbarians in the interest of passenger and crew safety, the airline rep recalled. The SpiceJet flight, which was originally slated to take off at 12:30 p.m., was delayed until 7:21 p.m. due to the disruption. Thankfully, no injuries were reported during the kerfuffle, although the incident has raised concerns over airline security and passenger behavior. Indeed, this isn’t the first time a flyer has attempted to storm the flight deck of late. In April, American Airlines flight attendants were forced to physically restrain a female passenger after she tried to barge into the cockpit during a New York-bound flight. Meanwhile, there have been seemingly myriad instances of passengers attempting to open emergency doors in flight. https://www.yahoo.com/news/passengers-delayed-7-hours-two-140951528.html KC-46 Crews Ordered To Drastically Curtail Use Of Jet’s Onboard Auxiliary Power Unit (Updated) Failures of the KC-46's APU, which is critical for self-starting engines and supplying power on the ground, is the latest of the KC-46's woes. Air Force KC-46 Pegasus aerial refueling jets are experiencing problems with their auxiliary power units. The U.S. Air Force’s KC-46 Pegasus air refueling tanker fleet is experiencing problems with its auxiliary power unit (APU), a small secondary turbine engine at the back of the plane that primarily provides electricity to run systems prior to the startup of the main engines. It is also used to self-start the aircraft on the ground without the need for cumbersome ground support equipment. The problem has gotten so bad, Air Mobility Command (AMC) recently sent out a memo curtailing the use of the KC-46’s APU, The War Zone has learned. The APUs are intended to make the KC-46s less reliant on ground crews and equipment prior to takeoff, but the issue is having the opposite effect, the Air Force told us. “AMC has seen some premature failures of APUs we’re working with the (Original Equipment Manufacturer) OEM to resolve,” an AMC spokesperson confirmed to us Monday afternoon. “This memo ensures our maintenance team uses ground support equipment whenever possible to reduce APU wear-and-tear, giving us the best availability while we work through repairs.” It isn’t clear when the problem was discovered or how long the workaround will be in place. Having to rely on ground systems, including power carts for accessory power and huffers carts for engine start, requires a larger logistical footprint and more personnel on the ground. It’s also an inconvenience to the crew. Above all else, it diminishes the aircraft’s ability to operate in austere conditions, a key component of the Air Force’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) program. ACE currently refers to a set of concepts for distributed and disaggregated operations centered heavily on short notice and otherwise irregular deployments, often to remote, austere, or otherwise non-traditional locales. The APU issue is the latest in a long string of problems for the Pegasus, both systemic and incidental. Last week, we told you about a KC -46 that lost its boom during an incident off the coast of Virginia. The Pegasus had been on a F-22 Raptor fighters refueling mission at the time. You can see images of the aftermath of that mishap below. The recent incident is one of several involving KC-46 booms. Last year, another Pegasus lost its boom while refueling an F-15E Strike Eagle off the coast of California. The boom and the control system for it have been a source of serious and persistent technical issues for the Pegasus fleet for years now. A fix for the KC-46’s particularly troublesome remote vision system (RVS), which boom operators in the tanker’s main cabin use to perform their work, is now unlikely to be finished before summer 2027, roughly three years behind schedule, according to Defense News. The APU problems come as the KC-46 fleet has been in heavy use. Last month, they were part of an armada of refuelers, which also included the KC-135 Stratotankers, that took part in the U.S. buildup of forces in the region as tensions with Iran rose to a fever pitch. They helped refuel the B-2 Spirit stealth bombers that struck Iranian nuclear sites during Operation Midnight Hammer last month. The bombers dropped 14 30,000-pound GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker buster bombs on Iran’s Fordow and Natanz nuclear facilities, marking the first combat use of those weapons. We reached out to Air Mobility Command Monday evening to find more details about the APU curtailment and will update this story with any pertinent information provided. In the meantime, the Air Force is working to fix yet another problem on its newest tanker. Update: 5:58 PM Eastern July 15 – An Air Mobility Command spokesperson provided additional details about the KC-46 APU problems. “The updated guidance on the use of the KC-46A’s Auxiliary Power Units is in place for the entire KC-46A fleet as each aircraft has an APU. As described in the original response, the updated guidance is intended to reduce unnecessary wear on the APUs during ground operations & training when a Powered Aerospace Ground Equipment (AGE) system can be used, particularly in light of an uptick in demand associated with increased operations and training tempos within our KC-46A units. The Program Office, Air Mobility Command, Boeing, and Honeywell are working to address normal reliability concerns and repair pipelines for the APUs as soon as possible. The situation does not affect the delivery process, nor does it constitute a new deficiency against the platform.” https://www.twz.com/air/kc-46-crews-ordered-to-drastically-curtail-use-of-jets-onboard-auxiliary-power-unit Emirates 777 Pilots Failed to Land Twice at Hong Kong, Flight Diverted The aircraft eventually landed safely at Kaohsiung International Airport (KHH) in Taiwan, marking a significant deviation from the planned destination HONG KONG— UAE flag carrier Emirates Airline (EK), operating flight EK382 from Dubai International Airport (DXB) to Hong Kong International Airport (HKG), was unexpectedly diverted on 14 July 2025 to Kaohsiung International Airport (KHH) in Taiwan. The Boeing 777-31H(ER), registered A6-EPU, was forced to abandon its approach to Hong Kong (HKG) after multiple landing attempts, eventually diverting to Taiwan for operational and safety reasons. Emirates 777 Failed to Land at Hong Kong Emirates flight EK382, a long-haul service from Dubai (DXB) to Hong Kong (HKG), encountered significant challenges during its arrival phase. As per the flight data, the aircraft made at least two unsuccessful landing attempts at HKG. Flight tracking visuals show the aircraft holding patterns over the Pearl River Delta region before the decision to divert was made. While unconfirmed reports cited a medical emergency onboard as the cause of diversion, conflicting reports have emerged. An aviation observer noted that weather conditions, particularly sustained winds of approximately 12 knots, may have contributed to the difficulties in landing. Some speculate that Emirates opted for diversion to avoid further risks or potential scrutiny over operational decisions, just like in the 2023 Singapore runway excursion incident. The aircraft eventually landed safely at Kaohsiung International Airport (KHH) in Taiwan, marking a significant deviation from the planned destination. No official details on the medical emergency or specific weather challenges have been publicly disclosed by Emirates (EK). The next day, on July 15, 2025, aircraft A6-EPU operated a reposition flight from Kaohsiung to Hong Kong as UAE382D. Aircraft and Flight Details Flight Number: EK382 / UAE382 Aircraft: Boeing 777-31H(ER) Registration: A6-EPU Departure: Dubai International Airport (DXB) — 03:15 local time Planned Arrival: Hong Kong International Airport (HKG) Actual Diversion: Kaohsiung International Airport (KHH), Taiwan Flight Date: 14 July 2025 The Boeing 777-31H(ER) is a widebody, long-range aircraft capable of enduring extended diversions such as the one executed during this flight. Weather and Airport Conditions Although winds of 12 knots are generally manageable for large aircraft like the 777-300ER, local weather conditions, including crosswinds, low visibility, or turbulence around Hong Kong (HKG), may have contributed to the missed approaches. Hong Kong’s airport is known for challenging weather patterns due to its coastal location and surrounding terrain. However, without an official statement detailing the operational reasons beyond the medical emergency, the precise cause remains speculative. The decision to divert prioritised passenger safety and ensured the onboard medical concern received timely attention. Emirates flight EK225 (UAE51N), operated by an Airbus A380-841, executed a smooth go-around at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) after encountering windshear at just 50 feet above the ground. The aircraft, registered as A6-EUV, safely completed its landing on the subsequent approach without incident. The flight departed from Dubai International Airport (DXB) at 8:57 AM local time and reached SFO after nearly 16 hours of flight. Despite the challenging conditions, the skilled crew navigated the situation effectively, showcasing operational proficiency. Emirates flight EK225, using the Airbus A380-841 powered by four Rolls-Royce engines, was on approach to San Francisco International Airport (SFO) on March 19, 2025. The aircraft was preparing for final landing when it encountered windshear — a sudden change in wind speed and direction — at approximately 50 feet altitude, a critical phase of landing. Flight data from FlightAware confirms the aircraft’s departure from Dubai International Airport (DXB), Gate A23. The A380 initiated the go-around maneuver smoothly upon detecting the windshear, an action essential for safety under such volatile conditions. The pilots managed a seamless transition to a higher altitude, re-entered the landing sequence, and successfully landed at SFO, proceeding to Gate A6 without further complications. Details of the Go-Around at San Francisco Go-arounds are a standard aviation safety procedure employed when approach or landing conditions compromise safety. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Organization data indicates that go-arounds occur in roughly 0.3% of arrivals at major hub airports across the U.S. In San Francisco, this rate aligns with national averages, with historical data showing 0.3% in fiscal year 2016 and 0.4% in fiscal year 2017, equating to two to three go-arounds per day. Unlike some past incidents, such as the March 2, 2023, runway excursion of another Emirates A380 in Singapore (SIN), where a failure to execute a go-around led to a serious event amid heavy rainfall, the SFO maneuver exemplifies textbook handling of adverse conditions. The Singapore incident, investigated by the Transport Safety Investigation Bureau (TSIB), concluded that non-compliance with the Pilot Monitoring’s (PM) instructions contributed to the event, underscoring the necessity of effective cockpit communication. https://aviationa2z.com/index.php/2025/07/16/emirates-777-pilots-failed-to-land-twice-at-hong-kong/#google_vignette Air India crash: Boeing aircraft in the spotlight India and South Korea have ordered checks of fuel switches on Boeing jets following the Ahmedabad crash which killed 260 people. A preliminary report indicates the switches moving to cutoff position just before impact. The US aircraft manufacturer Boeing finds itself the focus of an international controversy once again, with India and South Korea ordering fuel switch inspections for Boeing jets after a 787-8 Dreamliner crashed in Ahmedabad last month. Individual airlines in Japan and Singapore started their own checks as a precaution, according to Reuters. The London-bound Boeing jet collided with a structure just minutes after takeoff. The crash killed 19 people on the ground and all but one of the 242 people onboard the aircraft. Pilots discussed fuel intake Indian officials are still trying to determine the cause of the tragedy, the deadliest aviation accident in a decade. However, the nation's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) published a preliminary report this week, claiming that the fuel switches for both of the plane's engines moved to the "cutoff" position almost immediately after takeoff, starving the engines of fuel. It is not yet known if this was done by one of the pilots or due to a mechanical fault. While the 15-page report does not provide a full transcript of the pilots' conversation, the authorities shared a snippet indicating confusion in the cockpit. "In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so," AIIB officials said. The report also notes that fuel switches moved to "run" seconds later. One of the engines apparently started cycling toward recovery, while the other continued to struggle. This was not enough to maintain flight and the plane crashed after less than a minute in the air. 'Cloud of mystery' surrounds Air India crash Commenting on the preliminary report, aviation expert Sanjay Lazar who has worked with Air India for 37 years, said that the document "raises more questions" than it answers. The AAIB-provided notes on the pilots' conversation indicate that "either none of them cut it off and it got cut off some other way, or... there was some element of subterfuge. So it adds a cloud of mystery over that," he told DW. With the focus of the probe moving onto Boeing's fuel intake controls, Lazar pointed to two directives issued by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) possibly relating to the issue. In the first, non-mandatory directive in 2018, FAA warned that these fuel switches could have a fault and advising supervisory bodies to check them. The second one in 2022, however, was mandatory — and it focused on engine fire control panel and engine fire control switches. According to Lazar, the FAA said checks were necessary due to reports that foreign object debris "may have been introduced during maintenance or rework" of certain units, with one of the risks associated with it being an "uncommanded activation of the engine fuel shutoff." Air India admitted not following up on the first, non-mandatory directive. It was not immediately clear if the airline took action on the 2022 order. Air India also said its maintenance records for the crashed jet showed that the throttle control module, which includes the fuel switches, was replaced in 2023. However, "the reason for the replacement was not linked to the fuel control switch," the AAIB said in their preliminary report. In recent days, news agencies reported that Boeing was assured airlines its fuel switch locks were safe. Air India CEO says no issue with fuel quality According to media reports, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson issued an internal memo on Monday acknowledging that the preliminary AAIB report "provided both greater clarity and opened additional questions." "I urge everyone to avoid drawing premature conclusions, as the investigation is far from over," he said. Wilson also said all mandatory maintenance and checks were completed on the Boeing aircraft. "There was no issue with the quality of fuel and no abnormality with the take-off roll. The pilots had passed their mandatory pre-flight breathalyser and there were no observations pertaining to their medical status," he said in the note. Pilot group wants seat at table On Tuesday, Singapore Airlines said it had completed the inspection of its 787 fleet, including planes used by its low-cost subsidiary Scoot, and confirmed all were functioning properly. Germany's Lufthansa group also said it rechecked fuel switches on its own 787s in the wake of the Air India crash, and found no faults. Indian officials are due to submit their findings regarding fuel switches by next Monday. The final report on the crash, however, is likely to take a year or longer. Meanwhile, the Airline Pilots' Association of India (ALPA India) requested to be included as observers to provide "the requisite transparency" in the official probe. "We feel that the investigation is being driven in a direction presuming the guilt of pilots and we strongly object to this line of thought," ALPA India president Sam Thomas said in a statement issued over the weekend. Boeing's PR nightmare continues Whatever the outcome of India's and other probes, the latest Boeing crash is likely to further degrade the already shaky reputation of the US airspace giant. Boeing has been struggling to recover from two fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019, both of them involving 737 Max jets. While multiple factors contributed to both tragedies, both were linked to the plane's Manoeuvring Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), which is designed to automatically push the plane's nose down if it detects a danger of stalling. Between the 2019 crash and the latest incident in India, Boeing aircraft were involved in a series of smaller midair emergencies, such as a door ripping off of an Alaska Airlines 737 Max-9 in January 2024, or a 787 suddenly dropping during flight and leaving some 50 people injured in March 2024. Some two months later, one person died when a Boeing 777 hit turbulence while flying from London to Singapore. Multiple whistleblowers have also publicly raised concerns about production issues and alleged safety gaps in Boeing's production process, though achieving clarity on the complaints has proven to be difficult. In March 2024, a Boeing former employee who had recently been giving evidence against the company in a whistleblower suit died of what police later said was a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Weeks later, another whistleblower passed away after a short illness, after coming down with a fast-spreading infection and developing pneumonia. https://www.dw.com/en/air-india-crash-boeing-aircraft-in-the-spotlight/a-73286258 Attorney: $1B suit against Boeing, Alaska Airlines in door plug incident settled out of court Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, as part of the settlement agreement, according to the attorney. PORTLAND Ore. (KPTV) - Three passengers who sued Boeing and Alaska Airlines for $1 billion over a door plug that flew out mid-air have settled the lawsuit with the companies out of court, according to one of the attorneys for the passengers. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, as part of the settlement agreement, according to the attorney. Court documents show the suit was dismissed with prejudice on July 7, meaning the plaintiffs can not refile the same claim against the companies in the future. PREVIOUS COVERAGE: The NTSB officially faults Boeing for a door plug flying off in mid-air during an Alaska Airlines flight leaving Portland. The lawsuit stemmed from an incident on January 5, 2024, when a door plug on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 from Portland to Ontario, Calif. flew out shortly after takeoff. Last month, the National Transportation Safety Board found Boeing at fault for the incident following an investigation. https://www.kptv.com/2025/07/16/attorney-1b-suit-against-boeing-alaska-airlines-door-plug-incident-settled-out-court/ UK Lifts 5-Year Ban On This Airline After Fake Pilot License Scandal The United Kingdom has lifted the ban on Pakistani airlines from using its airspace, with the Asian country's carriers having been on the European nation's no-fly list for just over five years. Most notably, this will allow Pakistani flag carrier Pakistan International Airlines ( PIA) to fly to the UK once again, with a fake pilot license scandal at the operator having played a key role in the initial instatement of the ban. The news comes less than a year after a similar relaxation by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency ( EASA), which opened its skies to airlines from Pakistan once again at the end of 2024. With Pakistan International Airlines having long been mulling a return to the UK, where almost two million people of Pakistani heritage currently reside, this could end up providing a key financial boost to the carrier. As reported earlier by Reuters, the British High Commission in Islamabad, the capital city of Pakistan, has confirmed that the United Kingdom has lifted the ban on Pakistani airlines from using its airspace, following just over five years on the no-fly list for the Asian country. The move comes, Reuters notes, as a result of concerted efforts and safety improvements on the part of Pakistani aviation authorities. This news represents a coup for flag carrier Pakistan International Airlines, for whom the UK is a key market on account of its large Pakistani diaspora. Of course, it won't simply be able to restart flights to the country overnight, but there is already considerable anticipation for when this might occur. Commenting on the recent relaxation, British High Commissioner Jane Marriott is quoted by AP News as saying: "I’m grateful to aviation experts in both the UK and Pakistan for their collaborative work to meet international safety standards. While it will take time for flights to resume, once the logistics are in place, I look forward to using a Pakistani carrier when visiting family and friends." Why Were Pakistani Airlines Banned From The UK? According to The Economic Times, the United Kingdom first imposed a ban on Pakistani airlines like PIA from using its airspace in June of 2020. This came in the aftermath of a crash involving a Pakistan International Airlines Airbus A320, where almost 100 people died after the narrowbody twinjet came down in a residential area in Karachi. The subsequent investigation revealed a major scandal at PIA. Indeed, with the initial report into the accident suggesting that the crash had been caused by pilot error, it later arose that, following a probe into Pakistan International Airlines, the carrier had a serious issue with fake pilot licenses. As a result of this, some 150 pilots at the airline were grounded after having been found to either have cheated on their licensing exams or to have been holding fake documents. This resulted in aviation safety agencies around the world putting not just Pakistan International Airlines itself but, indeed, all Pakistani carriers on their respective no-fly lists due to the alarming safety inadequacies highlighted by the investigation. However, in November of 2024, the EU lifted its ban, with PIA's first flight to Europe in almost five years setting off from Islamabad to Paris on January 10, 2025. Pakistan International Airlines Restarts Paris Flights Following EU Ban Lift EASA banned Pakistan International Airlines from operating flights to the EU in June 2020. PIA Is Ready To Return To What Is A Key Market PIA Boeing 777 Landing At London HeathrowPhoto: Jake Hardiman | Simple Flying Being banned from the UK had an adverse financial impact on PIA, with Reuters noting that the carrier was losing around $144 million in revenue a year as a result of not being allowed to serve a market where over 1.6 million people of Pakistani heritage live. Still, the EU's relaxation gave PIA high hopes of a UK resumption. Indeed, Simple Flying reported after PIA's Paris relaunch that it was also eyeing flights to UK destinations such as London and Manchester, with a separate article noting that the US was also under consideration. According to Reuters, PIA has submitted its proposed schedules for the resumption of its flights to and from the UK, which would see, among others, three weekly Islamabad-Manchester services. https://simpleflying.com/uk-lifts-5-year-flight-ban-fake-pilots-license-scandal/ Next-Generation Aviation Safety: System-of-Systems Safety Concept Unveiled Newswise — A new safety concept based on the system-of-systems (SoS) perspective is proposed in a recent review paper published in Engineering, aiming to address the challenges of future civil aviation transportation system (CATS) safety management. With the expected growth in air traffic complexity, future CATS is evolving into a complex cyber-physical-social system, bringing new risks from scenarios like urban air mobility (UAM), new technologies, and new requirements. The paper, authored by Daqing Li, Anzhuo Yao, and others, first reviews the evolution of aviation safety, which has gone through four generations. Each generation is characterized by different driving factors and safety improvements, but also faces new risks with the introduction of new technologies. For example, new introducing new technologies often results in a temporary decline in safety performance. The complexity of aviation risks is analyzed from three aspects: emergence, diversity, and conflict. Risks can emerge from complex interactions within CATS, and are diverse in types, including human, machine, information, and management risks. The dynamic nature of CATS also makes risk spreading likely, resulting in conflicts in safety management. To deal with these challenges, the concept of SoS safety is introduced, inspired by the human immune system. It includes three core elements: safety capability, safety logic, and safety architecture. Safety capabilities cover aspects such as risk perception, mitigation, and elimination, with elements like global awareness, collaborative orientation, intelligent decision-making, and agile response. The safety logic features a three line of defense design, aiming to control known risks, be aware of unknown risks, and explore underlying unknown risks. The safety architecture is modeled as a hypernetwork structure, consisting of a safety fundamental network, a safety collaboration network, and a safety decision network. Key technologies supporting SoS safety, such as model-based systems engineering (MBSE), digital engineering, and parallel management, are also discussed. The development of SoS safety in CATS is predicted to progress in three phases. In the first phase, resilience management at the operational level is the core, aiming to enhance safety management. The second phase extends safety capabilities to the design end, enabling better adaptability to risks. In the third phase, with the advent of UAM and mixed operations, SoS safety aims to mitigate unknown risks through the integration of design and operation and the evolution of risk cognition. The proposed SoS safety concept represents a paradigm shift in complex system safety study. It has implications for safety management, guiding the transformation from isolated system safety to SoS safety, from operational-process-only risk management to the integration of design and operation, and from “process & outcome-oriented” to “capability-oriented” safety management. Although the concept is introduced with civil aviation as an example, it can be applied to other large-scale complex systems. Future research should focus on validating the concept through testing and digital engineering, especially in emerging contexts like low-altitude operations and UAM. The paper “Next Frontiers of Aviation Safety: System-of-Systems Safety,” authored by Daqing Li, Anzhuo Yao, Kaifeng Feng, Hang Zhou, Ruixin Wang, Ming Cheng, Hang Li, Dongfang Wang, Shuiting Ding. Full text of the open access paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2025.01.002. For more information about the Engineering, follow us on X (https://twitter.com/EngineeringJrnl) & like us on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/EngineeringJrnl). https://www.newswise.com/articles/next-generation-aviation-safety-system-of-systems-safety-concept-unveiled CALENDAR OF EVENTS . Airborne Public Safety Association -APSCON / APSCON Unmanned 2025 in Phoenix, AZ | July 14-18, 2025 . 3rd annual Asia Pacific Summit for Aviation Safety (AP-SAS), July 15-17, 2025, Singapore, organized by Flight Safety Foundation and CAAS. . Asia Pacific Aviation Safety Seminar 2025; 10-11 September 2025; Manila, Philippines . 2025 PROS IOSA SUMMIT - SEPT 10-11 - Denver, CO · ISASI ANNUAL SEMINAR 2025'September 29, 2025 – October 3, 2025, DENVER, COLORADO . Air Medical Transport Conference (AMTC™) - 2025 – October 27-29th (Omaha, Nebraska) . 29th annual Bombardier Safety Standdown, November 11-13, 2025; Wichita, Kansas · CHC Safety & Quality Summit, 11th – 13th November 2025, Vancouver, BC Canada Curt Lewis