Flight Safety Information - June 10, 2026 No. 113 In This Issue : Incident: Level A332 enroute on Jun 8th 2026, tyre problem : Incident: Georgian B739 at Tbilisi on Jun 4th 2026, cabin pressure problem : Cessna 404 Titan - Bird Strike (Minneapolis, MN) : Fixing FAA’s air traffic control safety conflict : Algeria ban contrasts with Kyrgyzstan progress in EU air safety update : Air Safety List Updated: 154 Airlines Remain Banned from EU Skies : Liquids on a plane? New airport scanners make it possible. : Pentagon Says Cirrus Aircraft Is Chinese Military Operating In The U.S. : Airbus outpaces Boeing in May aircraft deliveries and orders : Flight Safety Foundation to Honor Pioneering Aviator, World Food Programme : Windowless Phantom 3500 jet advances toward service with 90% lower emissions goal :Italian astronaut expects home flavors on Artemis III menu : Graduate Research Request : Calendar of Events Incident: Level A332 enroute on Jun 8th 2026, tyre problem A Level Airbus A330-200 on behalf of Iberia, registration EC-ODA performing flight IB-2623 from Barcelona,SP (Spain) to Los Angeles,CA (USA), was enroute at FL340 over Wales (UK) when the crew decided to return to Barcelona due to a tyre problem. The aircraft landed safely on Barcelona's runway 24R about 5 hours after departure and became disabled on the runway. The aircraft was towed off the runway about 30 minutes after landing. The rotation was cancelled. The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 23 hours before returning to service. https://avherald.com/h?article=53a4dc81&opt=0 Cessna 404 Titan - Bird Strike (Minneapolis, MN) Date: Monday 8 June 2026 Time: c. 23:24 LT Type: Cessna 404 Titan Owner/operator: Sonrise Aviation LLC opb Encore Air Cargo Registration: N80BS MSN: 404-0048 Year of manufacture: 1977 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Unknown Location: Anoka County–Blaine Airport/Janes Field (ANE/KANE), Minneapolis, MN - United States of America Phase: Take off Nature: Cargo Departure airport: Minneapolis-Anoka County-Blaine Arpt(Janes Field) Airport, MN (KANE) Destination airport: Minneapolis-Anoka County-Blaine Arpt(Janes Field) Airport, MN (KANE) Confidence Rating: Information verified through data from accident investigation authorities Narrative: A Cessna 404 Titan, N80BS, struck a bird on takeoff from KANE damaging the left leading edge. The airplane returned and landed uneventfully. https://www.aviation-safety.net/wikibase/572003 Fixing FAA’s air traffic control safety conflict There must be separation between aviation safety regulation and the provision of services like air traffic control. Robert Poole Director of Transportation Policy The Federal Aviation Administration has two main functions: to operate and manage the U.S. air traffic control system and to regulate all aspects of aviation safety. Both functions are essential for a safe and robust aviation system. But having both in the same organization creates an inherent conflict of interest. This analysis explains this conflict and shows how most other countries have resolved it. How are aviation safety regulations and air traffic control operations in conflict? The federal government has numerous safety regulatory agencies, with a partial list including: • Consumer Product Safety Commission • Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration • Federal Railroad Administration • Food and Drug Administration • Food Safety and Inspection Service • Mine Safety and Health Administration • Nuclear Regulatory Commission • Occupational Safety and Health Administration • Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration These and nearly all other federal safety regulatory agencies are at arm’s length from the industry they regulate. One historical example of an agency that both promoted an industry and regulated its safety was the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), created in 1946. Its inherent conflict of interest was a key factor in Congress separating the AEC into the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1974. The FAA and its predecessor agencies were also charged with promoting air commerce, but that provision was removed in 1996. FAA still has a mandate to promote (as well as regulate) commercial space transportation. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) deals with every mode of transportation. Yet the only member agency that both regulates and operates a mode of transportation is FAA. As aviation safety expert Clinton Oster of Indiana University has pointed out: No other agency within U.S. DOT both operates and regulates a transportation service. For example, the Federal Railroad Administration regulates railways and issues grants but does not manage train dispatching. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regulates the safety of motor vehicles but does not set speed limits or control traffic lights. Separation allows each organization to focus on their own core mission and avoid potential conflicts of interest. In 2010, this author coauthored with former FAA Administrator Langhorne Bond a journal article focused on the case for separating safety regulation and air traffic control operations. An important thrust of the article was that, “In its safety regulatory activities, the FAA appears to use a different standard for its ATC staff than for outside parties that it regulates.” One example was a 2009 Colgan Air commuter plane crash near Buffalo, New York, which led to a large-scale FAA effort to revise regulations on pilot fatigue and duty-time rules. By contrast, in a 2007 Comair regional jet crash at Lexington, Kentucky, in which the National Transportation Safety Board found controller fatigue to be a factor, there was no FAA effort to revise controller scheduling and duty time regulations. Another example is a 2009 case in which a Northwest Airlines flight passed over its destination airport (Minneapolis-St. Paul International) and continued flying northward toward Canada. FAA immediately suspended the pilots’ licenses, but it took no action regarding the controllers who allowed this overflight to take place. It took the controllers more than an hour to notify NORAD of the overflight that was headed toward Canada, instead of the required 10 minutes, but there was no record of FAA taking any action on that, either. In 1993, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) reported on FAA’s self-regulation shortcomings, stating that “FAA has allowed itself to shortchange safety in ways it would not tolerate in an air carrier or corporate flight operations.” In another report in the same time period, the Department of Transportation’s inspector general found that FAA’s own fleet of 62 aircraft “contained as many suspected unapproved parts as any other U.S. certified fleet of airplanes.” The United States ignores global best practices The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is a highly respected global aviation policy organization. Over the decades, it has released many recommended practices for aviation, which most countries adopt and adhere to. In 2001, ICAO issued a recommended policy calling for organizational separation between aviation safety regulation and the provision of services such as airports and air traffic control. In the decades since then, the large majority of developed countries have adopted this practice by separating their ATC system from their aviation safety regulator. This is a key element in some 100 countries that now receive their air traffic control services from an ATC system that has been reformed as a self-funded air navigation service provider (ANSP). Data from the Civil Air Navigation Services Organization (CANSO) lists 70 countries with self-supporting ANSPs regulated at arm’s length from each country’s transport ministry, plus another 30 countries that receive air traffic control services from four multi-country organizations: • Roberts Flight Information Region—three countries in Africa; • Maastricht Upper Airspace Control Center (MUAC)—high-altitude traffic management for Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and northwestern Germany; • COCESNA—six Central American countries; • ASECNA—17 countries in Africa and two overseas departments and regions of France, Reunion, and Mayotte. Previous U.S. air traffic control reform efforts embraced independent safety regulation This author was among the first to propose a private nonprofit corporation to finance and manage the U.S. ATC system, using competitive contracts for portions of airspace sectors. The FAA would remain, but as the safety regulator rather than being a developer or operator. His 1982 policy paper was adapted as his first paper in the Transportation Research Board’s journal, Transportation Research Record. Several organizations and researchers proposed ATC corporations in the 1980s and 1990s, but the first major U.S. proposal originated in Vice President Al Gore’s National Partnership for Reinventing Government. It was inspired by the 1987 separation of New Zealand’s ATC system from its transport ministry and its conversion into a user-funded ATC provider. This was the first of what we now call user-funded air navigation service providers (ANSPs). The Clinton administration’s Department of Transportation launched a major study on adapting the New Zealand model to the U.S. ATC system. The result was a two-volume study detailing the proposed U.S. Air Traffic Services (USATS) corporation. The two volumes were released by the U.S. Department of Transportation in May 1994: “Air Traffic Control Corporation Study” and “Air Traffic Control: Analysis of Illustrative Corporate Financial Scenarios.” The proposed nonprofit government utility would have a bondable aviation user-fee revenue stream. It was to be safety-regulated at arm’s length by FAA. The study was widely discussed in aviation and national news media, but a lack of airline support and opposition from general aviation and business aviation groups led to only a single House committee hearing, after which Congress paid no further attention. Twenty years later, a coalition organized by the Business Roundtable developed a detailed proposal for a nonprofit ATC corporation modeled after Nav Canada, which took over ATC in that country in 1994 and began user-fee-funded operations in 1996. This proposal was embraced by then-Rep. Bill Shuster, who was chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. It gained support from the air traffic controllers’ union, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, and from all major airlines except Delta, and it was also supported by the FAA’s own Management Advisory Council in 2014. The bill was passed by the T&I Committee in 2016 but went no further. A revised and improved bill again cleared the T&I Committee in 2018, but again went no further, due to significant opposition from business-aviation and general-aviation groups. What aviation safety experts say One of the most respected aviation safety experts is Indiana University Emeritus Professor Clinton Oster. In his book Managing the Skies, co-authored by John S. Strong, they wrote: Self-regulation of air traffic control creates long-recognized potential conflicts of interest when there are decisions to be made about trade-offs between safety and capacity…The trade-offs between safety and capacity are inherent in air traffic control, and they are often subtle. To be sure, many forms of capacity enhancements do not reduce safety; others may even increase safety…However, other capacity-related decisions, such as aircraft separation standards and the conditions under which various runway configurations are used can pose a trade-off between safety and capacity that FAA must make…Were the ATC system to be reorganized to place air traffic control operations into one organization and ATC regulations into a separate organization, the situation would change. The same trade-offs between safety and capacity would remain and be just as technically difficult, but the regulatory tensions that are now internal to one organization would become external and between two different organizations…The debate about trade-offs between safety and capacity would be more public and open to outside scrutiny. In 2007, when there was considerable discussion of air traffic control reform, a group of mostly retired aviation officials issued a call for reform. They called for reviving the idea of separating the ATO from FAA and making it self-supporting via bondable user-paid fees, consistent with ICAO funding principles that are adhered to by nearly all the world’s ATC providers. Specifically on the subject of separating safety regulation from ATC operations, they set forth the following: There should be arm’s length separation of aviation safety regulation from the delivery of ATC services. This is especially important as the ATO moves forward to implement the dramatic changes in technology and procedures inherent in the NextGen concept. Many decisions about increasing capacity by reducing aircraft spacing (thanks to new technologies and procedures) have important safety implications and should be arrived at in a transparent manner. Arm’s length separation cannot be accomplished as long as ATO operations and safety regulation reside in the same governmental unit. Hence, the ATO should be organizationally separate from, rather than a part of, the FAA. This change would also put the United States in compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization principles and with the global practice other OECD countries. The aviation pioneers who presented this policy statement were: • Langhorne Bond, former FAA administrator • Jim Burnley, former U.S. Secretary of Transportation • Aaron Gellman, founder, GRA, Inc. • Jim Haynes, former chairman, National Air Transportation Association • Jonathan Howe, former president, National Business Aviation Association • Alfred Kahn, former chairman, Civil Aeronautics Board • Clint Oster, Indiana University, former research director, Aviation Safety Commission • David Plavin, former president, Airports Council International-North AmericaJames Wilding, former president, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Relocating the air traffic organization The U.S. Department of Transportation plans to move most or all FAA staff currently housed in the Orville and Wilbur Wright office buildings on the Mall in Washington, D.C., to the DOT headquarters in the Navy Yard area of the District of Columbia. This relocation is planned to take place in 2026-2028. If a decision were made to organizationally separate the Air Traffic Organization from FAA, relocating the ATO staff to a location outside the District of Columbia would reinforce the arm’s-length nature of the intended separation of functions. Among the possible sites might be adjacent to the FAA (ATC) command center and Potomac TRACON in Warrenton, Virginia. https://reason.org/backgrounder/fixing-faa-air-traffic-control-safety-conflict/ Algeria ban contrasts with Kyrgyzstan progress in EU air safety update Air Express Algeria has been added to the EU Air Safety List and is no longer allowed to operate in European Union airspace, while all airlines certified in Kyrgyzstan have been removed. The EU Air Safety List is an EU-wide register of airlines subject to an operating ban or restrictions because they do not meet international safety standards, and it has been updated for the 48th time since it was first published in 2006, the European Commission noted in a statement on Tuesday. All air carriers certified in Kyrgyzstan were taken off the list in recognition of the country’s progress in strengthening aviation safety oversight over the past 20 years. Air Express Algeria was added after “serious safety concerns” were identified during assessments by EU aviation safety experts, which the Commission said found shortcomings in the airline’s compliance with international safety standards. What the updated list includes A total of 154 airlines are currently banned from EU skies following the update, the Commission said. That figure includes 126 airlines certified in 16 countries because of what the Commission described as inadequate safety oversight by national aviation authorities, and 22 airlines certified in Russia. Six individual airlines from other countries are also banned based on “serious safety deficiencies identified”: Air Express Algeria, Air Zimbabwe, Avior Airlines, Iran Aseman Airlines, Fly Baghdad and Iraqi Airways. Two other airlines — Iran Air and Air Koryo of North Korea — are subject to operational restrictions and can only fly to the EU with specific aircraft types. The Commission also published new Eurobarometer survey findings on public awareness of the list, saying seven in ten Europeans consider it an effective tool for protecting passengers from unsafe airlines. https://www.brusselstimes.com/2181234/algeria-ban-contrasts-with-kyrgyzstan-progress-in-eu-air-safety-update Air Safety List Updated: 154 Airlines Remain Banned from EU Skies The European Commission has updated the EU Air Safety List, which now includes 154 airlines banned from operating in EU airspace, down from 169 a year ago. The reduction follows the removal of all airlines certified in Kyrgyzstan after improvements in aviation safety oversight, while Algeria’s Air Express Algeria was added due to safety concerns identified by EU aviation experts. Published this week, the latest update marks the 48th revision of the EU Air Safety List, which identifies airlines subject to an operating ban or operational restrictions within the European Union because they fail to meet international safety standards. Kyrgyzstan removed after two decades All air carriers certified in Kyrgyzstan have been removed from the list, reflecting what the European Commission described as “significant progress in the country’s aviation safety oversight over the past 20 years”. The decision follows ongoing cooperation between Kyrgyz authorities, European aviation bodies and international partners aimed at strengthening regulatory and safety standards. Air Express Algeria added Meanwhile, Air Express Algeria has been added to the EU Air Safety List and can no longer operate within the European Union. According to the Commission, assessments carried out by EU aviation safety experts identified serious shortcomings in the airline’s compliance with international safety standards, leading to the decision to impose an operating ban. Current EU Air Safety List Fly Baghdad has been included on the EU Air Safety List since 2023. Photo source: FlyBaghdad.net Following the latest update, the EU Air Safety List includes: – 126 airlines certified in 16 countries [Afghanistan, Angola (with the exception of 2 airlines), Armenia, Congo (Brazzaville), Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Liberia, Libya, Nepal, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone,Sudan, Suriname, and Tanzania] due to inadequate safety oversight by national aviation authorities; – 22 airlines certified in Russia, along with six individual airlines from other countries, including Air Express Algeria, Air Zimbabwe, Avior Airlines, Iran Aseman Airlines, Fly Baghdad and Iraqi Airways, due to serious safety deficiencies; – Two airlines subject to operational restrictions rather than a full ban: Iran Air and Air Koryo. Survey shows strong public trust The update coincides with the 20th anniversary of the EU Air Safety List and comes alongside the publication of a new Eurobarometer survey measuring public perceptions of airline safety oversight. The survey found that seven in ten Europeans consider the list an effective tool for protecting passengers from unsafe airlines, while 75 percent said they trust the EU to update it based on safety criteria rather than political or economic considerations. Although only 12 percent of respondents said they consult the list before travelling, half reported being aware of its existence. Just 8 percent said they would proceed with booking a flight on an airline included on the list. The EU Air Safety List was first introduced in 2006 and is updated regularly based on international aviation safety standards and assessments conducted by European and international aviation authorities. The full list of banned airlines can be seen here. https://news.gtp.gr/2026/06/09/air-safety-list-updated-154-airlines-remain-banned-from-eu-skies/ Liquids on a plane? New airport scanners make it possible. Restrictions on liquids and laptops are being relaxed, thanks to new tech. For more than 20 years, air travelers have had to make sure they bring their liquid toiletries in 3 oz. bottles only, then chug their drinks before passing through airport security — a reaction to foiled terrorist plots that involved liquid explosives. But those days are coming to an end, at least in Europe, where two large airports are installing new 3D Computed Tomography (CT) security scanners that can more accurately detect real threats. Meanwhile, the U.S.'s Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) is "aggressively" adding the new scanners to airports, according to Scientific American, but any change to liquid rules does not appear imminent. Part of the reason for the delay is the patchwork implementation, with only about 255 of the country's 432 airports adding them. The TSA estimates that all its airports will be equipped with 3D scanners by 2043. Brussels and London enter the 21st century Back in Europe, Brussels Airport in Belgium is the latest facility to announce the new CT scanners; construction is set to begin next year, and the first implementation in 2028. The technology will replace 2D X-ray scanners and ultimately screen passengers, via full-body scanners, and carry-on luggage via conveyor belt scanners. When in place, fliers will be able to transport an unlimited amount of liquids in their carry-ons as long as the individual containers do not exceed 2 liters (about 68 fluid ounces); the EU currently limits liquids to 1 liter in containers no larger than 100 milliliters (about 3.4 fluid ounces) for those passing through 2D scanners. The new rules will apply to more than drinks, as most airports consider toiletries like lotions, toothpaste, and hair gel to be liquids. Laptops can stay in carry-ons The CT scanners' ability to accurately identify objects through various angles also means travelers can leave their laptops in their carry-on luggage as they pass through security. The scanners use sophisticated algorithms to create high-resolution 3D models of bags, allowing security personnel to rotate objects and more accurately identify them as harmless or worth a closer look. Brussels Airport officials tout the new scanners as a way to streamline the security process. "With this new technology, we will not only continue to ensure safety, but also make security screening even smoother and easier for our passengers. With the new scanners, we will also increase capacity so that we are prepared for any growth in passenger numbers in the coming years," Arnaud Feist, CEO of Brussels Airport, said in a statement. Brussels follows London's Heathrow Airport, which installed the CT scanners earlier this year and is already allowing some fliers to drop the 100 milliliter liquid limit and keep their laptops in their bags. https://mashable.com/tech/liquids-on-planes-ct-scanners Pentagon Says Cirrus Aircraft Is Chinese Military Operating In The U.S. Growing Scrutiny Of Chinese Ownership In US General Aviation The US Department of Defense has added Cirrus Design Corporation, the Duluth, Minn.-based aircraft manufacturer that does business as Cirrus Aircraft, to its updated list of “Chinese military companies” operating directly or indirectly in the United States, according to war.gov. The designation appears in the Section 1260H list published on June 8, 2026, under the William M. “Mac” Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. Cirrus is listed under Aviation Industry Corporation of China Ltd. (AVIC), its Chinese state-owned parent company. The 1260H list carries no automatic sanctions, but its consequences are widening. The move follows growing congressional scrutiny of Chinese ownership in U.S. general aviation. The document states that the Deputy Secretary of Defense determined the listed entities qualify as Chinese military companies engaged in commercial activity in the U.S. It describes AVIC as directly owned and controlled by China’s state-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission and as a contributor to Beijing’s military-civil fusion strategy. Cirrus is the largest manufacturer of piston-powered general aviation aircraft in the U.S., producing the SR20, SR22 and SR22T alongside the single-engine Vision Jet. The company has been owned since 2011 by AVIC subsidiary China Aviation Industry General Aircraft, which paid about $210 million in a deal cleared at the time by the U.S. Treasury committee that reviews foreign investment for national security concerns. Cirrus listed a minority stake on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2024, with AVIC retaining control. The company reported revenue of around $1.2 billion in 2024. AVIC was already subject to a U.S. investment blacklist introduced in 2021. Cirrus has previously said it operates independently of its shareholders and complies with U.S. disclosure rules on foreign investment... Yet the company was heavily documented as harassing and attacking journalists for what they considered to be unfavorable coverage, harassing former Cirrus Founder Alan Klapmeier, as well as acting out against companies that did not earn their approval. The federal designation also follows a state-level dispute involving Cirrus in Utah. In July 2025, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said state officials had blocked an attempted land purchase by Cirrus near Provo Airport, citing the company’s majority ownership by AVIC and a Utah law restricting land acquisitions by certain foreign entities. Cox’s office said the proposed investment would have been worth millions of dollars and created hundreds of jobs, but argued that AVIC’s status as a Chinese state-owned defense contractor made the transaction a national security concern. Two other U.S.-registered AVIC entities were named alongside Cirrus: engine manufacturer Continental Aerospace Technologies (just sold back to US interests) and parts supplier Align Aerospace. The list otherwise groups them with AVIC combat-aircraft subsidiaries including AVIC Chengdu Aircraft, AVIC Shenyang and Hongdu Aviation. FMI: www.war.gov https://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=CEFFC1F8-7835-44BD-A62A-A27D5782C2A4 Airbus outpaces Boeing in May aircraft deliveries and orders Airbus recorded 379 gross orders in May, while Boeing achieved only 27 new orders before cancellations and conversions reduced its net total to 11 aircraft. Airbus continued to outpace Boeing in aircraft deliveries in May, delivering 81 aircraft to 45 customers compared with Boeing’s 60 jet deliveries during the same month. The European manufacturer was even further ahead in terms of orders placed last month. Blockbuster orders sees Airbus beat Boeing in May Airbus recorded 379 gross orders in May, while Boeing achieved only 27 new orders before cancellations and conversions reduced its net total to 11 aircraft. Among the standout orders was AirAsia’s deal for 150 Airbus A220s. The order was the largest for the A220 to date, and includes a commitment from Airbus to reconfigure those aircraft with 160 seats to meet the Asian low-cost-carrier’s desire for high-density cabins. China Southern Airlines placed an order for 102 Airbus A320neo-family aircraft, alongside a further 35 aircraft for its subsidiary Xiamen Airlines. Deliveries are scheduled between 2028 and 2032 for the mainline carrier, and between 2029 and 2032 for the subsidiary. Scoot, the Singapore Airlines Group’s low-cost carrier, also confirmed an order for 11 Airbus A320neo family aircraft. The Scoot agreement comprises a firm order for five aircraft of this type and the exercise of options for a further six under a 2014 agreement with Airbus. Boeing struggles to land orders as it awaits certification of the 777X For Boeing, it was Lufthansa’s order for 10 Boeing 787-9s that took the top spot (although there was an undisclosed customer for 14 Boeing 737-800s). However, as if to steal Boeing’s thunder on its largest order for May, Airbus also reported an identical order, for 10 Airbus A350-900s from the German flag carrier. Delivery of the aircraft will be made between 2032 and 2034. TUI was the only other publicly named airline to place an order with Boeing in May, for a single 737 MAX. Boeing will be hoping that its yet-to-be-certified 777-9 will add to the tally of orders and deliveries in the months to come. Airbus ahead with year-to-date deliveries In the year-to-date, Airbus has delivered 262 aircraft to 68 customers, narrowly ahead of Boeing’s 250 deliveries through to the end of May. Boeing’s total is heavily weighted towards its re-engined narrowbody workhorse, with the figure including 198 737 MAX aircraft. Airbus’ delivery performance was led by A320 family aircraft. Across all airframes, Airbus has now recorded 26,272 total orders and 17,019 total deliveries since launch. Boeing, meanwhile, achieved a production recovery on the 737 MAX programme, delivering 51 of the type in May, the highest monthly total since production resumed following the 2024 strike disruption. The company is preparing to increase 737 production from 42 to 47 aircraft per month later this summer. On the widebody side, Boeing delivered six 787-9 Dreamliners during May, though the programme continues to face certification-related delays tied to the premium cabin seating. Boeing also handed over one 777 freighter and one 767 freighter, to National Airlines and Fedex Express respectively. Boeing’s backlog stands at over 6,000 aircraft Boeing reported 324 gross orders through the first five months of 2026, with 295 net new orders after accounting for cancellations and conversions. The company’s order backlog stood at 6,178 aircraft at the end of May. While Boeing marginally outpaced Airbus on aircraft deliveries for the first quarter of the year, the European behemoth has regained pole position. It comes after Boeing recorded its strongest April for aircraft orders in more than a decade. In a role reversal compared with May, the US planemaker secured 136 gross orders in April compared with 28 for Airbus, marking Boeing’s highest monthly order tally for the period in more than 10 years. Boeing had not enjoyed such a productive first four months of the year since 2014. Boeing handed over 47 aircraft in April, while Airbus delivered 67 aircraft to 39 customers during the same month. https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/airbus-boeing-may-aircraft-deliveries-orders/ Flight Safety Foundation to Honor Pioneering Aviator, World Food Programme Awards will be presented July 7 at the Foundation's annual Networking and Awards Dinner in Washington ALEXANDRIA, Va., June 9, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.N. World Food Programme and a former Air India executive director and chief of flight safety will be recognized for their contributions to aviation at Flight Safety Foundation's 12th annual Networking and Awards Dinner, scheduled for July 7 at the National Press Club in Washington. Capt. Nivedita Bhasin, who was the third woman to become an airline pilot in India and at one time was the world's youngest woman passenger jet captain, will be honored with the Foundation's Gloria Heath Trophy, which recognizes a woman in the industry for notable achievements in civil aviation. During a long and distinguished career at Air India, Capt. Bhasin commanded a variety of aircraft, including the Boeing 787, and held a number of leadership positions. She is known for strengthening safety systems, mentoring other pilots, and fostering a culture of professionalism, accountability, and continuous learning. She continues to give back to the industry as the vice president of the International Society of Women Airline Pilots and the governor of the India section of the Ninety-Nines. "In addition to her distinguished and record-breaking flying career, Capt. Bhasin led critical safety, quality, environmental, and emergency response functions at Air India," said Foundation President and CEO Dr. Hassan Shahidi. "Her contributions to Air India and the broader aviation industry are numerous and include advancing safety management system practices and promoting a just, collaborative, and data-driven safety culture. Just as importantly, she has worked tirelessly to mentor and inspire future generations." The World Food Programme (WFP) will be recognized with the Foundation's Richard Crane Award for its stewardship of the United Nations Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS), for the robust safety standards WFP has developed, and for its historical and ongoing dedication to delivering aid workers, food, medicine, and other life-sustaining supplies into some of the most challenging and often remote environments on Earth. The Richard Crane Award recognizes an organization for its sustained corporate leadership through lasting contributions in the field of civil aviation. WFP has managed UNHAS since the latter organization's inception in 2003, and over that period, UNHAS has achieved a remarkable safety record. In addition, WFP has pioneered novel ways to deliver food and other humanitarian supplies in challenging situations, including the use of airdrops and uncrewed aircraft systems. "Through its stewardship of UNHAS, WFP has built and sustained aviation operations under some of the most demanding conditions on Earth," Shahidi said. "It has developed robust standards for humanitarian and air operations which have enabled the safe transport of nearly 240,000 aid workers and 2,500 metric tons of relief supplies to 362 destinations in 2025." Both awards are named after founders and early leaders of Flight Safety Foundation and are presented annually at the Networking and Awards Dinner. This year's event will be held July 7 at the National Press Club in Washington. For more information on the dinner and to reserve your place, please visit the 2026 Networking and Awards Dinner page on the Foundation's website. About Flight Safety Foundation (flightsafety.org) Flight Safety Foundation is an independent, nonprofit, international organization engaged in research, education, and communications to improve aviation safety. The Foundation's mission is to connect, influence, and lead global aviation safety. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/flight-safety-foundation-to-honor-pioneering-aviator-world-food-programme-302794590.html Windowless Phantom 3500 jet advances toward service with 90% lower emissions goal Otto Aerospace’s unconventional Phantom 3500 combines laminar-flow aerodynamics, digital cabins, and carbon composites to reshape business aviation. Otto Aerospace has cleared a major regulatory hurdle as it pushes its unconventional Phantom 3500 business jet closer to certification. The milestone gives the Texas aircraft maker a defined path forward as it develops one of the industry’s most closely watched clean-sheet aircraft programs. The Federal Aviation Administration has finalized the Phantom 3500’s G-1 Issue Paper, establishing the aircraft’s certification basis under 14 CFR Part 23. The move allows Otto to transition from defining requirements to proving that its ambitious design can meet them. The company continues to target first flight in 2027 and entry into service by 2030. Defining the path ahead Otto became an FAA applicant for type certification in September 2025 and chose to pursue approval under Part 23. The company sought to take advantage of efficiencies introduced through Amendment 23-64, which streamlined parts of the certification process. Closing the G-1 Issue Paper defines the airworthiness standards the Phantom 3500 must satisfy before entering service. Otto is also working with the FAA’s East Certification Branch to complete the G-2 Issue Paper, which outlines how compliance will be demonstrated throughout the certification campaign. Scott Drennan, president and chief executive officer of Otto Aerospace, called the milestone a significant moment for the program. He said the agreement with regulators provides clarity on what the company must demonstrate and gives the team momentum as it moves toward first flight. Otto recently completed its Preliminary Design Review and has started advanced material testing to support the next stages of development. Rethinking jet efficiency The Phantom 3500 has drawn industry attention because of its unconventional approach to aircraft design. Otto’s strategy centers on transonic laminar flow technology, which aims to keep airflow smooth across the aircraft’s surface and reduce the turbulence that creates drag. The company recently completed an unmanned flight-test campaign in New Mexico to validate the aerodynamic principles behind the concept. Those same principles also explain the Phantom 3500’s windowless cabin design. Traditional passenger windows interrupt airflow and make it harder to maintain laminar flow along the fuselage. Otto instead plans to use digital displays connected to external cameras, creating a cleaner exterior profile. The company says combining laminar-flow aerodynamics with carbon-fiber composites could reduce fuel consumption by 61% compared with today’s super-midsize business jets. Otto also claims the design could deliver 35% less drag and a striking 90% reduction in emissions. Toward first flight Otto plans to conduct flight testing from Cecil Airport in Jacksonville, Florida, where the company has established its new operational base. Engineers continue advancing certification work while preparing for the first flight of the Phantom 3500’s test vehicle in 2027. Kerri Hinton, Otto’s director of test and certification, said safety remains central to the program as the company works alongside regulators to move the aircraft through the approval process. The Phantom 3500 also enters its next phase with substantial commercial backing. Flexjet has committed to purchasing 300 aircraft in a deal worth more than $5 billion, marking one of the largest orders in business aviation history. For Otto Aerospace, regulatory progress now shifts the focus to execution. The company must prove that its bold engineering ideas can perform in real-world conditions and redefine expectations for business jet travel. https://interestingengineering.com/transportation/windowless-phantom-3500-jet-faa-certification Italian astronaut expects home flavors on Artemis III menu Johnson Space Center (United States) (AFP) – Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano is hoping to bring a taste of his homeland to the Artemis III mission he will pilot near Earth in 2027 to test two lunar modules. Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano will pilot Artemis III, part of a series of missions geared toward returning humans to the Moon The menu for the Artemis II mission in April featured Texas brisket and tortillas for the Orion spacecraft's crew -- and a jar of Italian sweet treat Nutella was also seen floating by during a live broadcast from space. "I do expect something Italian to show up on the menu, and I don't even have to bring it up because Italian food is a treasure of UNESCO," Parmitano told AFP Tuesday, adding "everybody wants some Italian food." That's not all the former Italian Air Force colonel brings to the table for the Artemis III -- part of a series of missions geared toward returning humans to the Moon, perhaps as soon as 2028. Selected as an astronaut by the European Space Agency (ESA) in 2009, Parmitano has completed two missions aboard the International Space Station, where he completed complex spacewalks -- including a near-fatal incident when his helmet began filling with water due to a failure in the suit's cooling system. Responsibility and humility Parmitano is proud to represent Italy in space As the mission's lead pilot, Parmitano will share responsibility with commander Randy Bresnik. "We are both test pilots, and the spacecraft needs a crew of 2 to fly it, so we share the responsibilities," Parmitano said. "I feel honored that I was chosen for this role," he said. "It was unexpected because I didn't know that it was in the run for that position." Parmitano, a 49-year-old father of two daughters, added that he is "also very humbled by the task in front of us. It's a very complex mission." He proudly wears a uniform adorned with the Italian flag and the ESA's patch, whom he calls "strong partners." When NASA chooses a European astronaut to be a pilot, (it) is sending a strong message that our leadership is understood, that our cooperation is valued, and that our technical expertise, both in our constructions, because Europe builds part of the spacecraft, but also our personnel, is solid," he said. Multicultural crew The multicultural crew includes Randy Bresnik, Luca Parmitano, Frank Rubio and Andre Douglas The crew will be rounded out by African American Andre Douglas and US astronaut of Salvadoran descent Frank Rubio. Parmitano said he has known the mission's commander "for my entire career," but noted that for Douglas the mission will mark his first space flight. "We immediately bonded as soon as we found out that we were assigned to this mission," Parmitano said. He welcomes the diversity in ages and backgrounds, saying it "just enriches the crew in general." https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20260610-italian-astronaut-to-pilot-artemis-iii-mission Graduate Research Request Dear Pilots, My name is Giada Palusci, and I am a Master’s student in Clinical and Health Psychology at the University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy. As part of my thesis, I am conducting research on Fatigue Risk Management, with a particular focus on the relationship between sleep, jet lag, and work rosters among commercial pilots. Aviation safety depends heavily on the human element, and direct insights from flight crews are essential to better understand current operational challenges. If you are a commercial pilot, I would be extremely grateful if you could spare a few minutes to complete this short, anonymous, and confidential survey. Survey Link: https://qualtricsxmbhmnrhr9l.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_esP9sU63Y7tM9LM Upon completion of the study, I will be happy to share the final results with Dr. Lewis and the broader aviation community. Thank you very much for your time and for your continued commitment to advancing aviation safety. Kind regards, Giada Palusci CALENDAR OF EVENTS .2026 FAA-EASA International Aviation Safety Conference — June 16-18, 2026, in Chantilly, Virginia, with the theme “Safety Together: Innovation, Integration and Trust.” https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/newsroom-and-events/events/2026-faa-easa-international-aviation-safety-conference . Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection, and Investigation Course 7 to 9 July 2026; Woburn MA 01801 USA : APSCON/APSCON Unmanned 2026 – Ft. Lauderdale, FL - July 13-17, 2026 . EAA AirVenture Oshkosh - July 20–26, 2026 . ICAO/EASA Third Global RSOO/RAIO Forum for Aviation Safety — September 29–30, 2026, in Georgetown, Guyana., https://www.icao.int/events : Aircraft Cabin Air International Conference - 22-23 September 2026 . IATA World Maintenance & Engineering Symposium (23-25 June, Madrid, Spain) . ISASI - BOSTON 2026 - September 28, 2026 – October 2, 2026 . Global Aviation Conference Frankfurt- 29-30SEP2026 - Frankfurt, Germany . 2026 NBAA Business Aviation Convention & Exhibition (NBAA-BACE) Oct. 20-22, 2026 | Las Vegas, NV . 2027 ACSF Safety Symposium - April 6-8, 2027 - ERAU Daytona Beach, FL Curt Lewis