Flight Safety Information  - October 20, 2026    No. 206
 

In This Issue

: Incident: United B764 at Amsterdam on Oct 14th 2026, pressurization issue

: Incident: LATAM Peru A320 at Lima on Oct 19th 2026, engine fire

: Accident: Eurowings A321 near Dusseldorf on Oct 18th 2026, several passengers felt unwell

: FAA Orders Airlines To Replace Overhead Monitors On 459 Boeing 737s

: FAA investigates after jet skids off Harry Reid Airport runway

: NOTAMs Explained: The Notices Every Pilot Must Read Before Flight

: 2026 NBAA Top Safety Focus Areas

: FAA AI use sparks new reviews into AI safety, workforce shortages

: Honeywell predicts nearly 10,000 new business jets by 2035

: Cessna Citation Gen3 Jets Pass 1,220 Test Hours on Road to Autoland

: Victims in UPS plane crash seek access to documents Boeing gave NTSB

: Calendar of Events


 

 


Incident: United B764 at Amsterdam on Oct 14th 2026, pressurization issue

A United Boeing 767-400, registration N67052 performing flight UA-71 from Amsterdam (Netherlands) to Newark,NJ (USA), was climbing out of Amsterdam's runway 24 when the crew stopped the climb at FL100 due to a pressurization issue. The aircraft dumped fuel over the North Sea and returned to Amsterdam for a safe landing on runway 18R about one hour after departure.

The flight was cancelled.

The aircraft remained on the ground for about 25.5 hours before returning to service.

https://avherald.com/h?article=544716e5&opt=0

 


 


 


Incident: LATAM Peru A320 at Lima on Oct 19th 2026, engine fire

A LATAM Peru Airbus A320-200, registration CC-BFS performing flight LA-2302 from Lima to Piura (Peru), was lining up runway 16R when the left hand engine (CFM56) emitted continuous fire. The aircraft stopped, the runway was closed.

The airline reported the aircraft suffered an unforeseen technical incident, the passengers were disembarked as a precaution. The passengers were rebooked onto other flights.

A replacement A320-200 registration CC-BFR reached Piura with a delay of about 4 hours.

The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Lima about 10 hours later.

https://avherald.com/h?article=54471356&opt=0

 






Accident: Eurowings A321 near Dusseldorf on Oct 18th 2026, several passengers felt unwell

A Eurowings Airbus A321-200, registration D-AIDT performing flight EW-9631 from Rhodes (Greece) to Dusseldorf (Germany) with 215 people on board, was nearing Dusseldorf when the crew reported a number of passengers felt unwell and requested medical services to meet the aircraft on arrival. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on Dusseldorf's runway 23L and taxied to the apron. Three passengers were taken to a hospital.

Emergency services had been informed about a great rush of injured. Subsequently three passengers were taken to a hospital, a number of passengers were checked and went home. Fire services reported a number of passengers suffered from gastrointestinal infection.

The airline reported the reason for the illnesses is still unclear, there is some suspicion of an outbreak of the Norovirus.

The aircraft is still on the ground in Dusseldorf about 9 hours after landing.

https://avherald.com/h?article=54470dcf&opt=0

 






FAA Orders Airlines To Replace Overhead Monitors On 459 Boeing 737s

The Federal Aviation Administration has ordered airlines to replace certain overhead video monitors on 459 U.S.-registered Boeing 737s after screens detached from their mounting rails during a hard landing.

The airworthiness directive, published on October 19, covers Boeing 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900 and -900ER aircraft. It does not apply to the 737 MAX.

The FAA estimates that replacing overhead monitors could cost $15.6 million across the U.S. fleet.

Why Boeing 737 Overhead Monitors Must Be Replaced
The FAA received a report of overhead monitors detaching during a hard landing that did not exceed the emergency load requirements for the passenger service units holding the screens.

Passenger service units are the overhead assemblies containing reading lights, air vents, seatbelt indicators and other cabin equipment. Some also contain video monitors used for inflight entertainment.

The FAA warns that monitors could injure passengers if they become detached or obstruct an emergency evacuation if they hang below a safe height.

Affected monitors must be replaced with units fitted with secondary retention lanyards to prevent them from falling if their primary mounting fails.

FAA Estimates Up To $15.6 Million In Replacement Costs
The FAA identified different replacement costs for monitors supplied by Burrana and Panasonic Avionics.

Replacing a Burrana monitor is estimated to cost $2,904, including $2,734 for parts and $170 for labor. Panasonic replacements are estimated at $524 each, including $354 for parts and $170 for labor.

Both estimates allow two hours of labor at $85 per hour.

The FAA's cost breakdown covers three groups of aircraft:

62 aircraft with Burrana equipment: Up to $5.4 million.

342 aircraft with Panasonic equipment: Up to $5.4 million.

55 aircraft with other affected installations: Up to $4.8 million.

The estimates assume up to 30 affected monitors per aircraft. Actual costs could be lower depending on the number installed and whether operators have already completed the modifications.

The FAA will also accept certain replacements carried out under earlier Boeing service instructions.

Delta And Panasonic Challenged Parts Of The Proposal
Boeing, Delta Air Lines, Panasonic Avionics and All Nippon Airways were among those that commented on the proposed directive.

Boeing supported the proposal without requesting changes.

Delta asked the FAA to use its aircraft records to locate where affected monitors are installed instead of doing physical inspections. The FAA approved this approach only if the records clearly identify the equipment.

Panasonic argued the directive's wording could imply its monitors detached during the hard landing that led to the airworthiness directive. The supplier said its changes improved the fail-safe design, not that they were fixing a certification failure.

In its response, the FAA acknowledged that it was unaware of Panasonic monitors detaching during hard landings. The agency retained the replacement requirement for Panasonic, explaining that the reported failure concerned some affected monitor types, not necessarily every installation covered by the directive.

Airlines face different compliance deadlines
Airlines must identify affected installations and carry out the replacements using the applicable Boeing service instructions. Some configurations also require checks of the mounting rails or installation of additional retention hardware.

The FAA references Boeing service instructions revised in July 2025, which include procedures for installing the secondary retention lanyards.

The directive does not identify every U.S. airline operating the 459 aircraft or how many monitors airlines have already replaced.

The directive becomes effective November 23, 2026, though compliance deadlines vary by aircraft configuration and applicable Boeing service instructions.

For aircraft not covered by the specified Boeing service bulletins, operators have up to five years to complete the work. The FAA is not grounding affected aircraft.

The agency has recently proposed inspections of certain 737 MAX flight-control components, with estimated inspection costs of approximately $186,000 across 95 U.S.-registered aircraft. Unlike the overhead monitor directive, this proposal has not yet become a final rule. In July, the FAA also called for inspection of certain Boeing 737 MAX 8, 737 MAX 9 and high-density 737-8200 aircraft because of improper seat-track installation.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/faa-orders-airlines-replace-overhead-112953902.html

 






FAA investigates after jet skids off Harry Reid Airport runway

LAS VEGAS (KSNV) — A private jet carrying actor Donnie Wahlberg narrowly avoided a far more serious crash Sunday morning at Harry Reid International Airport when the plane aborted takeoff, ran off the end of the runway, and struck a perimeter fence.

Wahlberg, the brother of actor Mark Wahlberg, was one of eight people on board the Dassault Falcon 50. After the close call, Wahlberg had an emotional message: “Just finished praying and I looked out the window and thought we are not going up in the air today and all is well okay don't worry.”

The jet remained on the other side of the airport’s perimeter fence, surrounded by yellow tape. The fence had already been repaired.

The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the incident. In a statement, the FAA did not say why the flight crew aborted takeoff, saying only that the cause is under investigation.

Pilot and aviation expert Reed Yadon said the aircraft likely was traveling at high speed when the crew rejected the takeoff.

“It should have been doing close to 150 miles an hour at the time of the incident,” Yadon said. “That's pretty fast, and to get that aircraft stopped in that distance, that's pretty good.”

Yadon praised the pilots for aborting the takeoff without injuries and credited airport personnel for their response.

“In the scheme of things, this was about as - it was textbook. Everybody did what they should,” Yadon said.

Yadon said investigators will examine multiple possibilities, including mechanical issues and human factors.

“Was the cause within the aircraft, or was it a human failure?” Yadon said. “They'll look at both, go over training records, go over all the maintenance records on the aircraft.”

He said investigators will also have data to review, including recordings and video.

“And they have a cockpit voice recorder in the aircraft, so they have a lot of data,” Yadon said. “They'll have security cameras from Harry Reid.”

A visualization from FlightFollower.net showed the timeline leading up to the mishap, starting at 10:50 a.m. Sunday. Audio from air traffic control captured the Falcon 50 being cleared for takeoff and then the moment the tower realized the aircraft was not airborne.

“7 sierra golf... You okay?” a controller asked. The response came back: “Aborting aborting.”

After the jet went off the end of the runway, the tower told the aircraft emergency vehicles were on the way and asked whether there were injuries.

The incident also disrupted airport operations. A passenger jet that had been cleared to land was waved off, and a ground stop was put in place. During a ground stop, departing flights are not boarded or must return to the gate, while incoming flights may be held at their origin, diverted to other airports, or required to circle if they are already close.

https://news3lv.com/news/local/faa-investigates-jet-runway-overrun-at-harry-reid-airport-as-airport-reviews-records

 






NOTAMs Explained: The Notices Every Pilot Must Read Before Flight

Just before midnight on 7 July 2017, Air Canada Flight 759, an Airbus A320 inbound from Toronto, was cleared to land on runway 28R at San Francisco International Airport. The crew lined up instead with taxiway C, where four airliners sat waiting to take off. The A320 descended to 100 feet above the ground over the first of them and reached a minimum of about 60 feet over the second before the go-around finally took hold.

The warning that could have prevented it had been in the crew's paperwork since Toronto. The parallel runway, 28L, was closed, and the line saying so, "RWY 10R/28L CLSD", sat on page 8 of a 27-page flight release. It was a NOTAM.

NOTAMs are the least glamorous documents in aviation and among the most important. Every pilot is expected to read the ones that touch their flight, from a light-aircraft owner hopping between grass strips to an airline captain crossing an ocean. Here is what they are, how to decode one, why safety investigators have called them garbage, and how their computer system once stopped every departure in the United States.

Stands for: Notice to Airmen (the FAA used "Notice to Air Missions" from December 2021 to February 2025)
What it reports: The abnormal status of a facility, service, procedure or hazard, not the normal status
Key ICAO fields: Q) qualifier line, A) location, B) start, C) end, E) plain-language text

What a NOTAM Actually Is
The International Civil Aviation Organization defines a NOTAM, in the wording reproduced by the safety encyclopedia SKYbrary from ICAO Annex 11, as "a notice containing information concerning the establishment, condition or change in any aeronautical facility, service, procedure or hazard, the timely knowledge of which is essential to personnel concerned with flight operations."

The FAA's own definition is shorter and more practical: "a notice containing information essential to personnel concerned with flight operations but not known far enough in advance to be publicized by other means." The agency adds that a NOTAM states the abnormal status of a part of the National Airspace System, not its normal status. Charts and airport directories describe the world as it should be. NOTAMs describe what has changed.

In practice that covers closed runways and taxiways, unserviceable radio navigation aids, cranes put up near an airfield, unlit obstructions, parachute jumps and air shows, military exercises that close blocks of airspace, and flights by heads of state. Each one is small. Together, at a busy airport, they can run to pages.

Airmen, Air Missions, and Airmen Again
The acronym came into common use after the Chicago Convention, which founded the modern ICAO system, took effect on 4 April 1947. On 2 December 2021 the FAA changed what the letters stood for in the United States, from Notice to Airmen to Notice to Air Missions, through a change to its NOTAM order 7930.2S. AOPA reported that the FAA described it as "the more applicable term", and that it also covered small drones and uncrewed free balloons.

Critics including Senator Ted Cruz called the change virtue signalling, according to AIN. On 10 February 2025 the FAA reversed it, with a notice reading: "Effective immediately, the term Notice to Air Missions (Notam) is being changed to Notice to Airmen (Notam)." ICAO had kept "Notice to Airmen" throughout, and the four letters pilots actually type never changed at all.

Anatomy of an ICAO NOTAM
The clearest way to learn the format is the FAA's own worked example: runway 04L/22R closed at Chicago O'Hare on 23 June 2021. The first line, B0667/21 NOTAMN, gives the series (B covers aerodrome maneuvering areas such as runways and taxiways), the number and year, and the action. N means new; R replaces an earlier NOTAM and C cancels one.

Then comes the Q line, which the FAA describes as coded information, coordinates and radius "for the automated filtering of NOTAMs". KZAU is the flight information region, here the Chicago Air Route Traffic Control Center. QMRLC is the NOTAM code: always a Q, then MR for runway and LC for closed. IV means it affects both instrument and visual flights, NBO flags it for immediate attention, pre-flight briefing and flight operations, A sets the scope as an aerodrome, and 000/999 are the default height limits used for airport NOTAMs. The last group, 4159N08754W005, places the centre at 41°59'N 087°54'W with a five-nautical-mile radius of influence.

After that the lettered items read almost like plain English. A) KORD is the airport. B) and C) are the start and end times in UTC, written year, month, day, hour, minute, so 2106231700 means 23 June 2021 at 1700Z. E) RWY 04L/22R CLSD is the message itself. Optional D) gives a schedule, while F) and G) set lower and upper limits for airspace NOTAMs.

The same closure in the FAA's US domestic format is a single line: !ORD 06/001 ORD RWY 04L/22R CLSD 2106231700-2106232300. The FAA says it is working to make US NOTAMs comply with ICAO standards, which is why American pilots increasingly meet both styles. Either way, as the FAA puts it, "NOTAMs have a unique language using special contractions to make communication more efficient."

TFRs, Military Airspace and Closed Skies
Some NOTAMs are not just information but law. In the United States, Temporary Flight Restrictions are issued as FDC NOTAMs, the regulatory category that also covers changes to instrument approaches and airways. TFRs, airway changes and laser activity are filed as Center Area NOTAMs under the air route traffic control center that owns the airspace, so a pilot searching only under the destination airport can miss them.

Miss a TFR and the consequence can arrive with afterburners. Afterburner has covered a run of NORAD intercepts in which F-16 fighters met light aircraft that had strayed into restricted airspace, from Maryland et Bedminster à Chicago, where F-16s fired flares at aircraft during a presidential visit.

Military airfields publish NOTAMs too, and they read like orders of the day. On the morning of the 2023 outage, the FAA's public search for Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada listed exercise aircraft that had to arrange prior permission, limited transient support, obstruction lights out of service, and a blunt line stating the base was for official business only.

The Morning the NOTAM System Stopped America
That banner was the visible tip of a national problem. The US NOTAM system began failing on 10 January 2023. By the next morning the FAA had ordered airlines to pause all domestic departures until 9 a.m. Eastern Time "to allow the agency to validate the integrity of flight and safety information." Flights already airborne continued.

Departures resumed at Newark and Atlanta first, and by 8:50 a.m. Eastern the FAA announced the ground stop had been lifted. By noon, FlightAware had counted about 6,988 delayed flights and more than 1,100 cancellations, NPR reported. The pause was widely described as the first nationwide ground stop since 11 September 2001, although NPR noted that claim was unconfirmed.

That evening the FAA said its preliminary work had traced the outage "to a damaged database file" and that there was no evidence of a cyber attack. The fuller explanation came eight days later.

There was still no sign of a cyber attack. The cause, the FAA said on 19 January, was a maintenance job that went wrong while contractors tried to keep two copies of the database in step.

“A preliminary FAA review of last week’s outage of the Notice to Air Missions (NOTAM) system determined that contract personnel unintentionally deleted files while working to correct synchronization between the live primary database and a backup database.”
Administration fédérale de l'aviation — FAA statement, 19 January 2023
The FAA has since built a replacement. Its new NOTAM Management Service, a cloud-hosted system, began operations at the end of September 2025, and the agency set late spring 2026 as its target for moving to a single-source NOTAM service.

Air Canada 759 and the “Garbage” Problem
Back in San Francisco, the National Transportation Safety Board found that the probable cause of the 2017 incident was the crew's misidentification of taxiway C as the landing runway, resulting from their lack of awareness that the parallel runway was closed "due to their ineffective review of NOTAM information before the flight and during the approach briefing." Air Canada's ineffective presentation of approach procedure and NOTAM information was a contributing factor.

The NTSB looked hard at how that information reached the cockpit. The closure NOTAM sat on page 8 of the 27-page release, in the middle of the package, despite bold type and a red NEW tag. The investigators cited the serial position effect: people remember the first and last items in a list better than the middle ones.

NTSB graphic of San Francisco International Airport showing Air Canada 759 lined up with taxiway C over waiting airliners, with closed runway 28L marked
NTSB graphic built from radar data: Air Canada 759 (right) lined up with taxiway C, where four airliners were waiting, instead of runway 28R. The X marks closed runway 28L, the closure buried in the NOTAMs. Below, the night camera view. Image: National Transportation Safety Board / public domain
The airport information that arrived by datalink before landing was no better. The ATIS message, as displayed in the cockpit, was 14 continuous lines in capital letters, with the runway closure split across the end of line 8 and the start of line 9.

At the NTSB board meeting in September 2018, chairman Robert Sumwalt read out a verbose NOTAM restricting part of a taxiway to aircraft with a wingspan of 214 feet or less, and asked, as AIN reported: "Why is this even on there?"

“That's what Notams are: they're a bunch of garbage that no one pays any attention to.”
Robert Sumwalt — NTSB Chairman, board meeting on Air Canada 759, September 2018, as reported by AIN
Vice Chairman Bruce Landsberg went further in a concurring statement. He wrote: "Concerns about legal liability rather than operational necessity, drive the current system to list every possible Notice to Airmen (Notam) that could, even under the most unlikely circumstance, affect a flight." The result, in his words, is "an impossibly heavy burden on individual pilots, crews and dispatchers."

The NTSB recommended that the FAA set up a group of human factors experts to work out how flight information should be organised, prioritised and presented so pilots actually retain what matters. ICAO has since run its own campaign to clean up the NOTAM flood.

How Pilots Read NOTAMs Today
Most crews no longer wade through raw teleprinter text. Flight-planning software and electronic flight bags filter and sort NOTAMs by route and airport, which is exactly what the Q line was designed to make possible. The FAA still reminds pilots to check 25 nautical miles either side of their full route so that relevant navigation-aid NOTAMs show up.

The principle is as old as the system itself: if it is in a NOTAM, the pilot is expected to know it. Air Canada 759 proved how close the gap between published and noticed can come to a catastrophe. About sixty feet, in fact.

https://migflug.com/afterburner/fr/notams-explained-notice-to-airmen-icao-format-tfr/

 






2026 NBAA Top Safety Focus Areas

The NBAA Safety Committee has identified the association’s Top Safety Focus Areas for 2026, highlighting multiple priorities in support of a greater commitment to business aviation safety standards. These safety priorities are intended to help promote safety-enhancing discussions and initiatives within flight departments and among owner-flown operations. These safety priorities are grouped into three areas:

Address Preventable Accidents
Engage Unique Operational Concerns
Identify and Implement Mitigation Strategies
Address Preventable Accidents
Loss of Control Inflight
Loss of control inflight (LOC-I) accidents result in more fatalities throughout general aviation than any other accident category. The alarming consistency of catastrophic outcomes in this type of accident continues to make the contributing factors a targeted issue for safety improvement by NBAA and aviation professional organizations across the globe. Learn more about this severe threat on NBAA’s LOC-I information page, where you will find a wide variety of resources, expert safety presentations, and information on upset prevention and recovery training providers across the country.

Review NBAA’s Loss of Control Inflight Resources
Alone in the Cockpit – A Video About Loss of Control
Loss of Control Inflight Education Video Series
Runway Safety
Runway excursions and incursions continue to afflict the business aviation industry. Operators can prevent most excursions by mitigating well-identified hazards, including adhering to stabilized approach and landing criteria and using accurate and timely runway condition data. Runway incursions and wrong surface events can similarly be prevented by reviewing airport diagrams and NOTAMs to have situational awareness of the airport environment as well as fully understanding and complying with air traffic control clearances. The Safety Committee continues to raise awareness of these highly preventable incidents by utilizing a data-driven approach to enable all operators to learn from the experiences of their peers.

Review NBAA’s Runway Safety Resources
Read NBAA’s Updated Reducing Runway Excursions in Business Aviation Guide
Business Aviation Insider Article: Bizav Safety Experts Share Tips on Preventing Runway Incursions
Learn more about TALPA, a useful tool for determining runway conditions
Learn about NBAA’s New Runway and Surface Safety Working Group
View NBAA’s Airport Audit Tool

Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT)
Controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) continues to be an issue across the industry accounting for more than 10 percent of general aviation accidents with fatalities. CFIT continues to be a top 4 defining event among business and general aviation accidents. Enhanced ground proximity warning systems (EGPWS) and other ground collision avoidance systems are exceptionally capable technological solutions. Some smaller operators are not equipped with EGPWS, but an even more disturbing trend is Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA) data collected during 2024 and early 2025 indicating an alarming low response rate to EPWS warnings when the aircraft are so equipped. Data clearly indicates that only 27% of pilots responded correctly to a TAWS warning. NBAA continues to raise awareness, push for scenario-based training, and initiate discussions on technology and best practices to reduce the risk of CFIT.

Review NBAA’s CFIT Awareness and Prevention Resources
2026 Terrain Awareness Warning System (TAWS) Alert Response Behavior Survey
Learn more about preventing CFIT from the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA-JSC) Controlled Flight Into Terrain Working Group:
GA-JSC Controlled Flight Into Terrain Working Group Report (June 2021) (PDF) 
GA-JSC Controlled Flight Into Terrain Report Appendices with Safety Enhancements, Standard Problem Statements, and Interventions (June 2021) (PDF)
Ground Operations and Maintenance Accidents
Within business aviation, far more aircraft suffer damage on the ground than in the air. Although these events rarely result in serious injuries or loss of life, they can be very expensive and hinder, if not cancel altogether, any ensuing flight operations.

NBAA encourages the adoption of robust Safety Management Systems (SMS) among all operators and FBOs which would include enhanced standards, training, and procedures to prevent avoidable mishaps on ramps and in hangars.

Learn more about hangar and ground safety
Learn about aircraft misfueling with Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) events
Read the September/October 2020 Business Aviation Insider article “Handle With Care”
View Business Aviation Insider infographic about ground handling incident statistics (PDF)
Engage Unique Operational Concerns
Single-Pilot Accident Rate
Single-pilot operations provide flexibility and efficiency, however, they also present unique challenges that require a high level of situational awareness, sound decision-making and workload management. These challenges highlight the importance of equipping pilots with the right tools, training and support. The Safety Committee is committed to empowering single-pilot operators with practical strategies and resources to enhance safety, reduce workload and maintain peak performance in every phase of flight.

Examples of these efforts include the annual Single-Pilot Safety Standdown event, contributions to news and resources, and further outreach to the single-pilot community.

Review NBAA’s Single-Pilot Operations resources
Risk Management Guide for Single-Pilot Light Business Aircraft, which includes a flight risk assessment tool specifically developed with single-pilot operations in mind
Human Factors
Aircraft and humans are intricately connected and, regardless of a single aircraft type or a diverse fleet operation, safe operations depend on both technical proficiency and adherence to established procedures. Despite advances in technology and training, procedural non-compliance remains a significant contributor to aviation incidents, often rooted in underlying human factors. The NBAA Safety Committee’s Human Factors Working Group (HFWG) identified lack of awareness, complacency and lack of knowledge as primary contributors to these lapses. Among these factors, complacency is particularly concerning because it can lead to the normalization of deviance, where small departures from standard operating procedures (SOPs) gradually become accepted practice, eroding safety margins over time. Mitigating these risks requires business aviation organizations to foster a strong culture of accountability, address training and competency gaps, and implement proactive measures that enhance situational awareness, reinforce procedural discipline, and empower personnel to recognize and challenge deviations before they become normalized.

Procedural Non-Compliance: Learning the Markers and Mitigating the Risks
NBAA Safety Resource: Procedural Non-Compliance: Learning the Markers and Mitigating the Risks (PDF)
Strengthening Safety: A Look at Human Factors in Business Aviation
Fitness for Duty

While business aviation flight attendants are often recognized for exceptional cabin service, etiquette, and culinary expertise, passenger expectations and risk management demand that their primary role remains safety-sensitive. Operators must prioritize rigorous, safety-focused training that equips cabin crew to handle emergencies, medical events, dynamic cabin hazards, and threat management with total precision. Integrating flight attendants into Crew Resource Management (CRM), Safety Management Systems (SMS), and flight risk assessments ensures seamless cockpit-cabin coordination when seconds count.

Elevating flight attendants from service providers to fully integrated safety personnel directly strengthens a flight department’s overall risk mitigation strategy. Operators should mandate recurrent cabin safety training, fleet-wide equipment familiarization, and active cabin crew participation in safety reporting. Emphasizing safety-first training ensures that exceptional service is matched by uncompromising standards of passenger protection, emergency readiness, and operational integrity.

Flight Attendants/Flight Technicians Scholarship
What Are the Top Three Priorities for Flight Attendants/Technicians?
Contract Flight Attendant Best Practices
Workforce Challenges
Current projections from one industry training provider note the aviation industry has a significant demand for 1.3 million new professionals in the next decade, including 41,000 business aviation pilots to address attrition and retirements. The evolving industry requires us to strategically attract and retain talent while upholding stringent safety standards.

The NBAA Safety Committee’s Workforce Challenges Working Group works to identify the safety related impacts of these challenges and facilitate the transfer of critical knowledge, particularly emphasizing the cultivation of a robust safety mindset among less experienced peers.

Learn more about NBAA’s Workforce Initiatives
Flight Attendants
While business aviation flight attendants are often recognized for exceptional cabin service, etiquette and culinary expertise, passenger expectations and risk management demand that their primary role remains safety-sensitive. Operators must prioritize rigorous, safety-focused training that equips cabin crew to handle emergencies, medical events, dynamic cabin hazards and threat management with total precision. Integrating flight attendants into Crew Resource Management (CRM), Safety Management Systems (SMS) and flight risk assessments ensures seamless cockpit-cabin coordination when seconds count.

Elevating flight attendants from service providers to fully integrated safety personnel directly strengthens a flight department’s overall risk mitigation strategy. Operators should mandate recurrent cabin safety training, fleet-wide equipment familiarization and active cabin crew participation in safety reporting. Emphasizing safety-first training ensures that exceptional service is matched by uncompromising standards of passenger protection, emergency readiness, and operational integrity.

Flight Attendants/Flight Technicians Scholarship
What Are the Top Three Priorities for Flight Attendants/Technicians?
Contract Flight Attendant Best Practices
Identify and Implement Mitigation Strategies
Safety Management Systems Implementation
Business aviation organizations should incorporate a systemic approach to proactively managing safety in their operations, thereby identifying hazards and mitigating risk before it leads to an accident. The FAA issued a final rule in 2024 to mandate safety management systems (SMS) for Part 135 operators and some air tour operators. The time to begin efforts to implement an SMS is now. An SMS needs to grow from its implementation point and over time become an integral part of how an organization improves the conduct of its business and its safety posture.

View NBAA Safety Management Systems Information
FAA Part 5 SMS for Small Operators: A Practical Guide
SMS Implementation Video: Safety Policy & Safety Promotion
SMS Implementation Videos: Safety Assurance
Read the 2023 May/June NBAA Business Aviation Insider article “Scaling SMS to Meet Your Operation’s Needs”
Support of Safety Expenditures
With SMS mandatory for a broad range of operators by May 28, 2027, more safety managers will have to make the “asks” for personnel and financial resources necessary to mitigate the risk of identified hazards. Leadership understanding of the risks that have to be managed, and committing the necessary resources, is critical to successful operating risk management. Supporting safety managers and leaders with tools that support an efficient and effective SMS and operating outputs, requires cognizance and acumen by both the safety managers and the leadership team. Making decisions about what is needed requires internal and external resources.

This group is focused on building a resource library to best equip safety managers and organizational leaders with the tools, information and methodologies needed to make informed resource decisions and effectively manage operational risk within a mature SMS framework.

Review NBAA’s Safety Leadership and Culture Resources
Learn more about NBAA’s Safety Manager Certificate Program
Review NBAA’s “Safety Risk Profiles: Required Equipment for Your Operation” Resource
Accountable Executive/CEO Safety Survey (coming soon)
SMS Calibration/Executive Guide (coming soon)

Increase the Use and Sharing of Human-Reported and Automated Safety Data
Human-reported and automated safety data can provide a wealth of information to business aircraft operators. However, NBAA believes only a small fraction of the business community is participating in safety data collection and sharing efforts.

In the aftermath of recent incidents, NBAA members have seen data pointing to the prevalence of common causes throughout the industry. How many incidents might business aviation prevent by taking advantage of this information before a tragedy, rather than after? Without operators collecting, using and sharing data, these critical failures can go unnoticed, even in the most robust SMS, resulting in incidents and potential loss of life. Automated and human-reported safety data collection, analysis and sharing will enable your operation to proactively measure safety, allow for continuous safety improvements, and reduce costs and liability as part of your internal safety or SMS programs. The Safety Committee is developing tools to promote the use and sharing of data among business aircraft operators not already doing so.

Review NBAA’s Safety Data Collection, Analysis and Sharing resource
Listen to the February 2024 Podcast: How Data Collection, Monitoring and Sharing Improves Safety
Read the October 2023 Article “New NBAA Safety Resource Empowers Operators of All Sizes to Improve Performance Using Data”
Read the July/August 2023 NBAA Business Aviation Insider Article “Making the Move to Flight Data Monitoring”
Read the May/June 2023 NBAA Business Aviation Insider Article “Realizing Safety Benefits from Data Sharing”
View Business Aviation Insider infographic about the ASIAS Data Sharing Program (PDF)
Foundations for Safety
Professionalism

Professionalism is the pursuit of excellence through discipline, ethical behavior and continuous improvement. It is a cornerstone focus of active safety management where professional behaviors rule and safe actions become a byproduct. Professionalism is about who we are and how we approach everything that we do. Learn more about professionalism in business aviation.

Safety Leadership
The entire organization must work together to fully embrace a proactive safety mindset supported by a “just culture” and evidenced by not only participation and belief in the culture, but the willingness to share safety data with fellow aviation professionals. This second foundation for safety highlights the need for an effective set of beliefs, values, attitudes and practices from executive management to the flight line. Review NBAA’s safety leadership resources.

Technical Excellence
The common denominator for excellence in aviation decision making, risk management and flight path management is training. Improved business aviation training will lead to a reduction in loss of control, runway excursions and other business aviation accidents. Training programs need to address the skill sets required of business aviation professionals today in a way that teaches them new skills and sharpens old ones. Find an NBAA Professional Development course to help enhance your skills, review scholarship opportunities for training courses around the country and consult NBAA’s Training Management System Guide (PDF).

Risk Management
Daily, business aviation operators must effectively identify, analyze and eliminate or mitigate the hazards and associated risks that threaten the viability of the organizations for which they operate. Learn more about safety management systems.

Fitness for Duty
In a physically and mentally demanding environment, a clear mind and healthy body are essential to safe business aircraft operation, maintenance, and management. Operators must address fatigue, sleep apnea, improper use of medications, and many other physical and psychological aeromedical issues. Find more information and resources related to fitness for duty on NBAA’s Medical Issues page. Download the collaborative NBAA and Flight Safety Foundation publication Duty/Rest Guidelines for Business Aviation (PDF) and review science-based guidelines for duty and rest scheduling on NBAA’s Fatigue page.

https://nbaa.org/aircraft-operations/safety/2026-nbaa-top-safety-focus-areas/

 






FAA AI use sparks new reviews into AI safety, workforce shortages

FAA's use of AI and a shortage of air traffic controllers is raising safety concerns from House Democrats, who are calling for an oversight review.
 
The Federal Aviation Administration’s use of artificial intelligence is coming under scrutiny from its inspector general and Capitol Hill amid staffing concerns.

Congress is calling on the Government Accountability Office to audit the FAA’s AI-enabled air traffic software, only a month after the agency piloted the platforms. Over 20 members of Congress signed a letter to GAO asking for a review the FAA’s Flow Management Data and Services (FMDS) and Strategic Management of Airspace, Routes and Trajectories (SMART).

This is the second letter to FAA in the past month from lawmakers, expressing concerns about FMDS and SMART. Earlier this month, members of Congress wrote to Transportation Department Secretary Sean Duffy and FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford asking for the agency to pause the use of FMDS and SMART in the airspace above the National Capital Region (NRC) until the agency puts more safety measures in place.

Members also rang alarm bells about cybersecurity and AI following the recent reports of AI models going rogue.

“There has been little transparency from either DOT or the FAA on how the AI systems underlying SMART were tested … nor has information been shared as to why the NCR was chosen as the pilot test region,” lawmakers wrote in the Oct. 9 letter.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) said in a statement to Federal News Network that any new technology should “complement and not replace the experience, training and professional judgment of air traffic controllers who are responsible for the safety of the National Airspace System.”

Adequate AI reviews are necessary
GAO released two reports on aviation cybersecurity in June and August that found the FAA’s air traffic and data communication systems are vulnerable to cyber threats. GAO Center for Enhanced Cybersecurity Director Jennifer Franks told Federal News Network in August that GAO recommended improvements to threat detection and mitigation efforts.

“You can have a procedure and guardrails in place, but unless you fully implement all the necessary controls, you will have gaps in your processing of capabilities. We have to look at our privileged user controls and get into more of those zero trust architectural principles that really help us to refine some of the security controls that are needed to enhance the environment,” Franks said on The Federal Drive with Terry Gerton.

The lawmakers also acknowledged the need for FAA’s modernization efforts, but stressed safety should be the priority for the agency. Members of Congress wrote in both recent letters that without adequate review, AI could impact the current control systems in unknown ways.

“Decades of research show that people tend to over-rely on automated recommendations, a phenomenon known as automation bias, particularly under overworked conditions. Adding new, untested layers to these systems, especially those that are not yet ‘ready to immediately transform flight operations’, according to airline industry officials, must be done in partnership with all stakeholders in the aviation safety ecosystem,” members wrote.

In the second letter sent on Oct. 9, lawmakers want the FAA to respond to several questions regarding pre-deployment testing and evaluation, stakeholder training and the assessments and oversight of the systems post-deployment by Oct. 19.

The shortage of air traffic controllers and the lack of adequate training have amplified Congress’ concerns about adding AI into the mix.

“We have heard from several sources that frontline aviation safety workers were notified of the SMART tool rollout mere days in advance or not at all, giving them no time to learn how the system works, how it is incorporated into their workflow, and what oversight and accountability mechanisms maintain aviation safety standards,” members wrote.

IG to review training efforts
At the same time, the FAA’s Office of Inspector General said Friday it will begin a review of the Air Traffic Skills Assessment (ATSA) to identify areas for improvement. In June, the OIG found that despite making progress in improving air traffic controller training, the FAA still has work to do to accelerate the controller certification process.

“FAA does not adequately prepare certified professional controllers to serve in the critical on-the-job (OTJ) instructor role. Training for OTJ instructors is limited and outdated, and FAA lacks a formal program for improving instructors’ teaching skills,” FAA OIG wrote in the June report.

The FAA seems to be recognizing that it needs to increase training for air traffic controllers. The agency said this week it’s reinstating the Flight Deck Training program to give controllers firsthand experience with flight deck operations. The program, paused because of the COVID-19 pandemic, is in partnership with NATCA. Controllers will need to apply to fly on specific flights to identify a training objective. After the flight, controllers will submit a report to FAA explaining what they learned.

“The FAA has been testing the program and has already identified benefits, including helping controllers understand when they should refrain from issuing complex instructions and the impact that instructions such as changes in the landing runway can have on pilot workload,” FAA said in a statement.

The formal start of the program is set for after Thanksgiving.

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/congress/2026/10/faa-ai-use-sparks-new-reviews-into-ai-safety-workforce-shortages/

 






Honeywell predicts nearly 10,000 new business jets by 2035

Business aviation is set for a decade of growth as more customers turn to charter services and shared aircraft ownership.

Honeywell Aerospace has forecast almost 10,000 new business jet deliveries worldwide over the next decade. The company sees growing demand from private owners, charter companies and fractional operators driving global fleet expansion.

The company’s 35th annual Global Business Aviation Outlook, published on 19 October, forecasts 9,950 business jet deliveries between 2026 and 2035, up 4.4% from last year’s projection.

Honeywell also expects 4,200 turboprop deliveries, bringing the total forecast to approximately 14,000 business aircraft.

The global business aviation fleet is projected to grow by 29%, from approximately 39,400 aircraft in 2025 to nearly 51,000 by 2035.

“Over the next decade we’re predicting one of the most robust periods ever for business aviation, as corporations, private individuals, charter customers and fractional shareholders are all creating a surge in demand,” said Linnea Whisler, president of Commercial Original Equipment at Honeywell Aerospace.

“Business aircraft owners and operators are consistently flying more, ordering new business jets, expanding fleets and investing in innovations that are driving growth across the sector.”

Business jet deliveries expected to increase through 2035
Honeywell forecasts annual business aircraft deliveries will rise from approximately 1,280 in 2026 to more than 1,500 by 2035.

The annual value of aircraft deliveries is expected to exceed $37 billion by the end of the forecast period.

Large-cabin business jets will continue to account for the greatest share of aircraft delivery value, although midsize jets are expected to record the strongest fleet growth.

Dassault Falcon 10X
Photo: Dassault Aviation
Honeywell predicts the global midsize jet fleet will expand by 40% over the next decade, supported by demand for aircraft offering longer range and lower operating costs than the largest business jets.

By 2035, the company expects the worldwide business aviation fleet to include around:

18,000 turboprops
15,000 light jets
8,200 midsize jets
9,700 large-cabin jets
The forecast also sees relatively low aircraft retirement rates.

This year’s outlook includes turboprops and personal jets for the first time. Honeywell says its 4.4% upward revision to the business jet delivery forecast is calculated on a comparable basis with last year’s narrower coverage.

Business aviation flight hours forecast to grow 34%
Honeywell sees global business aviation flight hours increasing by approximately 34% between 2025 and 2035, outpacing the projected 29% fleet growth.

The company attributes much of this difference to the growing use of charter services, managed fleets and fractional ownership, which allow aircraft to operate more frequently than those held exclusively for private use.

Business jet flight hours have already increased by approximately 4% so far in 2026 compared with the equivalent period last year.

Midsize jets have recorded growth of 7%, while large-cabin aircraft flight hours are up 5%.

Honeywell’s operator survey found that nine out of ten respondents expect to fly at least as many hours in 2027 as in 2026. Nearly one-third expect to increase their flying activity.

The findings are based partly on Honeywell’s Buyer Expectations Survey, which collected responses from 306 non-fractional operators representing 1,558 business aircraft worldwide.

North America dominates business aviation market
The US and Canada account for approximately 63% of global business aircraft deliveries and fleet size, according to Honeywell.

The region also generates nearly 68% of worldwide business aviation flight hours and approximately 83% of fractional ownership flight activity.

Nearly one-third of North American operators surveyed plan to expand their fleets within the next five years.

Latin America remains the second-largest regional business aviation market, accounting for approximately 15% of the global fleet and 14% of deliveries. Brazil and Mexico are its principal markets.

Elsewhere, Honeywell identifies continued investment in aviation infrastructure in the Middle East, growing demand in India and selective fleet renewal in China.

European operators place particular importance on cabin functionality and passenger comfort when selecting aircraft, while Latin American buyers give greater weight to acquisition and operating costs.

Aircraft manufacturers and suppliers could benefit from fleet expansion
Honeywell expects the larger business aviation fleet to generate additional demand for maintenance, aircraft upgrades and support services.

Its research found that operators continue to prioritise range, payload, speed and runway performance when choosing new aircraft. Cabin experience, acquisition costs and customer support are also important considerations.

On sustainability, surveyed operators identified fleet modernisation as the most effective way to improve environmental performance. Sustainable aviation fuel remains another area of interest.

Honeywell developed its forecast using aircraft manufacturers’ production plans, market analysis and industry data from Cirium, WingX and Jetnet, alongside its annual operator survey.

The company expects annual business aircraft deliveries to exceed 1,500 by 2035, with the worldwide fleet approaching 51,000 aircraft.

https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/honeywell-business-jets-forecast-2035/

 







Cessna Citation Gen3 Jets Pass 1,220 Test Hours on Road to Autoland

Somewhere over Kansas, a white Cessna jet has been flying itself to the ground on purpose. Textron Aviation test pilots have been pressing the button that every owner hopes never to touch, and watching the airplane pick an airport, talk to air traffic control and roll to a stop on its own.

On Monday 19 October 2026, Textron Aviation said its three next-generation Citation light jets, the CJ4 Gen3, CJ3 Gen3 and M2 Gen3, have now flown more than 1,220 combined flight-test hours toward Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification. All three carry Garmin Emergency Autoland, and Textron says the CJ4 Gen3 is expected to be the first light jet to market with it.

The headline number is lopsided. The CJ4 Gen3 accounts for nearly 1,100 of those hours, while the two younger programmes only joined the test fleet this summer.

Announced: 19 October 2026, Textron Aviation, Wichita
Combined test time: More than 1,220 flight-test hours
Citation CJ4 Gen3: Nearly 1,100 hours on two test articles
Citation CJ3 Gen3: More than 60 hours, first flight July 2026
Citation M2 Gen3: More than 75 hours, first flight June 2026
Common feature: Garmin Emergency Autoland on all three
Targets: CJ4 Gen3 certification expected in 2026; CJ3 Gen3 and M2 Gen3 entry into service expected in 2027 (Textron, July 2026)

Where the Three Programmes Stand
The CJ4 Gen3 is furthest along. Textron says its two test articles have recently been through hot-weather and electrical-system certification testing. In July the company reported more than 880 hours on the type, so the jet has added roughly 200 hours over the summer.

The CJ3 Gen3 is the newcomer. Its prototype first flew from Wichita Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport in July, a nearly two-hour sortie that reached 41,000 feet. It has now passed 60 hours and is working through landing and braking performance.

Cessna Citation CJ3 Gen3 prototype in Textron flight-test markings lifting off from the runway at Wichita
The Citation CJ3 Gen3 prototype on its first flight in July 2026. With it airborne, all three Gen3 light jets were in flight test. Photo: Textron Aviation

The smallest of the three, the M2 Gen3, first flew in June and has logged more than 75 hours. Its next step is the most interesting one: Textron says the programme is nearing the start of simulated en route emergency activations, including airport selection and autoland to a full stop.

Textron did not repeat its timelines in Monday's release. In July it said the CJ4 Gen3 was heading for FAA certification during 2026, and that both the CJ3 Gen3 and M2 Gen3 were expected to enter service in 2027.

“The Citation CJ4 Gen3 and Citation M2 Gen3 flight test milestones reflect the disciplined progress our teams are making as we bring next-generation capability to the Citation light jet lineup.”
Chris Hearne — senior vice president, Engineering & Programs, Textron Aviation, July 2026

How Garmin Emergency Autoland Works
Emergency Autoland is built for one scenario: the only pilot is no longer flying. It can be triggered by a passenger pressing a dedicated button, or automatically if the avionics sense the pilot has stopped interacting with the flight deck. Once it starts, the system takes over the whole problem.

It uses the aircraft's navigation and weather data to choose the nearest suitable runway, weighing factors such as runway length, wind and storms. It squawks the emergency transponder code, broadcasts to air traffic control and nearby traffic, flies the approach, lowers gear and flaps, lands, brakes to a stop and shuts down the engine. Screens in the cabin tell passengers what is happening and how to get out once the airplane has stopped.

The system is not new to single-engine aircraft. Garmin's Autoland was first certified in May 2020 on the Piper M600/SLS, which Piper markets with its HALO safety system, and in August 2020 it was approved on the Daher TBM 940. Adapting it to a twin-engine Citation is detailed work: in July, Textron said its team was focused on runway centreline tracking and brake tuning for Autoland as M2 Gen3 testing got under way.

Textron Aviation flight test pilots deliberately trigger Garmin Emergency Autoland on a Citation CJ4 Gen3 test article.

In September, Textron published footage from those trials. Flight test pilots Corey Eckhart and James Bearman deliberately started the Autoland sequence so engineers could watch the system handle navigation, radio calls and the landing.

Two Textron flight test pilots in the cockpit of a Cessna Citation CJ4 Gen3 test article with Garmin displays
Flight test pilots Corey Eckhart and James Bearman during a Garmin Emergency Autoland test on a Citation CJ4 Gen3 test article. Photo: Textron Aviation

“Watching an autonomous system take control of the airplane and safely guide it to a landing in an emergency is remarkable.”

What Gen3 Changes
Autoland is the headline, but each jet gets more than one change. The CJ4 Gen3, the largest Citation in the light-jet segment and certified for single-pilot operation, moves to Garmin's G3000 PRIME avionics. Textron quotes an expected maximum range of 2,165 nautical miles, a maximum cruise speed of 451 knots true airspeed and seating for up to 11.

The CJ3 Gen3 brings Autoland to the existing Garmin G3000 platform and adds a customisable cabin with swivel seats, RGB accent lighting and a naturally lit lavatory. Textron gives it a 2,040-nautical-mile maximum range and standard seating for up to 10.

The M2 Gen3 is the entry-level jet of the three. It gets a refreshed interior with ambient lighting, illuminated cupholders, wireless charging and an optional folding side-facing seat that doubles as cargo space, with a maximum range of 1,550 nautical miles and seats for up to eight.

Why It Matters
Light jets like these are often flown by a single pilot, frequently the owner. That is exactly the case where a medical emergency at altitude leaves nobody else up front, and where a button in the cabin changes the outcome.

Autoland has spread from the Piper M600 and TBM 940 to more turboprops, including the Pilatus PC-12 PRO and the Epic E1000 AX. Textron now wants to put it into the light-jet market first, and with nearly 1,100 hours on the CJ4 Gen3, the finish line for that race is in sight.

https://migflug.com/afterburner/cessna-citation-gen3-cj4-cj3-m2-flight-test-hours-autoland-2026/

 






Victims in UPS plane crash seek access to documents Boeing gave NTSB

Nearly 30 lawyers argued the issue in court as the one-year anniversary of the crash approaches
Victims in UPS plane crash seek access to documents Boeing gave NTSB

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB+WAVE) — Nearly 30 lawyers appeared in court Monday to argue over access to documents Boeing and other companies provided to the National Transportation Safety Board in the investigation of the crash of UPS Flight 2976 in Louisville as the first anniversary of the crash approaches.

The NTSB has been examining the maintenance and design of a bearing that held the rear of the plane’s left engine to the wing. As part of that work, the agency receives information from the companies involved. Lawyers representing victims want access to what Boeing and other companies turned over to the NTSB.

Lawyers for the victims said the documents would help them search for evidence as they seek compensation on behalf of their clients.

Boeing and the other companies said they cannot meet those demands until the NTSB issues its final ruling. They argue releasing the documents before that point would violate the law.

“Boeing went to the NTSB and asked what their position was,” Christopher Essig, who represents Boeing, said in court Monday. “That’s what the statute says we should do. We have not received a response yet.”

“The defendants are objecting to the production of the information they shared with the NTSB even though we’re approaching the one-year mark,” said Robert Clifford, who represents the victims of the crash.

Judge Eric Haner didn’t issue a ruling from the bench Monday, saying he would need a full hearing to sort out the laws at play. The NTSB could also direct Boeing to release the documents, which could make the court dispute unnecessary.

Haner set a schedule of hearings to work through the issues. Those hearings are set to continue over the next year.

https://www.wdrbwave.com/2026/10/19/victims-ups-plane-crash-seek-access-documents-boeing-gave-ntsb/

 







CALENDAR OF EVENTS

. European Aviation Training Summit 3 – 5 November 2026 • Estoril Congress Centre, Cascais, Portugal

. 79TH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL AVIATION SAFETY SUMMIT MONTREAL | NOVEMBER 10-12, 2026. 

. Airlines 2026 conference - November 11, 2026 (London)

. 2026 NBAA Business Aviation Convention & Exhibition (NBAA-BACE) Oct. 20-22, 2026 | Las Vegas, NV

. Gulf Flight Safety Association (GFSA)conference Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on the 28th and 29th of October 2026

. Bombardier Safety Standdown (November 10–12, 2026 in Wichita, KS)

. CHC Safety & Quality Summit - 11th – 13th November 2025 - Vancouver, BC Canada

. Aircraft Fire Hazards, Protection, and Investigation17 to 19 November 2026, Woburn MA

: Save The Date - February 11-12, 2027 - ProDIGIQ User Conference

. 2027 ACSF Safety Symposium - April 6-8, 2027 - ERAU Daytona Beach, FL 



Curt Lewis