On May 12th, 2009, the NTSB began a three-day public hearing about its ongoing investigation into the fatal February 2009 crash of a Continental Connection airliner in Buffalo, NY. Among the issues that came up were the possible roles of crew fatigue and crew training in the accident. During the last day of the hearing, noted aviation consultant Mike Boyd and I sat down with host Dave Berns of the "State of Nevada" program on KNPR radio in Las Vegas.
KNPR Interview on 14 May 2009 (15:21)
Additional Information
NTSB Public Docket on the Investigation
Accident Details from AirSafe.com
Todd Curtis book Understanding Aviation Safety Data
19 May 2009
Emirates A340 Accident Report Released
On 20 March 2009, an Emirates A340 aircraft, with 275 passengers and crew on board, was involved in a tail strike accident during takeoff from Melbourne, Australia. The aircraft suffered some damage, but there were no injuries to anyone on board. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) recently released preliminary findings that indicated that an incorrect weight had been used when making performance calculations prior to departure. The calculations were based on a takeoff weight that was 100 tons below the actual takeoff weight of the aircraft.
This is the first accident involving an Emirates A340. Previously, in 2004, there was an Emirates A340 incident involving a runway overrun in Johannesburg, South Africa.
What sets this preliminary report apart from most is that the ATSB releases substantially more information at this stage than most accident investigation authorities. While the NTSB sometimes releases this level of preliminary information for major accidents that have tremendous media attention, it has not provided that kind of detail for other kinds of accidents.
Below are links to an audio of the ATSB press conference about the release of this report, a summary of the accident, and other accident details.
Abstract of Preliminary Report
Media Release from 30 April 2009
Preliminary Accident Report
Audio of ATSB Briefing from 30 April 2009 (21:10)
Other A340 Plane Crashes
Other Emirates Safety Events
28 April 2009
Swine Flu Risks for Airline Passengers
After a rapid spread of the swine flu virus, the World Health Organization announced an increase in its global alert level on April 27, 2009. So far, about 150 people have died from the disease, all in Mexico. In this report, AirSafe.com summarizes the current situation and offers passengers suggestions on how to deal with flu threats on their flight.
Podcast: First Broadcast 29 April 2009 (2:35)
Podcast: First Broadcast 29 April 2009 (2:35)
08 April 2009
Carrying Musical Insruments on Aircraft
AirSafe.com covered many issues related to checked and carry-on baggage at tsa.airsafe.org, but didn't address musical instruments. In short, if it can fit in the overhead compartment or under the seat, you should be able to carry it on board the aircraft.
TSA recommends that you check with your airline prior to your flight to ensure your instrument meets the size requirements for their aircraft. Some aircraft may have particularly small overhead compartments. Also, larger instruments in checked baggage may have size or weight limitations.
While they recommend that you travel with brass instruments in your checked baggage, there is nothing in any of the TSA's other recommendations that ban smaller brass instruments from carry-on.
They do recommend that you travel with you stringed instruments as a carry-on item if it is small enough. By the way, your airline may allow you to purchase a separate ticket for a larger instrument.
If you have an instrument in your checked baggage, include instructions, where a security officer will notice them, for handling and repacking your instrument. Make sure these instructions are very clear and understandable to someone who knows nothing about the instrument, especially the easily damaged areas of the instrument.
If you have electronic instruments that are small enough to take as carry-ons, be prepared to take it out for inspection.
Speaking of inspections, the TSA allows you to carry one musical instrument in addition to a carry-on and one personal item through the screening checkpoint. Airlines may or may not allow the additional carry-on item on their aircraft. Please check with your airline before you arrive at the airport.
Security officers must x-ray or physically screen your instrument before it can be transported on an aircraft. If the instrument has to be inspected, try to stay with the instrument and be prepared to offer the security screener advice on how to handle the instrument.
Allow extra time for screening. If security officers cannot clear the instrument through the security checkpoint as a carry-on item, you may have to go back to the check in counter and send the instrument as checked baggage. How much extra time? At least 30 minutes.
TSA recommends that you check with your airline prior to your flight to ensure your instrument meets the size requirements for their aircraft. Some aircraft may have particularly small overhead compartments. Also, larger instruments in checked baggage may have size or weight limitations.
While they recommend that you travel with brass instruments in your checked baggage, there is nothing in any of the TSA's other recommendations that ban smaller brass instruments from carry-on.
They do recommend that you travel with you stringed instruments as a carry-on item if it is small enough. By the way, your airline may allow you to purchase a separate ticket for a larger instrument.
If you have an instrument in your checked baggage, include instructions, where a security officer will notice them, for handling and repacking your instrument. Make sure these instructions are very clear and understandable to someone who knows nothing about the instrument, especially the easily damaged areas of the instrument.
If you have electronic instruments that are small enough to take as carry-ons, be prepared to take it out for inspection.
Speaking of inspections, the TSA allows you to carry one musical instrument in addition to a carry-on and one personal item through the screening checkpoint. Airlines may or may not allow the additional carry-on item on their aircraft. Please check with your airline before you arrive at the airport.
Security officers must x-ray or physically screen your instrument before it can be transported on an aircraft. If the instrument has to be inspected, try to stay with the instrument and be prepared to offer the security screener advice on how to handle the instrument.
Allow extra time for screening. If security officers cannot clear the instrument through the security checkpoint as a carry-on item, you may have to go back to the check in counter and send the instrument as checked baggage. How much extra time? At least 30 minutes.
23 March 2009
Crash of a FedEx Express MD-11 near Tokyo on 23 March 2009
The aircraft was on a cargo flight from Guangzhou, China to Narita Airport near Tokyo, Japan. The aircraft bounced on landing, and contacted the runway a second time nose wheel first. The plane then rolled to the left, hit the runway with its left horizontal stabilizer and wing, caught fire and rolled over onto its back, coming to rest off the left side of the runway. Both crew members were killed. This was the first fatal accident at Narita Airport since it opened in 1978.
This was the fourth crash landing of an MD-11 that led to either fatalities or to the destruction of the aircraft. Two previous crashes involved FedEx Express, a July 1997 crash in Newark, New Jersey, and an October 1999 landing overrun at Subic Bay Airport in the Philippines. No one was killed in these two events. An August 1999 China Airlines crash landing in Hong Kong during a rain storm led to the death of three of the passengers on board. There have been three fatal crashes involving passengers, the most recent being the Hong Kong crash.
About two hundred MD-11s were built, and about 182 are currently in service. FedEx Express operates the world's largest MD-11 fleet with about 57 active aircraft. Well over half of all active MD-11s are flying as dedicated cargo aircraft, with many of them being converted passenger airliners (including about 19 aircraft operated by Lufthansa Cargo). In addition to the two MD-11 crashes, NTSB records indicate that FedEx MD-11 aircraft have been in at least five other landing incidents or accidents involving either a bounced landing or a tail strike.
Watch or listen to the AirSafe.com report on this accident below:
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | YouTube
23 March 2009 Crash of a FedEx MD-11 near Tokyo
Other FedEx Express Plane Crashes
Other MD-11 Plane Crashes
Coincidentally, just a few hours after the FedEx Express crash, a Pilatus PC-12 aircraft crashed on approach to Butte, Montana. The aircraft had been on a flight from Orovile, California to Bozeman, Montana. The pilot changed the flight plane to Butte, MT, and the aircraft crashed about 500 feet (150 meters) from the airport. All 14 on board were killed, including several children.
This was the fourth crash landing of an MD-11 that led to either fatalities or to the destruction of the aircraft. Two previous crashes involved FedEx Express, a July 1997 crash in Newark, New Jersey, and an October 1999 landing overrun at Subic Bay Airport in the Philippines. No one was killed in these two events. An August 1999 China Airlines crash landing in Hong Kong during a rain storm led to the death of three of the passengers on board. There have been three fatal crashes involving passengers, the most recent being the Hong Kong crash.
About two hundred MD-11s were built, and about 182 are currently in service. FedEx Express operates the world's largest MD-11 fleet with about 57 active aircraft. Well over half of all active MD-11s are flying as dedicated cargo aircraft, with many of them being converted passenger airliners (including about 19 aircraft operated by Lufthansa Cargo). In addition to the two MD-11 crashes, NTSB records indicate that FedEx MD-11 aircraft have been in at least five other landing incidents or accidents involving either a bounced landing or a tail strike.
Watch or listen to the AirSafe.com report on this accident below:
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | YouTube
23 March 2009 Crash of a FedEx MD-11 near Tokyo
Other FedEx Express Plane Crashes
Other MD-11 Plane Crashes
Coincidentally, just a few hours after the FedEx Express crash, a Pilatus PC-12 aircraft crashed on approach to Butte, Montana. The aircraft had been on a flight from Orovile, California to Bozeman, Montana. The pilot changed the flight plane to Butte, MT, and the aircraft crashed about 500 feet (150 meters) from the airport. All 14 on board were killed, including several children.
18 March 2009
New AAIB and NTSB 777 Safety Recommendations
In early March 2009, the AAIB released findings from the investigation of the January 2008 British Airways 777 accident that point to ice buildup in the fuel system as the key factor in the crash in London. On March 11th, 2009, the NTSB called for a redesign of the fuel system, and for the affected aircraft to have those changes installed within six months after the redesign is complete. Watch or listen to the AirSafe.com report on these updates below, or read the transcript.
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
Report on March 2009 AAIB and NTSB Updates
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
Report on March 2009 AAIB and NTSB Updates
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
13 March 2009
Fixing the Problem That May Have Caused the British Airways 777 Crash
Recent findings from the AAIB accident investigation point to ice buildup in the fuel system as the key factor in the January 2008 crash of a British Airways 777 in London. On March 11th, 2009, the NTSB called for a redesign of the fuel system, and for the affected aircraft to have those changes installed within six months after the redesign is complete.
You can hear this information in the podcast here or at at podcast.AirSafe.org
In the January 2008 crash, the flight from Beijing to London was routine until the the aircraft was on final approach, when both engines had an uncommanded power reduction, or engine rollback, which caused the plane to land short of the runway. Although the aircraft was seriously damaged, only one of the 136 passengers was seriously injured, and there were no serious injuries among the 16 crew members.
The Air Accidents Investigation Branch in the UK headed the investigation, with the help of several other organizations, including the aircraft manufacturer Boeing, the engine manufacturer Rolls Royce, and British Airways.
The series of updates and interim reports from the AAIB, the most recent of which was released in early March 2009, revealed that the likely cause of the dual engine rollback was ice blockage in a critical fuel system component that led to a reduction of fuel flow to the engine.
These findings didn't come easily. The AAIB focused its efforts on the fuel system because of the unusual conditions of the accident flight. That flight was exposed to rather cold atmospheric conditions, so cold that the crew changed altitudes at one point to fly through warmer air.
The AAIB reviewed the minimum fuel temperature data from over 141,000 777 flights. About 13,000 of these flights were on aircraft operating with the Rolls Royce Trent 800 series engine, the same kind as on the accident aircraft. Of those 13,000 flights, only 118 had fuel temperatures at takeoff that were at or below the takeoff fuel temperature of the accident flight, and during the approach phase, only 70 had fuel temperatures that were as low or lower than the fuel temperature on the accident flight.
The two most likely accident scenarios that were investigated by the AAIB both involved ice formation within the fuel system, leading to a reduction of fuel flow. This ice formation was possible because the aircraft fuel did contain some water. This kind of contamination is normal, and in fact the fuel from the accident aircraft was tested, and found to be in compliance with the appropriate fuel specifications.
After an extensive analysis of the fuel system, the AAIB concluded that the most likely scenario for the engine rollback was that ice formed in the fuel pipes within the main fuel tank, and that during the latter part of the approach phase of the flight, factors such as turbulence, aircraft pitch changes, and increasing temperatures could have contributed to the sudden release of accumulated ice into the fuel feed system of both engines. This ice would have restricted the fuel flow through a component called the fuel oil heat exchanger and would have led to the engine rollbacks.
The AAIB recommended that Boeing and Rolls Royce review the aircraft and engine fuel system design, and make changes that would prevent ice from restricting fuel flow through the fuel oil heat exchanger.
In the US, the National Transportation Safety Board went further, recommending that within six months of completing the redesign, that it be incorporated in all 777 aircraft using the Trent 800 engines. Some of the airlines that fly Trent 800 equipped triple sevens include Air New Zealand, American Airlines, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Delta Airlines, El Al, Emirates, Kenya Airways, Malaysia Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and Thai Airways. There are about 220 such aircraft currently in service.
The NTSB's recommendations were influenced by a second 777 rollback event. On November 26, 2008, a Delta 777, powered by two Trent 800 series engines, experienced a single-engine rollback while in cruise on a flight from Shanghai to Atlanta. The crew was able to address the issue and continued the flight without incident. Later analysis indicated that there was a blockage of the fuel oil heat exchanger on that engine that was likely due to ice accumulation. Although the engine rollbacks on the British Airways accident aircraft and the Delta Airlines incident aircraft occurred during different phases of flight, the fuel temperatures at the time of the rollbacks were about equal.
Taken together, these developments are good news for the aviation community, especially passengers and crews flying on 777s equipped with Trent 800 engines. The investigative authorities have determined the likely cause of the event, the changes to the fuel system that are needed are well understood, and the engine and aircraft manufacturers are well on their way to developing solutions that will prevent similar occurrences in the future.
For more on this investigation, or for information about aviation safety or aviation security issues, please visit 777.AirSafe.org.
You can hear this information in the podcast here or at at podcast.AirSafe.org
In the January 2008 crash, the flight from Beijing to London was routine until the the aircraft was on final approach, when both engines had an uncommanded power reduction, or engine rollback, which caused the plane to land short of the runway. Although the aircraft was seriously damaged, only one of the 136 passengers was seriously injured, and there were no serious injuries among the 16 crew members.
The Air Accidents Investigation Branch in the UK headed the investigation, with the help of several other organizations, including the aircraft manufacturer Boeing, the engine manufacturer Rolls Royce, and British Airways.
The series of updates and interim reports from the AAIB, the most recent of which was released in early March 2009, revealed that the likely cause of the dual engine rollback was ice blockage in a critical fuel system component that led to a reduction of fuel flow to the engine.
These findings didn't come easily. The AAIB focused its efforts on the fuel system because of the unusual conditions of the accident flight. That flight was exposed to rather cold atmospheric conditions, so cold that the crew changed altitudes at one point to fly through warmer air.
The AAIB reviewed the minimum fuel temperature data from over 141,000 777 flights. About 13,000 of these flights were on aircraft operating with the Rolls Royce Trent 800 series engine, the same kind as on the accident aircraft. Of those 13,000 flights, only 118 had fuel temperatures at takeoff that were at or below the takeoff fuel temperature of the accident flight, and during the approach phase, only 70 had fuel temperatures that were as low or lower than the fuel temperature on the accident flight.
The two most likely accident scenarios that were investigated by the AAIB both involved ice formation within the fuel system, leading to a reduction of fuel flow. This ice formation was possible because the aircraft fuel did contain some water. This kind of contamination is normal, and in fact the fuel from the accident aircraft was tested, and found to be in compliance with the appropriate fuel specifications.
After an extensive analysis of the fuel system, the AAIB concluded that the most likely scenario for the engine rollback was that ice formed in the fuel pipes within the main fuel tank, and that during the latter part of the approach phase of the flight, factors such as turbulence, aircraft pitch changes, and increasing temperatures could have contributed to the sudden release of accumulated ice into the fuel feed system of both engines. This ice would have restricted the fuel flow through a component called the fuel oil heat exchanger and would have led to the engine rollbacks.
The AAIB recommended that Boeing and Rolls Royce review the aircraft and engine fuel system design, and make changes that would prevent ice from restricting fuel flow through the fuel oil heat exchanger.
In the US, the National Transportation Safety Board went further, recommending that within six months of completing the redesign, that it be incorporated in all 777 aircraft using the Trent 800 engines. Some of the airlines that fly Trent 800 equipped triple sevens include Air New Zealand, American Airlines, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Delta Airlines, El Al, Emirates, Kenya Airways, Malaysia Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and Thai Airways. There are about 220 such aircraft currently in service.
The NTSB's recommendations were influenced by a second 777 rollback event. On November 26, 2008, a Delta 777, powered by two Trent 800 series engines, experienced a single-engine rollback while in cruise on a flight from Shanghai to Atlanta. The crew was able to address the issue and continued the flight without incident. Later analysis indicated that there was a blockage of the fuel oil heat exchanger on that engine that was likely due to ice accumulation. Although the engine rollbacks on the British Airways accident aircraft and the Delta Airlines incident aircraft occurred during different phases of flight, the fuel temperatures at the time of the rollbacks were about equal.
Taken together, these developments are good news for the aviation community, especially passengers and crews flying on 777s equipped with Trent 800 engines. The investigative authorities have determined the likely cause of the event, the changes to the fuel system that are needed are well understood, and the engine and aircraft manufacturers are well on their way to developing solutions that will prevent similar occurrences in the future.
For more on this investigation, or for information about aviation safety or aviation security issues, please visit 777.AirSafe.org.
25 February 2009
Turkish Airlines Plane Crash in Amsterdam
25 February 2009; Turkish Airlines 737-800; Amsterdam, Netherlands: The aircraft, on a scheduled international flight from Istanbul, Turkey, to Amsterdam, Netherlands crashed in a field about a mile (1.6 km) short of the runway. The fuselage was broken into three major sections, and both engines were torn off. There was apparently no post crash fire. Three crew members, including both pilots, were killed, as were at least six others among the 135 passengers and crew members.
AirSafe.com's Initial Report on this Accident
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
Additional information about this event.
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
AirSafe.com's Initial Report on this Accident
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
Additional information about this event.
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
24 February 2009
Managing a Podcast Using the AirSafe.com System
As many of you know, AirSafe.com has created podcasts for over two years. One of the major milestones was going from audio only to a mix of audio and video episodes. Over time, there have been modest improvements in the technical quality of the podcast, but there have been great improvements in expanding the audience and streamlining the production process.
To give you an example of the changes, views and downloads of the video version of the podcast went from zero two years ago to an average of about 20,000 per month in early January 2009 (before the Miracle on the Hudson). This increase in views was almost certainly not due to the high production values. Most AirSafe.com video podcast episodes are little more than a narrated slide show with lots of bullet points, a few pictures, and even fewer video clips.
There were two keys to expanding the audience for the podcast. The first was having a systematic process for producing episodes. The second was the consistent application of a common sense marketing strategy, the foundation of which was using free online resources such as video sharing sites such as YouTube, podcast distribution through iTunes, and the strategic use of blogs and free online press releases to build interest in the podcast.
These lessons learned, production procedures, and marketing insights have been included in the AirSafe.com Podcasting Manual, a draft of which is available as a free download from AirSafe.com. This step-by-step guide was designed to give any group or individual the foundation to create an audio or video podcast, put that podcast on iTunes, YouTube and elsewhere, and to do so without spending much money.
Feel free to download a free copy of this manual at http://www.airsafe.com/classes/airsafe-podcasting-manual-draft.pdf. It is a working draft, so any advice you can provide to improve the document would be greatly appreciated.
But Wait, There's More!
The podcasting manual isn't the only thing offered at AirSafe.com. You can find a number of other free AirSafe.com resources, including advice on dealing with airport security, insights on fear of flying, and a free copy of the book Parenting and the Internet, at http://www.airsafe.com/airsafe-resources.pdf
To give you an example of the changes, views and downloads of the video version of the podcast went from zero two years ago to an average of about 20,000 per month in early January 2009 (before the Miracle on the Hudson). This increase in views was almost certainly not due to the high production values. Most AirSafe.com video podcast episodes are little more than a narrated slide show with lots of bullet points, a few pictures, and even fewer video clips.
There were two keys to expanding the audience for the podcast. The first was having a systematic process for producing episodes. The second was the consistent application of a common sense marketing strategy, the foundation of which was using free online resources such as video sharing sites such as YouTube, podcast distribution through iTunes, and the strategic use of blogs and free online press releases to build interest in the podcast.
These lessons learned, production procedures, and marketing insights have been included in the AirSafe.com Podcasting Manual, a draft of which is available as a free download from AirSafe.com. This step-by-step guide was designed to give any group or individual the foundation to create an audio or video podcast, put that podcast on iTunes, YouTube and elsewhere, and to do so without spending much money.
Feel free to download a free copy of this manual at http://www.airsafe.com/classes/airsafe-podcasting-manual-draft.pdf. It is a working draft, so any advice you can provide to improve the document would be greatly appreciated.
But Wait, There's More!
The podcasting manual isn't the only thing offered at AirSafe.com. You can find a number of other free AirSafe.com resources, including advice on dealing with airport security, insights on fear of flying, and a free copy of the book Parenting and the Internet, at http://www.airsafe.com/airsafe-resources.pdf
14 February 2009
Updates to Two Most Recent Continental Crashes
AirSafe.com just finished updating the status of the 20 December 2008 crash of a Continental Airlines 737-500 at Denver. The aircraft, which was on a scheduled flight to Houston's Intercontinental Airport, departed the runway during takeoff and skidded across a taxiway and a service road before coming to rest in a ravine several hundred yards from the runway. The aircraft sustained significant damage, including a post crash fire, separation of one engine and separated and collapsed landing gear. There were about 38 injuries among the 110 passengers and five crew members, including two passengers who were seriously injured. Because this did not involve the death of an airline passenger, this is a significant event as defined by AirSafe.com
Below are the audio and video versions of the podcast.
Continental Airlines Accident in Denver
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel at video.airsafe.org.
Additional Information on the Buffalo Accident
The site added a page with fatal and significant events involving the Dash 8 model airliner, the same model involved in the fatal 12 February 2009 crash in Buffalo, NY.
Additional information about both the Buffalo and Denver events is available at http://www.airsafe.com/events/airlines/cal.htm
Below are the audio and video versions of the podcast.
Continental Airlines Accident in Denver
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel at video.airsafe.org.
Additional Information on the Buffalo Accident
The site added a page with fatal and significant events involving the Dash 8 model airliner, the same model involved in the fatal 12 February 2009 crash in Buffalo, NY.
Additional information about both the Buffalo and Denver events is available at http://www.airsafe.com/events/airlines/cal.htm
13 February 2009
Continental Connection Crash in Buffalo
The aircraft, a scheduled flight from Newark, NJ and operated by Colgan Air, crashed in a residential area about five miles from the airport. At least one house on the ground was destroyed. All 44 passengers and four crew members were killed, along with one person on the ground.
AirSafe.com's Initial Report on this Accident
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
Additional information about this event.
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
AirSafe.com's Initial Report on this Accident
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
Additional information about this event.
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
11 February 2009
Interview with Bird Strike Expert Dr. Ron Merritt
On January 18th, 2009, three days after the bird strike related ditching of US Airways Flight 1549 in New York, Dr. Todd Curtis of AirSafe.com interviewed bird strike expert Dr. Ron Merritt. He's currently the president of Detect, Inc., which manufactures bird strike avoidance radars. Dr. Merritt was also at one time the military commander of US Air Force unit responsible for understanding and reducing bird strike hazards to Air Force aircraft. During this wide ranging conversation, they discus a variety of bird strike and wildlife hazard topics, including the need for wildlife experts in the US Airways accident investigation team, wildlife control policy issues, and the history of the key bird strike organizations in the US and Canada.
Listen to the interview with Dr. Merritt
For more information on the accident, including videos and background information on bird strike hazards and airliner ditchings, visit:
hudson.airsafe.org
Listen to the interview with Dr. Merritt
For more information on the accident, including videos and background information on bird strike hazards and airliner ditchings, visit:
hudson.airsafe.org
10 February 2009
Interview on the Escapes Radio Talk Show
On February 9th, 2009, Dr. Todd Curtis of AirSafe.com was interviewed on the "Escapes" radio show hosted by Ann Lombardi of the the Trip Chicks, who along Wendy Swartzell run the Atlanta area travel company Passport to Adventure. During the show, we discussed several of the issues around the previous month's ditching accident involving a US Airways A320 in New York, including what can be done about bird strike hazards, and how passengers should deal with fear of flying.
Listen to the interview
For more information on the accident, including videos and background information on bird strike hazards and airliner ditchings, visit:
hudson.airsafe.org
Listen to the interview
For more information on the accident, including videos and background information on bird strike hazards and airliner ditchings, visit:
hudson.airsafe.org
24 January 2009
Interview on WGN Radio after the US Airways Ditching (audio - MP3)
On 15 January 2009, a US Airways A320 encountered a flock of birds shortly after takeoff. Both engines lost power, apparently as the result of experiencing multiple bird strikes, and the crew was able to successfully ditch the aircraft in the Hudson River. All five crew members and 150 passengers survived the accident. The following day, Dr. Todd Curtis was a guest of Dean Richards on Chicago's WGN radio. They discussed the US Airways event, how the public's fear of flying is affected by extensive media coverage of airline accidents, and what kind of measures could be taken to deal with the threat of bird strikes.
Listen to the interview
For more information on the accident, including videos and background information on bird strike hazards and airliner ditchings, visit:
hudson.airsafe.org
Listen to the interview
For more information on the accident, including videos and background information on bird strike hazards and airliner ditchings, visit:
hudson.airsafe.org
16 January 2009
Ditching of a US Airways A320 on the Hudson River in New York
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
On 15 January 2009, a US Airways A320 experienced a loss of power to both engines shortly after taking off from New York's LaGuardia Airport. The crew was able to successfully ditch the aircraft in the Hudson River near midtown Manhattan. Reportedly, the aircraft encountered a flock of birds shortly after takeoff. The aircraft reached an maximum altitude of about 3200 feet before it began to descend. After ditching, all five crew members and 150 passengers evacuated the aircraft. One passenger sustained serious injuries.
According to early reports, the aircraft took off normally toward the north, but the flight crew reported striking a flock of birds about two minutes after takeoff. Both engines lost power, and unable to either return to LaGuardia or to land in nearby Teterboro Airport in New Jersey, the crew turned the aircraft toward the south. After flying over the George Washington Bridge, the crew executed a controlled ditching on the Hudson River just west of midtown Manhattan. The passengers and crew escaped with the help of numerous ferries, tour boats, fireboats, and other vessels in the area.
This was the first crash of an Airbus A320 operated by a US airline. The A320 has had eight events involving passenger fatalities. The first was a 1988 crash involving Air France, and the most recent was a May 2008 crash of a TACA airliner in Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
While many jet airliners have crashed in the water, prior research by AirSafe.com revealed only three previous events where the crew of a large passenger jet intentionally ditched the aircraft in a controlled manner. Prior to the US Airways event, the most recent ditching involved a hijacked Ethiopian Airlines 767 in 1996. The others included a 1963 ditching of an Aeroflot jet in Leningrad (present day St. Petersburg), and a 1970 ditching of a DC-9 in the Caribbean.
Fatal and serious bird strike related crashes of large jet aircraft are also quite rare. The last fatal US bird strike accident involving a large jet was the crash of a US Air Force E-3 AWACS in Alaska in 1995. The last time bird strikes led to passenger deaths in the US was in 1960 in Boston. Since 1990, five other large jet airliners have crashed due to bird strikes, but only one involved fatalities.
The NTSB is currently investigating this US Airways accident. For updates on this investigation, and for the latest news from AirSafe.com, visit hudson.airsafe.org.
For related information, visit:
Previous US Airways Crashes
Other Significant A320 Events
Bird Strike Hazards to Aircraft
Jet Airliner Ditching Events
08 January 2009
New Video for Year in Review 2008 Released
The new video for the podcast "AirSafe.com's Airline Safety Review for 2008" is now available. You can see the video or listen to the audio version, below, or you can find it at one of the podcast links.
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
For details on the events of 2008, visit http://2008.AirSafe.org
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube
For details on the events of 2008, visit http://2008.AirSafe.org
For more videos, visit the AirSafe.com YouTube channel.
06 January 2009
Video Trailers for The Conversation at AirSafe.com
On occasion, I tear myself away from the computer and actually read a magazine or two for news about what's happening online. I came across an article about Animoto.com, which allows users to upload photos or graphics from their computer, or from an online photo management site like Flickr, Facebook, Picasa, or Photobucket, and have the Animoto turn it into a dynamic trailer. You can even add music to it (theirs or yours) and create a music video type trailer in minutes. Like many online services, there is a free version and a paid version. With the free version (my kind of price), you can upload the result to YouTube, Facebook, or other social networking sites.
How good is it? Just for fun, I decided to make a trailer for an upcoming podcast reviewing significant aviation safety events of 2008. I uploaded a bunch of pictures, hit the button, and waited for Animoto software to do its thing. You can see the fruits of Animoto's (automated) labor below (or at AirSafe.com's Youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/airsafe).
Trailer for 2008 Year in Review
By the way, the music in this trailer is from the song "Time and Place" from the Canadian group In-Flight Safety. Yes, that is the name of the group. How could I possibly pass up the chance to use their music?
Future video podcasts will likely feature these kinds of trailers at the beginning of the show. Feel free to send feedback about this kind of addition.
How good is it? Just for fun, I decided to make a trailer for an upcoming podcast reviewing significant aviation safety events of 2008. I uploaded a bunch of pictures, hit the button, and waited for Animoto software to do its thing. You can see the fruits of Animoto's (automated) labor below (or at AirSafe.com's Youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/airsafe).
Trailer for 2008 Year in Review
By the way, the music in this trailer is from the song "Time and Place" from the Canadian group In-Flight Safety. Yes, that is the name of the group. How could I possibly pass up the chance to use their music?
Future video podcasts will likely feature these kinds of trailers at the beginning of the show. Feel free to send feedback about this kind of addition.
31 December 2008
AirSafe.com's Airline Safety Review for 2008
The year 2008 had the fewest fatal airline crashes in any year since AirSafe.com began it's annual review of airline safety events in 1996. This 13th annual review discusses seven fatal airline events, and fifteen other significant events from 2008.
As AirSafe.com looks back at the fatal and significant aviation safety events of last year, the most noticeable fact about this 13th annual review is that 2008 had fewer fatal airline events than any of the previous 12 years reviewed by AirSafe.com. The most was 19 fatal events in 1997, and the previous low was eight fatal events in 2003, 2006, and 2007.
AirSafe.com counts as a fatal event any airline flight where one or more passengers are killed, including those events involving hijacking, sabotage, and military action. This review counts only those events that occur on aircraft that can carry at least 10 passengers, and that are commonly used in regular airline service in North America, Western Europe, Australia, and Japan. Significant events are those events that were noteworthy for other reasons. Several of these 15 significant events were non-fatal events involving large jet airliners, but others included crashes involving celebrities, military aircraft, and smaller airline aircraft.
One of the more interesting observations from the 2008 review is that it represents the second consecutive year with no fatal airline events involving the US or Canada. That includes any US or Canadian airliner operating anywhere in the world, or any other airliner operating to or from the US or Canada. The last such event was the crash of a US airliner in Kentucky in August 2006. Since the introduction of jet airliner service to North America in 1958, there had been no previous two year period with zero airliner passenger fatalities.
To put this in a global context, Canada and the US account for about 60% of all airline traffic involving larger aircraft. In other words, 40% of these kinds of airline flights were responsible for 100% of the fatal passenger events. In 2008, the seven fatal events included one airliner from Europe, two each from Africa and Latin America, and two from countries of the former Soviet Union.
The fifteen other events in AirSafe.com's review were included either because of the amount of media attention they attracted, or because of the safety and security issues associated with the event. Among these 15 significant events were seven non-fatal jet airliner events. The most recent was a December 20 takeoff accident involving a Continental Airlines 737 in Denver. Although the plane experienced significant structural damage and a post-crash fire, all passengers and crew members successfully evacuated the aircraft.
The other significant airliner events included the first ever crash of a 777, two in-flight events involving Qantas, another two involving Air Canada, and a takeoff accident involving Iran Air.
The other eight significant events included an F/A-18 crash in San Diego, four fatal crashes involving small airliners, and three crashes involving celebrities. Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the head of the Unification Church, survived a helicopter crash in South Korea; Travis Barker, former drummer for the music group Blink-182, was one of two survivors of a crash of a chartered jet in South Carolina, and President-Elect Barack Obama was on board a plane that had a collision with a parked aircraft on the ground in Chicago.
For more information on all of these 2008 events, including links to incident reports, investigation updates, plane crash videos, and podcasts, please visit 2008.AirSafe.org. There you will also find links to additional information such as what you can bring on board, lists of banned items, instructions on how to successfully complain about your air travel experience, and fear of flying advice.
Listen to the Annual Review for 2008
As AirSafe.com looks back at the fatal and significant aviation safety events of last year, the most noticeable fact about this 13th annual review is that 2008 had fewer fatal airline events than any of the previous 12 years reviewed by AirSafe.com. The most was 19 fatal events in 1997, and the previous low was eight fatal events in 2003, 2006, and 2007.
AirSafe.com counts as a fatal event any airline flight where one or more passengers are killed, including those events involving hijacking, sabotage, and military action. This review counts only those events that occur on aircraft that can carry at least 10 passengers, and that are commonly used in regular airline service in North America, Western Europe, Australia, and Japan. Significant events are those events that were noteworthy for other reasons. Several of these 15 significant events were non-fatal events involving large jet airliners, but others included crashes involving celebrities, military aircraft, and smaller airline aircraft.
One of the more interesting observations from the 2008 review is that it represents the second consecutive year with no fatal airline events involving the US or Canada. That includes any US or Canadian airliner operating anywhere in the world, or any other airliner operating to or from the US or Canada. The last such event was the crash of a US airliner in Kentucky in August 2006. Since the introduction of jet airliner service to North America in 1958, there had been no previous two year period with zero airliner passenger fatalities.
To put this in a global context, Canada and the US account for about 60% of all airline traffic involving larger aircraft. In other words, 40% of these kinds of airline flights were responsible for 100% of the fatal passenger events. In 2008, the seven fatal events included one airliner from Europe, two each from Africa and Latin America, and two from countries of the former Soviet Union.
The fifteen other events in AirSafe.com's review were included either because of the amount of media attention they attracted, or because of the safety and security issues associated with the event. Among these 15 significant events were seven non-fatal jet airliner events. The most recent was a December 20 takeoff accident involving a Continental Airlines 737 in Denver. Although the plane experienced significant structural damage and a post-crash fire, all passengers and crew members successfully evacuated the aircraft.
The other significant airliner events included the first ever crash of a 777, two in-flight events involving Qantas, another two involving Air Canada, and a takeoff accident involving Iran Air.
The other eight significant events included an F/A-18 crash in San Diego, four fatal crashes involving small airliners, and three crashes involving celebrities. Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the head of the Unification Church, survived a helicopter crash in South Korea; Travis Barker, former drummer for the music group Blink-182, was one of two survivors of a crash of a chartered jet in South Carolina, and President-Elect Barack Obama was on board a plane that had a collision with a parked aircraft on the ground in Chicago.
For more information on all of these 2008 events, including links to incident reports, investigation updates, plane crash videos, and podcasts, please visit 2008.AirSafe.org. There you will also find links to additional information such as what you can bring on board, lists of banned items, instructions on how to successfully complain about your air travel experience, and fear of flying advice.
Listen to the Annual Review for 2008
17 December 2008
Crash of an F/A-18D in San Diego 8 December 2008
On 8 December 2008, a US Marine Corps F/A-18D jet based at the Miramar Marine Corps Air Station crashed during approach about two miles short of the runway. The pilot successfully ejected, but four people, two children, their mother, and grandmother were killed in one of the two houses destroyed by the jet. No one else on the ground was injured.
The investigation is ongoing, but reportedly the two-seat jet, flown by a single pilot on a training mission, had some kind of mechanical or flight control difficulty. The crash occurred as the pilot was returning from training on the carrier USS Lincoln, off the San Diego coast.
The F/A-18 has first entered operational service with the US Marines in 1983. The D model of the aircraft involved in the crash is used by the Marines as either a training or attack aircraft.
For the audio podcast from AirSafe.com, visit http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/show76-f-18.mp3.
The AirSafe.com video podcast is available below:
The following video was produced by Glenn Pew.
F/A-18 Crash 8 December 2008
The investigation is ongoing, but reportedly the two-seat jet, flown by a single pilot on a training mission, had some kind of mechanical or flight control difficulty. The crash occurred as the pilot was returning from training on the carrier USS Lincoln, off the San Diego coast.
The F/A-18 has first entered operational service with the US Marines in 1983. The D model of the aircraft involved in the crash is used by the Marines as either a training or attack aircraft.
For the audio podcast from AirSafe.com, visit http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/show76-f-18.mp3.
The AirSafe.com video podcast is available below:
The following video was produced by Glenn Pew.
F/A-18 Crash 8 December 2008
27 November 2008
Risks from Incapacitated Pilots and Pilots Who May Deliberately Crash Airplanes
What an Air Canada Event Says About Incapacitated Pilots
AirSafe.com reviews the investigation into a January 2008 incident where an Air Canada pilot became mentally incapacitated and had to be removed from the cockpit. Once the first officer was removed, the captain was able to safely land the aircraft. The event caused some in the aviation community to question whether this kind of incident may have led to serious problems in the past. While a review of the available incident and accident record by AirSafe.com revealed no proven cases of a mentally incapacitated pilot deliberately causing death or serious injury to passengers, there have been several cases where such behavior was suspected, and one case where a pilot crashed an airliner on purpose.
On 19 November 2008, the Air Accident Investigation Unit of the Irish Department of Transport released their incident report on a 28 January 2008 event involving an Air Canada flight. The captain declared an emergency and diverted to Shannon, Ireland due to the incapacitation of a flight crew member.
The Air Canada 767 was on a scheduled flight from Toronto to London and carried 146 passengers and nine crew members. After the first officer became incapacitated, the captain declared an emergency and completed the flight with the assistance of a flight attendant who was also a licensed pilot.
According to the incident report, the first officer had arrived late for his flight, with the captain having already completed all preflight preparations before the first officer's arrival.
During the early phases of the flight, the first officer left the flight deck several times for short periods, and made it clear to the captain that he was tired.
At one point, the captain allowed the first officer to take a controlled rest break in cockpit. Over an hour later, as the aircraft was near the midpoint of its ocean leg, the first officer began to display unusual behavior, including rambling and disjointed conversation.
The first officer left the cockpit again, and after he returned he didn't follow proper cockpit reentry procedures, and also neglected to fasten his seat belt. It became apparent to the captain that the first officer was suffering from an unknown medical condition which impaired his ability to carry out his required duties on the flight deck. The captain summoned the lead flight attendant to get the first officer removed from the cockpit. The lead flight attendant removed the first officer with the help of other flight attendants. One of those flight attendants sustained a wrist injury during the removal.
After the removal of the first officer, the captain had the lead flight attendant check to see if there were any flight crew members among the passengers. None were on board, but one of the flight attendants held a commercial multiengine license, and she assisted the captain as the flight diverted to Shannon, Ireland.
The first officer was hospitalized in Ireland for 11 days before being transferred by air ambulance back to Canada for further treatment.
News reports about this incident focused on the more dramatic elements of the event, such as what the first officer said after being removed from the cockpit, or how and where the first officer was restrained in the cabin. However, this incident raised more serious issues in the minds of many passengers, such as whether the mental state of a pilot should be a concern, or whether a mentally unstable flight crew member has ever caused serious injuries or deaths to airline passengers.
AirSafe.com not aware of any reliable, publicly available information about the number of pilots in the US or elsewhere who have been removed from flight status due to some kind of psychological or psychiatric issue.
The information is more clear when it comes to cases where an airliner crashed as a result of deliberate flight crew actions. Quite simply, there are no proven events where an airline pilot's deliberate actions or mental state led to the deaths of one or more passengers.
There has been at least one case of a pilot deliberately crashing an airliner.
On 11 October 1999, an Air Botswana pilot, who had been grounded for medical reasons, took off alone in an Air Botswana ATR42 airliner, and crashed it into two of the airline's other ATR42s on the ground. Fortunately, there was no one else in the other two aircraft. The pilot was the only person killed in this event.
There were two other crashes that many in the aviation community suspected were caused by pilot actions, but investigative authorities found no conclusive evidence that they were deliberately caused by one of the pilots. On 31 October 1999, an EgyptAir 767 en route from New York to Cairo, crashed in the Atlantic, killing all 217 on board. The NTSB concluded that the airplane's departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean was a result of the first officer's flight control inputs, but could not determine a reason for the first officer's actions.
On 17 December 1997, a SilkAir 737, traveling between Jakarta and Singapore, crashed into a river, killing all 104 people on board. While there was ample evidence that the captain was under great personal stress, and indications that both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were turned off prior to the crash, there was no evidence that either pilot deliberately brought the aircraft down.
These past events, as well as the most recent event involving Air Canada, remind the public that while there's always a possibility that a pilot would deliberately put passengers or aircraft at risk, there have been no passenger deaths or serious injuries associated with incidents where such behavior was proven.
For the latest news from AirSafe.com, including notices for new podcasts and updates on major accident investigations, visit http://airsafenews.com
A copy of the Air Canada incident report from the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit is available at http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/air-canada-jan-2008.pdf.
You can hear the associated podcast at:
http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/show75-air-canada-pilot.mp3
AirSafe.com reviews the investigation into a January 2008 incident where an Air Canada pilot became mentally incapacitated and had to be removed from the cockpit. Once the first officer was removed, the captain was able to safely land the aircraft. The event caused some in the aviation community to question whether this kind of incident may have led to serious problems in the past. While a review of the available incident and accident record by AirSafe.com revealed no proven cases of a mentally incapacitated pilot deliberately causing death or serious injury to passengers, there have been several cases where such behavior was suspected, and one case where a pilot crashed an airliner on purpose.
On 19 November 2008, the Air Accident Investigation Unit of the Irish Department of Transport released their incident report on a 28 January 2008 event involving an Air Canada flight. The captain declared an emergency and diverted to Shannon, Ireland due to the incapacitation of a flight crew member.
The Air Canada 767 was on a scheduled flight from Toronto to London and carried 146 passengers and nine crew members. After the first officer became incapacitated, the captain declared an emergency and completed the flight with the assistance of a flight attendant who was also a licensed pilot.
According to the incident report, the first officer had arrived late for his flight, with the captain having already completed all preflight preparations before the first officer's arrival.
During the early phases of the flight, the first officer left the flight deck several times for short periods, and made it clear to the captain that he was tired.
At one point, the captain allowed the first officer to take a controlled rest break in cockpit. Over an hour later, as the aircraft was near the midpoint of its ocean leg, the first officer began to display unusual behavior, including rambling and disjointed conversation.
The first officer left the cockpit again, and after he returned he didn't follow proper cockpit reentry procedures, and also neglected to fasten his seat belt. It became apparent to the captain that the first officer was suffering from an unknown medical condition which impaired his ability to carry out his required duties on the flight deck. The captain summoned the lead flight attendant to get the first officer removed from the cockpit. The lead flight attendant removed the first officer with the help of other flight attendants. One of those flight attendants sustained a wrist injury during the removal.
After the removal of the first officer, the captain had the lead flight attendant check to see if there were any flight crew members among the passengers. None were on board, but one of the flight attendants held a commercial multiengine license, and she assisted the captain as the flight diverted to Shannon, Ireland.
The first officer was hospitalized in Ireland for 11 days before being transferred by air ambulance back to Canada for further treatment.
News reports about this incident focused on the more dramatic elements of the event, such as what the first officer said after being removed from the cockpit, or how and where the first officer was restrained in the cabin. However, this incident raised more serious issues in the minds of many passengers, such as whether the mental state of a pilot should be a concern, or whether a mentally unstable flight crew member has ever caused serious injuries or deaths to airline passengers.
AirSafe.com not aware of any reliable, publicly available information about the number of pilots in the US or elsewhere who have been removed from flight status due to some kind of psychological or psychiatric issue.
The information is more clear when it comes to cases where an airliner crashed as a result of deliberate flight crew actions. Quite simply, there are no proven events where an airline pilot's deliberate actions or mental state led to the deaths of one or more passengers.
There has been at least one case of a pilot deliberately crashing an airliner.
On 11 October 1999, an Air Botswana pilot, who had been grounded for medical reasons, took off alone in an Air Botswana ATR42 airliner, and crashed it into two of the airline's other ATR42s on the ground. Fortunately, there was no one else in the other two aircraft. The pilot was the only person killed in this event.
There were two other crashes that many in the aviation community suspected were caused by pilot actions, but investigative authorities found no conclusive evidence that they were deliberately caused by one of the pilots. On 31 October 1999, an EgyptAir 767 en route from New York to Cairo, crashed in the Atlantic, killing all 217 on board. The NTSB concluded that the airplane's departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean was a result of the first officer's flight control inputs, but could not determine a reason for the first officer's actions.
On 17 December 1997, a SilkAir 737, traveling between Jakarta and Singapore, crashed into a river, killing all 104 people on board. While there was ample evidence that the captain was under great personal stress, and indications that both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were turned off prior to the crash, there was no evidence that either pilot deliberately brought the aircraft down.
These past events, as well as the most recent event involving Air Canada, remind the public that while there's always a possibility that a pilot would deliberately put passengers or aircraft at risk, there have been no passenger deaths or serious injuries associated with incidents where such behavior was proven.
For the latest news from AirSafe.com, including notices for new podcasts and updates on major accident investigations, visit http://airsafenews.com
A copy of the Air Canada incident report from the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit is available at http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/air-canada-jan-2008.pdf.
You can hear the associated podcast at:
http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/show75-air-canada-pilot.mp3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
