Flight Safety Information December 1, 2010 - No. 246 In This Issue American Airlines 737 overshoots in Montreal Man accused of poking, shoving flight attendant on Miami-bound flight Survey: LaGuardia Once Again Worst Airport In U.S MTSU aerospace department to host national aviation conference American Airlines Jet Slides Off Runway FAA clears ITT-deployed ADS-B system for nationwide rollout Lone co-pilot 'panicked' after putting Indian 737 into dive Boeing 787 struck by fire heads back to Seattle Mis-selected flaps led Finnair A320 to drop below glideslope American Airlines 737 overshoots in Montreal In a story developing this hour, an American Airlines 737-800 has overshot runway 24R at Montreal's Trudeau International. The flight is said to be American Airlines flight 802 from Dallas/Ft. Worth International. Local news is reporting that the plane went off the end of the runway and 200 (see update) people were evacuated from the airplane. So far, no injuries have been reported. We will update this information as we receive it. Update: A local news source has since reported that, according to witnesses, dozens of ambulances and fire equipment are on scene. Still no injuries reported. Update: In an official update from American Airlines, they have comfirmed that the plane had gone into the mud at the end of the runway. They reported that all passengers where evacuated and where safe, American Airlines has no reports of injuries at this time. Update: American Airlines has said that 105 passengers, 2 pilots, and 4 flight attendants have evacuated the plane using front stairs. AA reports no major damage to the aircraft. No injuries reported. Update: According to local news media in Dallas, American Airlines spokesman Billy Sanez has said, "After landing, the plane went off the runway into the grass." Only the front tires went off the runway into the grass and mud, he added. "There was no abrupt stop, its a very minor situation," said Sanez. http://www.runway2right.com/?p=104 Back to Top Man accused of poking, shoving flight attendant on Miami-bound flight A passenger on an American Airlines plane bound for Miami was being interviewed Tuesday after he was accused of shoving and poking a flight attendant during the flight, according to authorities. The incident happened during the second half of the trip from Guatemala City to Miami, American Airlines spokesman Tim Smith said. The flight attendant said something that upset the passenger, who was seated in first class, Smith said. He responded by yelling at the flight attendant. The flight attendant then told the passenger to sit and walked away, Smith said. The passenger followed him into the kitchen area near the front of the Boeing 737-800, Smith said. ``The passenger followed him there, continued to verbally insult him and ultimately poked and shoved the flight attendant there in the galley,'' Smith said. The captain noticed the commotion and told everyone to return to their seats. The unruly passenger eventually sat down, Smith said. The flight landed safely shortly before 4:30 p.m. at Miami International Airport, where the passenger was met by the authorities. The FBI is investigating, Special Agent Michael Leverock said. http://www.miamiherald.com/ Back to Top Survey: LaGuardia Once Again Worst Airport In U.S. Zagat's Comes Down Hard On Once Great Hub Of Air Travel NEW YORK (CBS 2) - And there's yet another unwelcome badge of distinction for LaGuardia airport. A new survey rates it as the worst airport in the country - again. And to think, once upon a time - 1960 to be exact - LaGuardia was voted the greatest airport in the world by the worldwide aviation community. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. Zagat's annual air travel survey of 8,000 travelers gives it a rating of 6.18 out of 30, which means LaGuardia is, for the fourth time in a row, the lowest rated airport in the U.S. Travelers at LaGuardia on Tuesday were a little bit kinder, maybe because the place wasn't very crowded. "No, not at all. I don't know, several come to mind that are definitely less favorable to travel through than this. This is easy," Matt Zimmerman of Colorado told CBS 2's Don Dahler. "It's often a tough place to get in and out of," added Jeff Glatzer of Manhattan. "I don't consider it to be a great airport. My gate always seems to be at the very end and my luggage takes a long time to arrive," said Gina Zehr of Chicago. Ted Zagat said reviewers blame the design. "LaGuardia has two or three real problems. One, it's one of the oldest terminals. It was built under Robert Moses in the 1930s I believe. Number two, it is separate. It has two main terminals that are quite far apart, relatively," Zagat said. LaGuardia's sister airports didn't fare much better. John F. Kennedy and Newark Liberty ranked only a few spots higher on the list. Part of the problem is LaGuardia was expanded over the years in a piecemeal fashion. So last April, they hired consultants to take a look at demolishing the whole place and starting all over again. Until then, travelers will have to make the most of narrow passageways, crowded waiting areas, and more surveys confirming what everyone already knows. If you're curious, Portland International Airport got top honors. LaGuardia does have one advantage over the other airports in this area - it's a lot closer to Manhattan. The other airports at the bottom, LAX, Philadelphia and Miami. Back to Top MTSU aerospace department to host national aviation conference MTSU's Department of Aerospace will serve as host for the first National Conference on General Aviation Trends in China, Wednesday and Thursday, in the Donald McDonald Hangar inside the university's Flight Operations Center at Murfreesboro Airport. "We're extremely excited about this conference, as it is one of the first in the United States that will have members of one of the largest universities in China here to learn about U.S. general aviation," said Wayne Dornan, chair of the department. "We have a distinguished list of U.S. speakers that will lend their expertise to the Chinese officials. ... I am unaware of any such gathering that has taken place in the United States were high-ranking officials from both countries interact on aviation." The conference is closed to the general public, but media are welcomed. http://www.dnj.com/article/20101130/NEWS01/101130017 Back to Top American Airlines Jet Slides Off Runway By ANDY PASZTOR And PETER SANDERS (WSJ) An American Airlines jetliner with 115 people aboard slid off a runway after landing in Montreal Tuesday night, but an airline spokesman said there appeared to be no injuries or any damage to the fuselage of the Boeing 737 aircraft. The twin-engine plane, arriving from Dallas-Forth Worth International Airport just before 8 p.m. local time, ended up with portions of it landing gear in the grass near the runway, according to a spokesman for the airline, a unit of AMR Corp. The spokesman said the passengers on American Flight 802 deplaned safely through a door and were taken by buses to the terminal. Weather reports around the time of the incident showed light rain and misty conditions. The American spokesman said early reports indicated that the landing gear didn't collapse and no part of the fuselage was touching the ground. The reasons for the incident weren't immediately clear. In recent years aviation-crash investigators have increasingly focused on the dangers of aircraft running off runways-frequently while landing in windy or wet conditions-as one of the most serious safety hazards facing airlines around the world. Such incidents, called runway overruns or excursions, occur far more frequently than aircraft entering or crossing an incorrect runway, which poses collision threats. But excursions generally result in fewer injuries or deaths. American has had some serious runway incidents in the past year. In December 2009, an American jet scraped a wingtip and partially veered off the runway while landing in poor visibility at Charlotte, N.C. While none of the crew or the 110 passengers aboard that flight was injured, the Federal Aviation Administration treated the event as an accident. Later the same month, another American Airlines jet crashed while landing in stormy weather in Kingston, Jamaica, highlighting the challenge of keeping big jets from running off slick runways in bad weather. Dozens of passengers received minor injuries and seven were hospitalized after the Boeing 737-800, one of the airline's newest models, skidded off the Jamaican runway. The plane was carrying 148 passengers and six crew members. The same Boeing model was involved in Tuesday's incident Investigators believe that heavy rain, combined with a tailwind and water pooling on the runway, were important factors in the botched Kingston landing by an experienced crew. Back to Top FAA clears ITT-deployed ADS-B system for nationwide rollout WHITE PLAINS, N.Y., 30 Nov. 2010. ITT Corp. in White Plains, N.Y., received clearance from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for nationwide deployment of the satellite-based air traffic surveillance system, Automatic Dependent Surveillance -- Broadcast (ADS-B). ITT provides radios, routers, and radio control stations for the program. This means that air traffic controllers can now more accurately separate aircraft in the U.S. with ADS-B coverage by displaying aircraft tracked through the new ADS-B global positioning technology, as well as displaying traditional radar monitoring. Benefits include more accurate information and more rapid updates than current systems, says John Kefaliotis, ITT's vice president of next generation transportation systems. "We will be able to deploy surveillance where never before such as on oil platforms," he says. Since 2007, ITT has been under contract to the FAA to deploy the ADS-B ground infrastructure in support of the FAA's overall Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) initiative to modernize the U.S. National Airspace System. For more on ADS-B, see related story ADS-B In brings air traffic management to pilots in the cockpit. Commissioning the system follows ADS-B implementation by ITT at four sites in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, Louisville, Ky., and Philadelphia. The "ADS-B technology we provided for these four sites is for critical services also known as surveillance services, Kefaliotis says. Critical means critical to air traffic control, he adds. The next step involves essential services, which cover Traffic Information Services- Broadcast (TIS-B) and Flight Information Services-Broadcast (FIS-B). TIS-B provides air traffic situational awareness from ground sources such as radar and FIS-B provides information such as weather reports. For this program test sites was determined due to the variety of operational environments and challenges, Kefaliotis says. Technology was then deployed to that test site, and then it was evaluated and approved for nationwide deployment, Kefaliotis says. The ADS-B radios "We've got 300 radio stations completed and will have 800 by 2013" when the program is complete, he adds. The radios provided by ITT are not commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS), Kefaliotis says. They were designed with stringent FAA requirements for receiving airborne data reports, he adds. ADS-B radios are less expensive than radar radios. The radios operate on a frequency of 1090 MHz, which was allocated for this radio, he continues. ITT's radio architecture enables the radios to distribute information to any ATC facility, he says. ITT has three major radio control systems set up nationwide to enable the network -- Ashburn, Va., Dallas, and Redwood City, Calif. The radio control stations provide central processing and data distribution services, he says. Some installations will have backup radar control but some will not, he notes. For those aircraft not equipped with ADS-B the ATC facilities can merge ADS-B data with radar data creating a TIS-B capability, Kefaliotis says. for those not equipped with ADS-B, he continues. ITT's ADS-B team includes: AT&T, which provides the network; Thales, which provides the radios and multi-sensor tracker; WSI, who is the weather service provider; Sunhillo, which provides the service delivery point (SDP) equipment; Pragmatics, which provides software development support; and SAIC, which provides engineering and implementation support. http://www.militaryaerospace.com/ Back to Top Lone co-pilot 'panicked' after putting Indian 737 into dive Investigators have detailed an extraordinary event in which an Air India Express Boeing 737-800 was put into a steep dive moments after the captain was locked out of the cockpit. While the twin-jet was cruising at flight level 370, en route to Pune from Dubai, the captain left the cockpit for the washroom. Almost as soon as he was gone, the aircraft started to pitch nose-down, after forward pressure on the co-pilot's control column. India's DGAC attributes this to the co-pilot's adjusting his seat forward and inadvertently knocking the control column. Flight-data recorder information shows that, after momentary relaxation, the forward pressure on the column increased and the jet pitched to 5° nose-down, before the pitch command briefly transitioned to nose-up. But another "sharp" nose-down command followed, says the inquiry report, and the forward control column force gradually increased. The 737 passed through 13° nose-down and an 'overspeed' warning showed the jet's airspeed had risen to Mach 0.82. As the airspeed increased the autothrottle reduced thrust in an attempt to keep the aircraft under control. Outside the cockpit the captain had felt the change in pitch and attempted to re-enter the flight deck. There was no response from the co-pilot to a request from cabin crew to open the secure cockpit door, and the captain had to resort to an emergency code to gain access. He was away for about 40s in total. Upon entering the cockpit he saw the aircraft was pitched about 26° nose-down. He responded by pulling on his control column - although the flight-data information shows that, while he was pulling with 130lb (580N) nose-up force, the co-pilot's column was experiencing an opposite pressure of 200lb nose-down. Shortly afterwards the two columns "rejoined" and the aircraft - which reached a maximum speed of Mach 0.888 - began to pitch nose-up, having lost 6,800ft in altitude during the event. Control regained, the flight continued without further incident. An admission of being "panic stricken" is given as the co-pilot's explanation for his failure to open the cockpit door. The inquiry report states that he attempted to contact the captain four or five times using an attendant call button. As the aircraft departed from its planned altitude, as a result of the pressure on the control column, the increase in speed and the warning sounds from the aircraft caused a "panic situation". The co-pilot "couldn't control the aircraft [or] open the cockpit door and answer the cabin call", the report says: "During the pitch-down attitude he tried to leave the control column to open the cockpit door but the aircraft pitch increased further and altitude [was being lost] rapidly." It adds that the 25-year-old co-pilot - who had 968h on type - claimed to have forgotten the procedure to return to the assigned flight level. While none of the 113 passengers was injured during the 26 May event, there had been a commotion in the cabin as a result of the upset, with items spilling into the aisle. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top Boeing 787 struck by fire heads back to Seattle The second 787 test aircraft is set to return to Seattle, the first flight the aircraft has undertaken since a 9 November fire that threw the schedule of Boeing's flagship program into disarray. ZA002 will return 30 November to Boeing Field in Seattle, Washington, home to the 787's flight test operations, joining five other grounded test aircraft dispersed between Boeing Field and the company's Everett facility. Boeing halted flight test operations immediately following the 9 November fire that occurred while the aircraft was on final approach to Laredo, Texas following an extended test of the fuel tank's nitrogen generation system (NGS). The fire, which was unrelated to the NGS testing, started in the P100 power distribution panel in the aircraft's aft electronic equipment bay, destroying the panel, igniting nearby insulation blankets and causing damage to the aircraft's composite primary structure. Boeing says: "Maintenance technicians replaced the damaged P100 power distribution panel, repaired damage to interior composite structure and installed new insulation material." The airframer adds: "The team in Laredo, Texas, has completed a series of ground test operations and inspections to validate the repairs." The return of ZA002 will mark the reunification of the test fleet at Boeing's commercial base of operations. ZA001 and ZA005, returned to Seattle earlier in the month from remote sites in Rapid City, South Dakota and Victorville, California, respectively. Additionally, ZA003 and ZA004 have alternated spots at Boeing Field and Everett for maintenance operations. Boeing has continued ground testing of the fleet during a FAA-imposed suspension of 787 flight testing. Boeing is currently evaluating its 787 program schedule as it makes provisions for updates to its power distribution software and minor hardware changes to the power distribution panels to prevent foreign object debris, which is believed to have caused the fire. The airframer says the assessment will be ready in "several weeks". The first 787 is currently scheduled for delivery to Japan's All Nippon Airways in the middle of the first quarter 2011, but that target will likely slip well into next year. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Back to Top Mis-selected flaps led Finnair A320 to drop below glideslope Finnish investigators have disclosed that a Finnair Airbus A320 descended far below the glidepath to Helsinki after the first officer unintentionally selected flaps-up instead of full-flap on approach. The aircraft had been approaching Helsinki Vantaa Airport's runway 22L following a service from Budapest on 21 May. Accident Investigation Board of Finland says the captain requested full flap but that, instead, the first officer selected the flaps-up position. The aircraft's speed, as a result, was 14kt below the minimum required for the configuration. While the first officer realised the error within a short time, the aircraft descended 600ft during the incident when, under normal circumstances, it should only have descended 250ft. The inquiry report from the accident board states that, during the recovery, the twin- jet sank "considerably below the glidepath", to a height of 635ft above the ground. Its crew aborted the approach and landed without further incident a few minutes later. Investigators subsequently advised Finnair to double the minimum height for stabilising visual approaches, from 500ft to 1,000ft. Source: Air Transport Intelligence news Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC