Flight Safety Information - January 25, 2021 No. 018 In This Issue : Incident: LOT E195 at Da Nang on Jan 24th 2021, fuel leak : Incident: Vistara A20N at Patna on Jan 23rd 2021, bird strike : Incident: Capital Beijing A321 near Beijing on Jan 24th 2021, cargo smoke indication : Incident: Ryan Services SF34 at Anchorage on Jan 21st 2021, windshield on fire : Canadair CL-600 Challenger 600 - Runway Excursion (Mexico) : Report: USAF Global Express crew shut down wrong engine after failure : Airlines have banned more than 2,500 passengers for not wearing masks - here are the carriers that have booted the most : What Makes An Aircraft An “ER” Plane? : Southwest Airlines Pledges To Vaccinate All Its Employees : Ethiopian Airlines Urged To Reject 737 MAX Compensation Offer : Airbus commercial jet production expected to reach about 620 aircraft in 2021 : Air Force Offers Early Outs, Pushes More Toward Reserve Amid Record-High Retention : SpaceX launches a record 143 satellites on one rocket, aces landing : Safety Degree from Florida Institute of Technology Becomes a GSP Qualified Academic Program : 2021 Aircraft Cabin Air Conference Incident: LOT E195 at Da Nang on Jan 24th 2021, fuel leak A LOT Polish Airlines Embraer ERJ-195 on behalf of Bamboo Airways, registration SP-LNH performing flight QH-1061 from Da Nang to Con Dao (Vietnam), had just levelled off at cruise level 300 when the crew declared emergency and decided to return to Da Nang reporting a fuel leak. The aircraft landed safely back at Da Nang's runway 35R about 40 minutes after departure. A replacement LOT Embraer ERJ-195 registration SP-LNM reached Con Dao with a delay of 3 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Da Nang about 16 hours after landing back. LOT leased three ERJ-195s out to Bamboo Airways, the aircraft received the paint scheme of Bamboo. SP-LNH and SP-LNI positioned to Vietnam in November 2020, SP-LNM positioned to Vietnam on Jan 5th 2021. http://avherald.com/h?article=4e218151&opt=0 Incident: Vistara A20N at Patna on Jan 23rd 2021, bird strike A Vistara Airbus A320-200N, registration VT-TNW performing flight UK-717 from Bangalore to Patna (India) with 65 passengers and 7 crew, landed on Patna's runway 25 when during touchdown a bird collided with the aircraft. The aircraft rolled out without further incident and taxied to the apron. The airline reported the aircraft received minor damage to an engine (LEAP) as result of the bird strike on landing. The occurrence aircraft was able to depart for the return flight after about 8 hours after landing. http://avherald.com/h?article=4e216fd5&opt=0 Incident: Capital Beijing A321 near Beijing on Jan 24th 2021, cargo smoke indication A Capital Airlines Beijing Airbus A321-200, registration B-8189 performing flight JD-5166 from Harbin to Guangzhou (China), was enroute at 9800 meters (FL321) about 30nm southeast of Beijing's Capital Airport when the crew received a cargo smoke indication and decided to divert to Beijing's Capital Airport. The aircraft landed safely on Capital Airport's runway 36R about 25 minutes later. The airline reported the crew received a cargo smoke indication and acted according to the relevant procedures. The aircraft landed safely, the passengers were "settled", another aircraft is going to continue the flight. First inspection of the occurrence aircraft suggests the smoke indication was false. http://avherald.com/h?article=4e217d61&opt=0 Incident: Ryan Services SF34 at Anchorage on Jan 21st 2021, windshield on fire A Ryan Air Services Saab 340A, registration N907RA performing flight 7S-907 from Kodiak,AK to Anchorage,AK (USA) with 2 crew, was on approach to Anchorage's runway 07R when the right hand windshield heating element caught fire. The crew used fire extinguishers to put the fire out and continued for a safe landing on runway 07R maintaining routine communication and taxied to the Fedex Hangar. The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT RIGHT WINDSHIELD HEATING ELEMENT CAUGHT FIRE AND FIRE EXTINGUISHER WAS USED TO PUT THE FLAMES OUT, ANCHORAGE, AK." The aircraft received "unknown" damage, the occurrence was rated an incident. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground about 18 hours after landing (however, according to flights performed in the last week - only involving the rotation Anchorage-Kodiak-Anchorage - probably is scheduled to do the flight to Kodiak again on 22nd with a scheduled departure about 21 hours after landing). https://flightaware.com/live/flight/RYA907/history/20210121/2030Z/PADQ/PANC http://avherald.com/h?article=4e201c9e&opt=0 Canadair CL-600 Challenger 600 - Runway Excursion (Mexico) Date: Saturday 23 January 2021 Type: Canadair CL-600 Challenger 600 Operator: Global Avionics LLC Registration: N275JP C/n / msn: 1036 First flight: 1981 Engines: 2 Lycoming ALF502L-2 Crew: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 2 Passengers: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 0 Total: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 2 Aircraft damage: Unknown Location: Los Mochis-Federal Airport (LMM) ( Mexico) Phase: Takeoff (TOF) Nature: Unknown Departure airport: Los Mochis-Federal Airport (LMM/MMLM), Mexico Destination airport: ? Narrative: Canadair CL-600S Challenger N275JP, suffered a runway excursion at Los Mochis Airport (LMM/MMLM), Sinaloa, Mexico. One of the two pilots received minor injuries. The aircraft, which had undergoing repairs for a month, was trying to conduct a test flight when directional control was lost on takeoff. https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20210123-1 Report: USAF Global Express crew shut down wrong engine after failure Status: Final Date: Monday 27 January 2020 Time: 13:09 Type: Silhouette image of generic GLEX model; specific model in this crash may look slightly different Bombardier E-11A (Global Express) Operator: United States Air Force - USAF Registration: 11-9358 C/n / msn: 9358 First flight: 2009 Crew: Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2 Passengers: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 0 Total: Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2 Aircraft damage: Destroyed Aircraft fate: Written off (damaged beyond repair) Location: 39 km (24.4 mls) NNW of Sharana FOB ( Afghanistan) Phase: En route (ENR) Nature: Military Departure airport: Kandahar Airport (KDH/OAKN), Afghanistan Destination airport: Kandahar Airport (KDH/OAKN), Afghanistan Narrative: A Bombardier E-11A operated by the U.S. Air Force crashed in the Deh Yak district in Afghanistan, killing both pilots. The aircraft, part of 430th EECS wing, was outfitted with a Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) and operated as a commincations-relay platform out of Kandahar Airport, Afghanistan. At the time of the accident the aircraft operated on a combat sortie as well as a Mission Qualification Training for the first officer. Takeoff occurred at 11:05 local time. The flight proceeded to the assigned orbit using standard departure/climb procedures. The crew assumed a circular orbit just west of Kabul at 42,000 feet altitude at about 11:36. At 12:50, the crew requested and was cleared by ATC to climb from 42,000 feet altitude to 43,000 feet altitude. The engine revolutions per minute (RPMs) advanced and the crew initiated the climb with the autopilot, gaining about 300 feet. At 12:50:52, a fan blade broke free and separated from the N1 first-stage turbofan of the left engine, causing major damage and resulting in the immediate shutdown of that engine by the Electronic Engine Controller (EEC), a subsystem of the Full Authority Digital Engine Controller (FADEC). This was accompanied by a bang. Simultaneous with the bang, the CVR recording stopped. Within one to two seconds after the initial event, the autothrottles disengaged automatically. The autopilot was engaged and it remained engaged. Bank angles remained essentially constant, consistent with a circular orbit, and the aircraft descended from an altitude of 42,300 feet to 41,000 feet. Ten seconds after the catastrophic left engine failure, the crew retarded both throttles to just less than halfway (14 degrees; total throttle range is from 0 – 40 degrees) for one second, then slightly advancing the left throttle separately (26 degrees) for one second, then retarding it to align with the right throttle (both at 16 degrees) for one second, and finally splitting the throttles to advance the left throttle (to 31 degrees) while retarding the right to idle (0 degrees). Nine seconds after moving the right throttle to idle, the crew placed the right engine run switch to off, shutting down the right engine. Finally, at 12:51:19, the left throttle was advanced to full power (40 degrees), briefly cycled then brought to idle. At 12:51:23, both throttles were advanced from idle to full power. It is likely the crew’s first actions, including the shutdown, were hastened by a sense of urgency due to aircraft vibrations and other auditory/sensory cues, reinforced by the startle response. The crew announced to Kabul ATC that they had lost both engines and that they intended to proceed to Kandahar, which was well outside the E-11A glide capabilities. This intent suggests that the crew was confident of airstarting one or both engines. While the crew would have waited, in accordance with the checklist, to 30,000 feet to attempt an airstart, an airstart of the right engine should have been successful, whether accomplished with windmilling airspeed or with the assistance of the APU. However, airstarts of the left engine would have failed due to the original damage. There is no DFDR data to definitively confirm whether an engine airstart attempt was made. At 13:03:30, the crew announced to ATC that they were going to land at FOB Sharana. The aircraft continued to glide without engine power and was not able to reach Sharana. At approximately 13:09, the aircraft impacted the ground approximately 21 NM (39 km) short of Sharana, on a heading of roughly 140 degrees, consistent with a direct flight path towards Sharana. The terrain was unpopulated, largely flat, and covered in snow. The wings show the slats out and the flaps appear to be extended, suggesting that the aircraft had been configured for, and presumably slowed for, landing. It is likely that the crew attempted to make a forced landing. While the terrain was largely flat, the aircraft impacted berms and ditches, roughly estimated between 3-6 feet high. Weather at Sharana was reported to have 1000 foot ceilings, and pilot testimony confirms approximately 1000 foot ceilings in the vicinity of the accident site. Accordingly, the crew may have had less than a minute to maneuver after exiting the clouds and seeing the terrain. It appears that while the aircraft touched down, it impacted a smaller berm almost immediately, then more completely impacted the ground and skidded to a halt in approximately 340 meters. During this time the wings were ripped from the aircraft, and subsequently much of the cockpit and cabin were destroyed by fire. Probable Cause: The Accident Investigation Board (AIB) President found by a preponderance of the evidence that the cause of the mishap was the MC’s error in analyzing which engine had catastrophically failed (left engine). This error resulted in the MC’s decision to shutdown the operable right engine creating a dual engine out emergency. The AIB President also found by a preponderance of the evidence that the MC’s failure to airstart the right engine and their decision to recover the MA to KAF substantially contributed to the mishap. Accident investigation: cover Investigating agency: USAF AIB Status: Investigation completed Duration: 293 days (10 months) Accident number: final report Download report: Final report https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20200127-1 Airlines have banned more than 2,500 passengers for not wearing masks - here are the carriers that have booted the most More than 2,500 passengers have been banned from US airlines for non-compliance with mask policies. Delta Air Lines banned 880 passengers, including six on a flight where Mitt Romney was harassed. President Joe Biden signed a mask mandate for air travelers on his first full day in office. Newly inaugurated President Joe Biden just signed an executive order to mandate masks when flying travelers but it's clear that airlines haven't been waiting on the government for guidance. New data from the country's largest airlines reveal that more than 2,500 passengers have been banned since the spring for violating onboard mask policies, and the list grows larger every day. Airlines have been turning to mask enforcement as a way to regain confidence in air travel by eliminating fears of the onboard spread of COVID-19. A handful of banned passengers, in their eyes, outweighs the loss of thousands of travelers due to an in-flight outbreak, especially as daily passenger numbers are still more than 50% less than 2019's, according to the Transportation Security Administration. Read more: Airline workers have lower rates of COVID-19 than the general population - and airline CEOs say it's proof that flying is safe Passengers banned by these airlines will typically be welcomed back once the pandemic ends and masks are no longer required. Until then, the thousands of passengers banned by a particular airline will have to find a new one to frequent. Here's how US airlines are stacking up when it comes to enforcing mask policies. Allegiant Air Allegiant Air was the last major US airline to require its passengers to wear masks while flying and while the ultra-low-cost carrier finally relented, a spokesperson told Insider that only "approximately 15" flyers have been banned for non-compliance and "egregious violations," as of January 14, 2021. Masks are available upon request at Allegiant airport counters or onboard the aircraft, a policy that the airline says helps minimize the number of banned passengers. "We have found this approach to be quite effective generally, and that the great majority of passengers support and comply with the policy," a spokesperson told Insider. "For the most part, those few who may need a reminder in flight also comply with the policy." Hawaiian Airlines Hawaiian Airlines has banned 56 passengers for mask non-compliance as of mid-January, a spokesperson confirmed to Insider. Flights between the mainland and Hawaii are among the most scrutinized in the US as the 50th state requires proof of a negative COVID-19 test for entry. JetBlue Airways JetBlue Airways has banned a total of 115 passengers as of January 20, 2021. "We are extremely grateful to our crewmembers who are focused on ensuring our customers are complying with our face covering requirements and to our customers who tell us how important this requirement is toward keeping one another healthy and safe," an airline spokesperson told Insider. Alaska Airlines Alaska Airlines has banned 328 passengers as of January 22, 2021, after experiencing an uptick following the US Capitol riots. A total of 14 passengers were banned on a single flight from Washington, DC to Seattle for non-compliance, as well as rowdy behavior. A soccer-style yellow card system was implemented at the airline to help discretely notify passengers that they're running afoul of mask rules. Spirit Airlines Spirit Airlines has banned "about 400" passengers for mask non-compliance, a spokesperson told Insider. Despite its status as America's most loved-to-hate airline, Insider found on an August Spirit Airlines flight that the airline was being proactive in aiding social distancing when possible. Flight attendants were moving passengers to empty rows and while middle seats weren't formally blocked, an effort was made to limit passengers to two per row. Frontier Airlines Frontier Airlines is reporting over 500 passengers have been added to a "prevent departure list" as of January 14, 2021, due to mask non-compliance, a spokesperson told Insider. Passengers are required to wear masks for the duration of the flight and submit to a temperature check at boarding. United Airlines United Airlines is reporting 613 banned passengers for mask non-compliance as of January 15, 2021, a spokesperson told Insider. Around 60 passengers on the list had been banned the week of the Capitol riots alone as United has a hub at Washington Dulles International Airport near the nation's capital. Delta Air Lines Delta Air Lines tops the list at 880 passengers banned for mask non-compliance as of January 14, 202, a spokesperson confirmed to Insider. Masks are required at every step in the Delta travel experience starting at check-in, as Insider found on a tour of Delta's operation at John F. Kennedy International Airport. The airline saw additional incidents in the days leading up to and after the Capitol riots. A flight from Salt Lake City to Washington saw six passengers that were harassing Senator Mitt Romney banned for mask non-compliance. Most passengers on Delta's no-fly will be allowed to travel once the mask rule is phased out but some who committed offenses beyond just not wearing a mask will be banned indefinitely. American Airlines, Southwest Airlines, and Sun Country Airlines did not provide specific data on how many passengers were banned due to mask non-compliance. Minneapolis-based Sun Country, however, did report an increase in mask-related incidents following the Capitol riots, despite a lack of flights to Washington. https://www.yahoo.com/news/airlines-banned-more-2-500-132500955.html What Makes An Aircraft An “ER” Plane? Commercial aircraft today can cover some seriously impressive distances without the need to stop to refuel. As airlines have looked to expand their long-range operations, aircraft manufacturers have developed ER (‘Extended Range’) variants of their planes to increasingly facilitate their customers’ needs. But what exactly goes into developing an ER variant? A popular development with Boeing Since the 1980s, American manufacturer Boeing, in particular, has become known for developing ER versions of certain variants of its airliner families. The first family that it introduced ER versions to was the 767, its medium to long-range widebody twinjet airliner. The original model, the 767-200, entered service in 1982 with US legacy carrier United Airlines. However, the -200ER followed with Israeli flag carrier El Al just two years later, in 1984. As Boeing developed stretched versions of the 767, it also produced corresponding ER sub-variants. In the case of the -300, it was, once again, only two years between the original (Japan Airlines, 1986) and ER (American Airlines, 1988) versions being launched. The longest model of the 767 was the -400ER, which Continental Airlines launched in 2000. In this instance, there was no standard -400, and the -400ER, therefore, became the only version of this variant. Other Boeing models also received the ER treatment, even if only on a small scale. The iconic 747-400, for example, also saw a very limited -400ER sub-variant. Boeing produced just six of these for Australian flag carrier Qantas in the early 2000s. The extended range provided the airline with a safety net on its lengthy transpacific routes. Qantas retired its first 747-400ER last February, one of the first of a series of high-profile 747 retirements throughout 2020. Meanwhile, the Boeing 777-200 had both ER and LR (‘Long Range’) variants developed from the standard model. The -200ER entered service with British Airways in 1997, three years after the original -200 first took to the skies with United in 1994. Meanwhile, the stretched 777-300 had its first delivery to Air France in 2004. This has since become the best-selling 777 variant. Not just a widebody phenomenon Boeing’s ER models are not solely confined to widebody designs. Indeed, the largest and newest model of its 737NG (‘Next Generation’) family is none other than the 737-900ER. Boeing developed this variant to give airlines a narrowbody aircraft with a similar range and capacity to the now-discontinued 757. It also developed and launched the 737-700ER in the mid-2000s. This aircraft has similar specifications to the Airbus A319LR. One can also find ER aircraft in certain regional jet families. One example of this is Brazilian manufacturer Embraer’s ERJ series. On a basic level, jets from this family are split into ERJ135, 140, and 145 models. However, all of these also have both ER and LR variants. This gives operators an edge when operating longer regional routes with lower demand levels. But, now that we have seen the sorts of aircraft that can have an ER version, what exactly is it that manufacturers do to a plane to certify it as ‘extended range?’ Additional fuel tanks Perhaps the most obvious way of increasing an aircraft’s range is to correspondingly increase its fuel capacity. This is generally achieved by installing additional fuel tanks, and it can have a significant impact on an aircraft’s overall range. Using the example of the 767-200ER, Boeing’s first extended range model, we can see that, rather than adding auxiliary fuel tanks, the American manufacturer instead utilized the space it already had in the existing design. Specifically, this entailed using the center tank’s dry dock as extra space for carrying fuel. The result was an increased range of 12,200 km (6,590 NM). This represented a 5,000 km (2,700 NM) increase over the standard model. Meanwhile, the Boeing 747-400ER can partly attribute its extended range to the presence of an additional 12,300-liter fuel tank in the forward cargo hold. Boeing did give customers the option of a second additional tank, but Qantas was the only customer for the -400ER, and chose one. The result was an 800km (430 NM) increase in the -400ER’s range. While this is not as significant an increase as the 767-200ER, the aircraft could also carry nearly seven tonnes of extra cargo compared to the standard 747-400. This brings us nicely onto a crucial aspect of developing extra range models. With the burden of the additional fuel to consider, how do manufacturers increase an aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight? Achieving a higher MTOW There are many ways in which an aircraft manufacturer can increase its MTOW to safely carry the weight of additional fuel and tanks. Staying with Qantas’s 747-400ER aircraft, we can see that Boeing strengthened areas such as its fuselage and wings. It also reinforced the landing gear, as well as fitting it with larger tires. The result was an increased maximum takeoff weight of nearly 413 tonnes, compared to around 397 tonnes on the standard -400. The Boeing 737-700ER also features structural modifications compared to the standard model. Specifically, it is fitted with the same wings and landing gear as the larger 737-800. These alterations allow it to safely bear the weight of the additional fuel. Other factors in extending the range Meanwhile, the 777-300ER features structural modifications in these areas as well but also benefits from raked and extended wingtips to increase its efficiency. Therefore, aerodynamic factors also play a significant role in extending an airliner’s range. Finally, an aircraft’s range can also be increased with a lower-density seating configuration. To briefly touch upon a different long-range variant, Planespotters.net reports that Singapore Airlines operates seven examples of the Airbus A350-900ULR (‘Ultra-Long Range’). According to SeatGuru, this features a premium-heavy configuration, seating just 161 passengers, freeing up weight for additional fuel. Consequently, the airline was able to operate the world’s longest scheduled commercial flight, directly connecting Singapore and Newark in just under 18 hours. https://simpleflying.com/er-aircraft/ Airbus commercial jet production expected to reach about 620 aircraft in 2021 Airframer will reduce the A320 family assembly pace than previously planned Airbus confirmed this week that the resumption of the production pace of its commercial jets will be less than originally planned. The program most affected is the A320 family, the most important of the manufacturer. Instead of raising monthly production to 47 aircraft, Airbus announced that the current output of 40 planes will be increased to 43 units in the third quarter and 45 jets in the fourth quarter. While the production rate for the A330 and A350 widebodies will continue at two and five units per month, the A220 assembly line will move from four to five aircraft per month at the end of the first quarter. Airbus did not mention the A380, which still has five units pending delivery – the assembly line will be closed in 2022. Thanks to this new schedule, the A320 series is expected to reach about 504 aircraft in 2021. If the other programs are kept within this forecast, it is expected that about 620 to 630 aircraft will be produced this year. “With these revised rates, Airbus preserves its ability to meet customer demand while protecting its ability to further adapt as the global market evolves,” said the company. In 2020, after the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, Airbus came to suspend production for a few months, but resumed assembling the jets and ended the year with 566 planes delivered. According to airframer, “the commercial aircraft market to return to pre-COVID levels by 2023 to 2025”. https://www.airway1.com/airbus-commercial-jet-production-expected-to-reach-about-620-aircraft-in-2021/ Southwest Airlines Pledges To Vaccinate All Its Employees Southwest Airlines announced Thursday it would be providing COVID-19 vaccinations for free to its employees. The administration of the vaccine will be covered by the company’s health plans and likely become available during later phases of the rollout. Meanwhile, 15.1 million people in the US have now received their first doses. Vaccine free, recipients may pay for jabs Not providing any specific time-line, the carrier said it would begin once the vaccine had been made “widely available” across the US. No mention has been made whether or not it would be mandatory for Southwest staff to get vaccinated, or which, if any, group of staff would be prioritized. “We have teams working to identify third parties who can provide vaccines to our employees as soon as they are able to do so – likely during later phases in the vaccine roll-out plan,” Southwest said in a statement seen by Reuters. The COVID-19 vaccine itself is free in the United States. It is paid for by the federal government. However, providers may still charge for the care. This means that while people may not pay for the actual substance, they could pay for the administration of the jab. Simple Flying has reached out to Southwest for more detail on the story but was yet to receive a response at the time of publication. This article will be updated when more information becomes available. What are other airlines doing? We are yet to hear of specific vaccination plans from other major US carriers. However, American Airlines has told its pilots that they should see about getting vaccinated on their “days off”, while the company prepares a broader voluntary program for staff. The carrier affirmed that to get vaccinated was a “personal choice.” Meanwhile, Dubai-based Emirates earlier this week began offering its employees shots of the Pfizer BioNTech and Sinopharm vaccines. The administering of the doses are done in collaboration with the Dubai Health Authority and the Ministry of Health and Prevention, and the program prioritizes staff that most often come into contact with passengers. Singapore Airlines has set the ambitious project of having all of its employees vaccinated within two months. Singapore’s Transport Minister Ong Ye Kung said that it would be an important step towards reestablishing Singapore and Changi Airport as a major international hub. Where is the vaccine rollout in the US now? At the time of writing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that about 15.1 million people across the US have received at least one dose of the vaccine. Close to 2.4 million have been fully vaccinated. This is a much slower start than the federal government had planned. Intentions were to have given the first shot to 20 million people by the start of 2021. Thus far, the US government has purchased 400 million doses. Half of these are from Pfizer-BioNTech, and half are from Moderna. As they both require two shots, this means it is enough to vaccinate 200 million people. The US has a population of about 329 million people, and additional orders are most likely forthcoming. https://simpleflying.com/southwest-airlines-employee-vaccination/ Ethiopian Airlines Urged To Reject 737 MAX Compensation Offer The US attorneys representing Ethiopian Airlines in their case against Boeing relating to the 737 MAX have advised the airline not to accept the settlement on offer. Boeing is tabling a compensation amount of around $500 million to $600 million, which the legal team says is not enough. They are urging the airline to instead sue the planemaker for damages. Law firm says offer falls ‘grossly short’ The legal team representing Ethiopian Airlines in its claim for compensation from Boeing relating to the 737 MAX crash and subsequent grounding have advised the airline not to accept the current offer on the table. In a letter sent to Ethiopian’s CEO Tewolde Gebremariam, and seen by the Seattle Times, DiCello Levitt Gutzler’s co-founding partner Adam Levitt said the amount on offer falls ‘grossly short’ of what should be demanded by the airline. Claiming that Boeing’s offer is just a ‘mere fraction’ of the actual damages to the airline, both in physical losses and brand reputation, Levitt encouraged Gebremariam to “reject Boeing’s current, desperate settlement entreaties” and “immediately file and prosecute its claims against Boeing, in the United States.” Part of the attorney’s argument hinges on the fact that Boeing recently accepted guilt for criminal fraud during the certification of the 737 MAX. Earlier this month, the planemaker agreed to pay $2.5 billion in total in relation to the charge. This, the law firm claims, puts Ethiopian in a strong position to claim up to $1.8 billion in damages from the manufacturer. Does Ethiopian have time to sue? Ethiopian Airlines was, historically, the most powerful airline in Africa. But the crash of ET302 was a painful experience, damaging its reputation and leaving it out of pocket. Then, with the prolonged grounding of the type, the airline lost access to its remaining fleet of MAX aircraft, not to mention those planes that it was expecting to have delivered. Still reeling from this experience, then came 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has decimated air travel, with long-haul the worst-hit sector. For an airline that was forging a path to becoming a hub and spoke carrier to rival the likes of Emirates, this couldn’t have come at a worse time. Unlike many other airlines, Ethiopian has not received any state support to see it through the crisis. The airline has pinned its survival on a rapid pivot to cargo operations, previously telling Simple Flying that, “Many of the European and American carriers have got a very rich Uncle Sam who is supplying them with these funds. But for us, we do not have that kind of a luxury. So, we have to run for our own life.” When Ethiopian does fly a passenger or two, it makes sure there is enough cargo in the belly of that plane to offset the losses from the low load factors in the passenger cabin. But for how long is this strategy sustainable. The crisis has gone on for much longer than anyone expected, and the airline may not have time to wait. Litigation can take years The US legal system can run painfully slowly, particularly in cases involving large corporations. For Ethiopian, taking Boeing to court could mean a lead time of years, not months, before its compensation is in the bank. While it’s staring down the barrel of a major loss-making year, it could well be the case of a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Then, of course, you have to consider what Levitt’s motivations really are. Representing Ethiopian, Levitt is likely billing the airline something in the region of $500 – $600 per hour, so anything he can do to inflate his final bill is going to be attractive enough to push. On Boeing’s side, the planemaker has set aside $9 billion for compensation relating to the MAX. For the majority of its customers, this will cover loss of earnings while the plane was grounded, and compensation for late deliveries of new aircraft. However, Boeing is well known for dishing these awards out in the form of discounted future purchases and waivers on maintenance costs. For Ethiopian, an offer of a half a million dollars (part of which is likely to not be in cold, hard cash) seems a bit of a low-ball on Boeing’s part. But, for the airline, it could well be a case where the time and expense of seeking a larger payout just isn’t worth the wait. https://simpleflying.com/ethiopian-airlines-737-max-compensation/ Air Force Offers Early Outs, Pushes More Toward Reserve Amid Record-High Retention Facing high retention rates, the U.S. Air Force is expanding its voluntary force management programs in an effort to transfer some airmen into the Reserve. The programs are available to officers and enlisted troops. The service announced this week that it has opened the application process for the Palace Chase program, which gives active-duty airmen the opportunity to finish their careers in the Air Force Reserve. It is also offering the limited Active Duty Service Commitment waivers program, in which eligible airmen will be asked to retire no later than Sept. 1 or separate no later than Sept. 29, according to a news release. Officials didn’t say how many airmen are eligible for these early-out programs. "Voluntary force management programs provide airmen with flexible options to retire, separate or affiliate at times that suit their personal circumstances and allow the Department of the Air Force to balance certain specialties to ensure we meet the needs of the high-end fight," Col. Richard Cole, Military Sustainment and Transition Program Division chief, said in the release. "Air Force leaders are working hard to preserve the mission and care for the airmen who accomplish it," Cole said. Last month, Lt. Gen. Brian Kelly, deputy chief of staff for manpower, personnel and services, said the Air Force would begin to move some troops voluntarily into other specialties or to the Guard or Reserve, because its retention rate in 2020 was the highest in two decades. The service had about 334,600 active-duty members at the time, exceeding its end strength goal of 333,700, he said. Kelly attributed the retention gains to the downturn in the economy but also credited the service's efforts over the last five years to build up the force following congressionally mandated spending caps known as sequestration. The programs are the service's initial steps to move airmen out of "overmanned" career fields; the Jan. 19 release did not identify those fields. Applications for both programs will close April 2, according to the release. The Palace Chase service commitment has been shortened. Previously, enlisted airmen moving into the reserve component were required to serve two years for every year of service left within their commitment. Officers had to serve three years for every one year left. The expanded program now gives approved officers and enlisted members a 1:1 ratio -- serving one year for every year they had left in an active-duty capacity. Those who finish out their careers under Palace Chase will not have to return unearned portions of their bonuses, officials said. And educational costs will be deferred until an airman finishes his or her commitment under Palace Chase. To be eligible for the Active Duty Service Commitment waivers program, airmen must complete at least 20 years of total active federal military service; officers need at least 10 years of total active federal service as an officer before their requested retirement date, the release states. Waivers for enlisted airmen would apply toward permanent change of station (PCS) moves, date estimated return from overseas (DEROS) curtailment, and senior noncommissioned officer promotions. Officer waivers will be considered for PCS, DEROS curtailment, tuition assistance, direct accession, and extended active-duty, ROTC or Officer Training School commitments, according to the release. Airmen who receive a waiver will be required "to repay the government for related unearned portions of bonuses, special pays, education assistance and all other monetary incentives," the release states. Applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, Cole said. "While an airman may be eligible, manning and mission requirements will be considered when evaluating applications," he said. "Airmen should consider their options and apply promptly if interested, as eligibility is subject to change quickly as applications are approved." https://www.yahoo.com/news/air-force-offers-early-outs-125046210.html SpaceX launches a record 143 satellites on one rocket, aces landing CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — SpaceX successfully launched an ambitious rideshare mission as one of its veteran boosters hoisted 143 small satellites — a new record for a single rocket — into space before nailing a landing at sea. The two-stage Falcon 9 rocket lifted off Sunday morning (Jan. 24), soaring into a blue sky dotted with clouds at 10 a.m. EST (1500 GMT) from the Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station here in Florida. Perched atop the veteran launcher is a stack of 143 satellites as part of SpaceX's first dedicated rideshare mission, called Transporter-1. The flight allowed SpaceX to flex its ridesharing muscles in a carefully choreographed orbital ballet as its flagship rocket ferried its largest number of payloads yet. Acting as a cosmic carpool, SpaceX sent the bevy of small satellites into space alongside 10 of its own Starlink internet satellites. The mission is expected to deposit the flat-paneled Starlink satellites in a unique polar orbit — a first for its broadband fleet that will help provide coverage to customers in Alaska and other polar regions. As such, the rocket appeared to launch straight overhead and into the clouds as it leapt off the pad this morning. Sunday's launch marks the third mission this year for SpaceX and the company's second within a week from Florida's Space Coast. On Wednesday (Jan. 20), SpaceX launched a full stack of its Starlink satellites atop a different Falcon 9 as part of a record-breaking mission. (The booster used on that mission became the first in SpaceX's fleet to launch and land eight times.) The rocket powering today's mission is also a frequent flier, marking its fifth flight on the Transporter-1 mission. Known as B1058, the booster first entered service in May 2020 when it launched two NASA astronauts—Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley— into space as part of NASA's first crewed mission under the agency's Commercial Crew program. Called Demo-2, the flight marked the first astronaut mission to the International Space Station to launch from U.S. soil since the retirement of the space shuttle program in 2011. The booster, which is adorned with NASA's iconic worm logo, also ferried a communications satellite for South Korea’s military, a batch of Starlink satellites and a Dragon cargo capsule to the space stationfor SpaceX's 21st resupply mission in December. Originally slated to blast off on Saturday morning, the complex Transporter-1 mission was delayed 24 hours due to poor weather conditions at the launch site. On Sunday, those rainy conditions were replaced by clouds and sunshine, allowing the Falcon 9 rocket and its record-setting payload to get off the groundright on time. Following a successful liftoff, the Falcon 9's first stage landed on SpaceX's drone ship "Of Course I Still Love You" in the Atlantic Ocean. The catch marked the 73rd recovery of a first-stage booster for SpaceX and the first catch of the year for the company's main drone ship, after receiving some needed refurbishments. (SpaceX's two other launches this year landed their first-stage boosters on a separate drone ship, "Just Read The Instructions.") For its fifth act, which came just over a month after its last flight, the veteran Falcon 9 acted as a space taxi service to deliver the 143 Transporter-1 mission satellites into orbit. The mission was the first in a dedicated series of rideshares as part of a program SpaceX created to help smaller satellites get into space by sharing a ride and reducing costs. The company announced in 2019 that it would offer rides on its Falcon 9 rockets at certain intervals throughout the year and for $1 million per launch. Those flights can be booked through a dedicated website that SpaceX created. Rideshares missions are not exactly new for SpaceX. The company has sent payloads to space for multiple companies, including a similar rideshare mission in 2018. That flight, dubbed SSO-A, delivered 64 satellites into low-Earth orbit, launching from SpaceX’s California launch pad in December 2018. Since then, SpaceX has shared space with other payloads to space on a few of its Starlink missions. Those missions included small cubesat satellites for Planet and BlackSky. It also launched the Beresheet lunar lander into space for Israel in 2018. Onboard this flight will be 133 commercial satellites (meaning paying customers for SpaceX) and 10 of the company's own Starlink internet satellites. The complex rideshare was in part facilitated by Spaceflight Inc., which helps small satellites book their perfect ride to space. The company Exolaunch also arranged to fly 30 satellites for customers. Three small CubeSats are flying for NASA's V-Rx3 mission to test new technologies for spacecraft communication and navigation. Until recently, smaller satellites have had limited options, squeezing in on missions wherever there’s room. But as launch costs decrease and with the advent of smaller launchers, like Rocket Lab's Electron and Virgin Orbit's services, smaller satellites have more options than ever on hitching a ride to space. However, launching that many satellites at once is no easy task. Each one has to deploy in a timed sequence so as to avoid potential collisions. To address that challenge, specialized launch dispensers are used as well as free-flying transfer stages that will then deploy payloads once they are in a certain orbit. The deployment sequence is carefully timed, with 48 tiny satellites for the Earth-observing company Planet beginning to deploy at just under 59 minutes after liftoff. The last satellites to leave the rocket’s upper stage will be SpaceX’s 10 Starlink satellites that are intended to provide better coverage to those in the polar regions. Also on board will be three Hawk 2 satellites that will be part of a global constellation of radio satellites that will be used to help monitor and locate emergency beacons and improve response times in emergencies. There are also two Taiwanese satellites, YUSAT and IDEASat, which will improve maritime navigation and help map out the Earth's ionosphere, respectively. IDEASat will make measurements of the ionosphere’s structure, identifying plasma disturbances that could interfere with satellite and radio communications. PlanetIQ is sending a GNSS Navigation and Occultation Measurement Satellite (GNOMES) that will beam back data to help with weather forecasting, climate research as well as to help monitor space weather. There are dozens of other payloads on board, including a payload called Celestis 17 that contains cremated human remains, and a payload called the Extremely Low Resource Optical Identifier (ELROI) that will test the use LED lights (which basically serve as a license plate for a satellite) to help identify objects in orbit. Polar flight The launch trajectory for this mission is also a bit unique. It will follow a similar path as one that launched last summer from Cape Canaveralthe Cape. After liftoff, the rocket hugged the east coast of Florida, heading south over the Atlantic ocean so it could deposit its payload into what's known as a polar orbit. This type of orbit allows satellites to fly over the planet's poles. This type of orbit allows satellites to fly over the planet'’s poles. Typically these types of flights launch from the West Coast as they can more easily avoid populated areas. However, last summer, SpaceX received permission to launch flights bound for polar orbits for the first time since the 1960s. That's because SpaceX's workhorse, the Falcon 9, is equipped with an automated flight termination system which will destroy the rocket in case something goes amiss during flight. (Historically, there would be a human in charge of the system, which isn’t as precise as a computer.) And in the late 1960s, debris from a Thor rocket reportedly killed a cow in Cuba, ending the cycle of polar launches from Florida. SpaceX's two rocket payload fairing recovery ships GO Ms. Tree and GO Ms. Chief successfully recovered the nose cone halves of the Transporter-1 Falcon 9 booster in a Jan. 24, 2021 launch. One of SpaceX's two fairing recovery boats — called GO Ms. Chief — will retrieve the rocket’s two fairing halves after they splashdown in the ocean. The boat will scoop the pieces out of the water and haul them back to Port, along with the fairings from the Starlink mission that launched on Jan. 20. (Those fairings are currently already on board the other fairing ship, GO Ms. Tree.) Up next for SpaceX is another Starlink mission, which could blast off as early as next week. The company also has two additional Transporter missions on the schedule for 2021 — one as early as June and another expected in December. https://www.space.com/spacex-launches-143-satellites-transporter-1-rocket-landing Safety Degree from Florida Institute of Technology Becomes a GSP Qualified Academic Program Melbourne, Florida (January 1, 2021) – Florida Institute of Technology’s Master of Science in Aviation, Aviation Safety has been reviewed by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals (BCSP) and approved as a Graduate Safety Practitioner® (GSP®) Qualified Academic Program (QAP), providing the program’s graduates the opportunity to apply with BCSP for the GSP designation after graduation. The GSP meets the credential requirement for the Certified Safety Professional® (CSP®), the “gold standard” in safety certification, allowing those who hold the designation to waive the Associate Safety Professional® (ASP®) certification examination. It demonstrates accomplishment and commitment to professional development. “We welcome Florida Institute of Technology’s exceptional safety program and those who graduate from it,” says the Interim CEO of BCSP, Christy Uden, CAE, IOM. “Those who graduate from GSP Qualified Academic Programs have a strong foundation of knowledge that deserves recognition and BCSP looks forward to supporting them in the development of their careers.” A GSP QAP is a degree program in safety, health, and environmental (SH&E) practice that has been reviewed by BCSP and demonstrates a substantial match to the ASP exam blueprint. Any person having graduated from Florida Institute of Technology with a Master of Science in Aviation, Aviation Safety may apply for the GSP designation within their program’s applicable dates as it appears on the QAP list. More information on the Florida Institute of Technology’s Master of Science in Aviation, Aviation Safety can be found at www.fit.edu, and details on the GSP are available at bcsp.org/gsp. ##### The Board of Certified Safety Professionals (BCSP) headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana, is a not-for-profit corporation recognized as a leader in high-quality, accredited credentialing for safety, health, and environmental (SH&E) practitioners. BCSP establishes standards and certifies competency criteria in professional safety practice. Since 1969, over 100,000 of BCSP’s CSP, SMS, ASP, OHST, CHST, STS, STSC, or CIT certifications have been achieved. 2021 Aircraft Cabin Air Conference Registration Now Open ** Thanks to our generous sponsors, registration is currently free, so book today! ** 2021 Aircraft Cabin Air Conference 15 to 18 March 2021 1500 to 2000 GMT daily via Zoom (0700 to 1200 PST) Four online days of powerful talks given by industry and subject matter experts. Registration is open and currently FREE, so book today! https://www.aircraftcabinair.com/ Following on from the success of the 2017 and 2019 Aircraft Cabin Air Conferences, the 2021 conference will be an essential four-day free modular online event via Zoom. Providing an in-depth overview or update for all those seeking to understand the subject of contaminated air, the flight safety implications, the latest scientific and medical evidence investigating the contaminated air debate and the emerging solutions available to airlines and aircraft operators. The 2021 conference will be the biggest conference ever held on the issue. Who should participate? Airline Management - Aircraft Manufacturers - Safety equipment providers - Health & Safety Regulators - Maintenance Companies - Airline Safety Departments - Air Accident Investigators- Crew & Unions - Policy Makers- Press & Media - Aircraft Insurers - Leasing Companies - Scientists - Occupational Health Professionals - Academics & Researchers - Engineers Register Curt Lewis