Thursday, September 26, 2013

New Garden Airport (N57), Toughkenamon, Pennsylvania: New group moves forward with construction of hangars

High hopes of new hangars at the New Garden Flying Field were temporarily put on hold until a new group came forward at a New Garden Township supervisors’ meeting this week.

Three years ago, plans were put into motion to expand the airport and in January 2012, a land lease agreement was signed with the Hangar Corporation of America.

Since that time, little progress has been made and after several months of no updates, the contract was terminated in June, said Airport Manager Jonathan Martin.

Pilots who were interested in purchasing a hangar and who already made down payments were left with three options: Quit, wait for the township to find a new developer, or they become developers themselves.

They opted for the latter of three.

The core group of five, who were in attendance for the meeting, are in the process of setting up an LLC, which will be known as The New Garden Hangar Association LLC, said member Richard Kellerman.


Original article:   http://www.southernchestercountyweeklies.com

Lion Air Considers Buying Bombardier Jets: Canadian Plane Maker Tries to Improve Backlog of CSeries Orders

September 26, 2013, 5:43 p.m. ET

By JON OSTROWER

The Wall Street Journal


Bombardier Inc. said Thursday it is in talks with Lion Air of Indonesia about a potential sale of the Canadian company's CSeries jetliners to the budget carrier, a deal that would bolster the plane maker's efforts to secure new customers.

Bombardier has struggled to build a significant backlog of orders for its new 100- to 160-seat CSeries jets amid fierce competition from established competitors Boeing Co. and Airbus.

Lion Air Chief Executive Rusdi Kirana said in Montreal on Thursday that he was impressed by Bombardier's CSeries. Mr. Kirana said he met Wednesday with Mike Arcamone, president of Bombardier Commercial Aircraft, and toured a CSeries jet. A spokesman for Bombardier confirmed that the meeting took place.

Bombardier declined to comment on when any deal might be completed, but a spokesman for the Canadian company said it was "pleased" with Mr. Kirana's "positive comments" about the aircraft, which made its first flight on Sept. 16.

Mr. Kirana was reported to have said he wants to complete a deal with Bombardier in time for the 2014 Farnborough air show outside of London.

Bombardier current backlog for the CSeries stands at 177 firm orders. List prices for the CSeries are $63 million for smaller versions and $72 million for larger models, before discounts, compared with about $70 million to $92 million for similar models from Boeing and Airbus.

Lion Air purchased 230 Boeing planes in 2012 and 234 Airbus aircraft earlier this year to support its growth plans for Southeast Asia. Airbus is a unit of European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co.

Source:   http://online.wsj.com

Boeing considers building facility in Daytona: Aircraft giant, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in talks to bring $24 million facility to school’s planned research park

DAYTONA BEACH — Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University officials and The Boeing Co., the world’s largest aircraft manufacturer, are in talks about building a $24 million testing facility for engines at the school’s planned research park in Daytona Beach.

John Johnson, the university’s president, made the announcement Thursday at a Daytona Regional Chamber of Commerce luncheon.

“This looks very promising,” Johnson said after the meeting. He said the two organizations are still in the early stages of discussion and are working on developing a letter-of-intent regarding the facility.

If Boeing and Embry-Riddle can reach an agreement, the facility could be up and running within two years, Johnson said. He would not say how many jobs the testing center could bring to the area.

Boeing currently tests its engines at a General Electric plant in Cincinnati.

Johnson said making the move to Embry-Riddle’s aviation research park would give Boeing more flexibility in testing engines that aren’t manufactured by General Electric.

A Boeing spokeswoman on Thursday said she was unable to comment at this time.

Rob Ehrhardt, Volusia County economic development manager, said Boeing’s interest in establishing a facility at Embry-Riddle’s research park is “another example of great collaboration in our community. We are most fortunate to have the No. 1 aviation university on the planet in our community.”

The university has been working to develop the 90-acre research park along Clyde Morris Boulevard, south of the university’s campus, for more than a decade.

Larsen Motorsports became the research park’s first tenant when the company moved into a facility at the corner of Clyde Morris and Aviation Center Parkway. The building is part of the complex’s 13-acre initial development phase. Raleigh, N.C.-based Advanced Aerospace Solutions also has office space at the research park in a building it intends to share with other tenants.

In June, Austrian aviation company Diamond Aircraft Industries — the world’s third-largest general aviation manufacturer — announced plans to also become a tenant of the research park.

In late 2011, Boeing announced plans to locate its commercial crew program headquarters at Kennedy Space Center in Brevard County. The company estimated the move would create 140 jobs by June of this year and 550 jobs by December 2015.

Thursday’s chamber luncheon, at LPGA International in Daytona Beach, was sponsored by Consolidated-Tomoka Land Co.
 

Original article:   http://www.news-journalonline.com

New airstrip proposed for Eloy planning area - Arizona

In an August work session, the Eloy City Council had an opportunity to take a position on a proposed airstrip that will require a major comprehensive plan amendment through Pinal County.

Larry Hill , owner of Airborne Support Group, affiliated with Skydive Arizona, is involved in submitting the request to the County, and as a part of that process, Pinal County provides a 60-day review period to municipalities or others who may be impacted by the change in planned land use.


The seller of the property, Outer Ring, LLC, has requested that the land use designation be changed from “Very Low Density Residential” to “Secondary Airport.” The site is about 10 miles south of Interstate 10 and about 5-6 miles south of Arizona City and west of Sunland Gin Road.

Shawn Hill, representative for Airborne Support Group, and Planner Jackie Guthrie clarified that the plans are for an airstrip and not an airport.

After hearing a report about the project from Community Development Director Harvey Krauss, the Council stated their approval of the change in land use of the property that is adjacent to the city and within the city of Eloy’s Planning Area. The city of Eloy sent a letter to Pinal County stating their approval, which also included Eloy’s expectations and concerns about the proposed project.

The airstrip operators expect from 20-100 flights per month for the facility, which has a 35,400-foot runway on a 243-acre site. The facility will handle overflow from their military parachute training business currently taking place at the Eloy Municipal Airport.

Some of the City’s concerns included the impact on the Eloy Municipal Airport airspace, and competition with the city’s airport. In addition the city was concerned about FAA and ADOT feedback, as well as any concerns of adjacent landowners, impact on future development and noise and air quality levels.

Planner Jackie Guthrie and Shawn Hill assured the Council that the facility would not be in competition for FAA grant funds since it will be a private facility. In addition, they explained that it should not affect Eloy airspace or flights coming in or out of Casa Grande or Coolidge.

Guthrie also clarified that the “public will not be allowed to land on this airstrip,” she said. In addition, Guthrie said that plans call for fencing the property.

Council members Etta Ruth Amerson and J.W. Tidwell encouraged the City to approve of the project, Tidwell saying that “If it is going to bring new revenue, go for it.” Amerson added that she didn’t like to see government “stymie private business.”

Planner for Airborne Support Group Jackie Guthrie agreed with the Council that this could bring “additional” business to Eloy. “They are very successful at doing their parachute drops, and in addition to that they have some agreements with the military to do training,” she said. “That’s why they want the overflow strip—to keep building the business.”

The process for obtaining a Major Comprehensive Plan Amendment from the County is a long one, however. The initial application was filed in May, then the 60-day review process for other agencies was followed by a Citizen Advisory Committee review that makes a recommendation to the Pinal County Planning and Zoning Commission.

The Commission met on Sept. 19 and recommended approval of the re-designation from “Very Low Density Residential” to “Secondary Airport.” Ashley MacDonald, Planner II for Pinal County said that it was a unanimous vote to approve the request and that other than a few general questions, the process was “pretty smooth.”

The next step is a Public Hearing of the Pinal County Board of Supervisors on Oct. 9 to approve, deny, or continue the request. If the Board of Supervisors approves it, MacDonald said, “they still have to come back through and get a special use permit.”

At that point, the City as well as the County will have an opportunity to get more detailed answers to questions about the planned operations. Comprehensive Major Plan Amendments are addressed only once per year.

Currently Airborne Support Group is using a twin-engine turbo prop. Guthrie said that since Sunland Gin Road is paved past the site and electric goes right past the site, she doesn’t anticipate any off-site improvements. “It all depends on what the county requires,” she said. Noise studies, site improvements or any other issues will be addressed during the Special Use Permit process, she added.

“They’re still a ways away from actually operating out there,” MacDonald said.

Airborne Support Group hopes to have the airstrip operational “by this time next year,” Hill said. The purpose of the facility is “to accommodate the future growth of Skydive Arizona,” he added.


Original article:   http://www.trivalleycentral.com

Former Houston-based hand surgeon sentenced for disturbance on a plane


MIAMI -- Former Houston hand surgeon Michael Brown was sentenced on Wednesday for a disturbance he had on a flight from London to Miami.

Brown pleaded guilty in federal court in Florida to one count of assaulting and intimidating a flight crew member.

He will serve 30 days in a federal prison for assaulting two flight crew members. He was also fined $2,000 and will serve 2 years of supervised probation. 

Brown, who initially pleaded not guilty to the charge of assaulting a flight attendant on a Jan. 2 flight from London to Miami, changed his plea to guilty. 

Brown was arrested Jan. 2, accused of choking a flight attendant and threatening to strip naked on the transatlantic flight. He was released on bond to his Miami residence but was allowed non-commercial flights for purposes of litigation, business or visiting his minor children in Texas, according to court records.

In February, lawyer Robert Hantman told the Chronicle that Brown had a "negative reaction" after drinking alcohol and taking an insomnia medication on the flight.

This negative reaction led him to choke a flight attendant and threaten to strip naked, Hantman said at the time.

Original article:   http://www.khou.com

Aviation officials slam $4,000 tax on pastorprueners and private jet owners - Nigeria

Government officials have imposed a $4,000 luxury tax on private jet owners and operators across the country in a bid to cash in on one of the-fastest growing aviation sectors in the world.

Nigeria’s private jet industry is one of the more dynamic anywhere on earth, as over recent years, the country has become one of the world’s fastest growing private jet markets with politicians, church leaders and wealthy oil magnates increasingly opting for personal aircraft. According to industry analysts Nigeria and China constitute two of the fastest growing private jet markets in the world.

Between March 2010 and March 2011, a few wealthy Nigerians spent at least $225m acquiring private jets. One of the biggest buyers are Nigeria’s new brand of religious leaders or pastorprueners, with several of them owning fleets.

Looking to raise revenue from this lucrative market, the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) has directed all private jet owners and operators to pay tax for every flight departure within the country. Under the terms of the new directive, Nigerian-registered private jets would pay the sum of $3,000 for every departure, while foreign registered ones would pay $4,000 per departure.

Captain Fola Akinkuotu, the NCAA director general, said:“In compliance with the provisions of Section 30 (2) (q) & (s) of the Civil Aviation Act of 2006, the authority hereby orders all foreign registered aircraft engaging in non-scheduled operations shall forthwith pay $4,000 as fees under the provisions of the law set out above for every departure, except round trips without changes in passenger manifest, or return ferry. Such fees shall be paid in advance and prior to departure.

“All Nigerian-registered aircraft engaging in non-scheduled operations shall forthwith pay $3,000 as fees under the provisions of the law set out above for every departure, except round trips without changes in passenger manifest, or return ferry. Such fees shall be paid in advance and prior to any departure.

His memo added that the order shall be effective immediately and failure to comply shall result in denial of operations and or privileges. Already, the directive is generating controversy in the aviation sector, with some operators arguing that the levies are illegal and as such, they will not pay it.

In response the NCAA has filed a suit at the Federal High Court in Lagos, challenging the reluctance of foreign and locally-registered aircraft operators to pay the levies. However, the affected airlines and aircraft operators under the aegis of the Airline Operators of Nigeria have described the policy as draconian and tantamount to double taxation.

If the courts rule in favor of the NCAA, Nigeria can expected to generate as much as $1.4m annually from the new luxury tax. Pastorprueners and business moguls are expected to be the main payers of the new tax.

In March last year, David Oyedepo, the owner of Winners Chapel rated by Forbes as the world’s richest cleric with an estimated wealth of about $3000m acquired a Gulfstream V jet for $30m. Pastor Oyedepo owns a private collection of four planes including two Gulfstream planes and a Bombardier Challenger aircraft.

Also, in December last year, Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, the founder of the World of Life Bible Church and the president of the Christian Association of Nigeria was bought a 10-seater Bombardier Challenger jet as a birthday present worth about $50m. In 2010, Aliko Dangote, Africa’s wealthiest man acquired a $45m Bombardier jet as a gift to himself on his 53rd birthday, while oil magnate Mike Adenuga purchased a Bombardier Global Express XRS.

Original article:  http://www.nigerianwatch.com

Terry Anderson appeals dismissal of lawsuit: Tupelo Regional Airport (KTUP), Mississippi

TUPELO, Mississippi — Terry Anderson is appealing a judge's ruling dismissing his lawsuit against the Tupelo Regional Airport Authority over his firing.

Anderson argued he was a victim of age discrimination. He says the board violated his First Amendment rights by terminating him for speaking to the media regarding a runway extension.
 
The board says Anderson lied when confronted about who gave information to news media about a runway expansion. The board also denied age was a factor.

Anderson was 64 when he was fired in 2009.

WTVA-TV in Tupelo reports (http://bit.ly/18rnVwM ) that in a ruling earlier this month, U. S. District Judge Mike Mills says Anderson did not prove his firing was illegal on either claim.

Anderson's appeal has been filed in the 5th U.S. District Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

http://www.wtva.com

http://www.dailyjournal.net

Cessna 172, Diamond Flying LLC, N953SP: Accident occurred May 26, 2012 in St. George, Utah

NTSB Identification: WPR12FA230
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, May 26, 2012 in St. George, UT
Probable Cause Approval Date: 02/03/2014
Aircraft: CESSNA 172S, registration: N953SP
Injuries: 4 Fatal.

NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

Prior to the flight, the pilot and passengers were at a party, during which time the pilot and all but one passenger (the designated driver) consumed multiple alcoholic beverages. They left to go to another party and while en route, the vehicle was pulled over by a police officer. During the diversion, the group agreed to instead go to a nearby city to gamble.

The flight subsequently departed around 0120 with the airplane about 160 lbs. over its maximum gross weight. An airport video recording that captured the takeoff revealed that the airplane remained either on the ground or in ground effect for over two-thirds of the length of the runway, consistent with the pilot attempting to gain airspeed in the overweight airplane. The airplane then aggressively pitched nose up and climbed out of view of the camera. Seconds later, the airplane reappeared in a near-vertical descent into the dirt area at the end of the runway, most likely due to an aerodynamic stall during the steep climb.

A review of the pilot's toxicological tests found that the post-mortem blood ethanol level was 0.105 percent, which is more than twice the Federal Aviation Administration limit for civil aviators (0.04 percent). The evidence points to ingestion as the primary source of the ethanol in the pilot and implies that his pre-mortem ethanol level was high enough to significantly impair his judgment and psychomotor skills. It is likely that the pilot's consumption of alcohol preflight contributed to this accident. Postaccident examinations of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed during an aggressive pitch-up maneuver, which resulted in a low-altitude aerodynamic stall shortly after takeoff. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's impairment from alcohol consumption and an over-gross-weight airplane.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On May 26, 2012, about 0120 mountain daylight time, a Cessna 172S, N953SP, collided with terrain shortly after departing from St. George Municipal Airport, St. George, Utah. Diamond Flying LLC was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The commercial pilot and three passengers were fatally injured; the airplane sustained substantial damage. The local personal flight was departing from St. George with a planned destination of Mesquite, Nevada. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed.

A friend of the pilot stated that he arrived at a party on the evening of May 25 and the pilot was already there. He recalled both himself and the pilot having several alcoholic beverages (two shots of Southern Comfort liqueur) between 2030 and 2200, but was not aware of his alcohol consumption before or after that time frame; there was also Bud Light and Smirnoff Vodka at the party. He recalled two of the passengers were also drinking alcohol at the party and the third passenger did not consume any alcohol because he was the designated driver for the group. Shortly thereafter, himself, the pilot, and three passengers all left the party and decided to drive to another party.

The friend further stated that while en route to the other party, the vehicle was pulled over by a police officer. While they were all waiting in the car for the officer to complete the traffic stop, one of the passengers suggested that the group should go to Mesquite, since he frequently drove there on the weekends to gamble. The group agreed to go, with the exception of the friend, who decided that he would stay in town instead and he called someone to pick him up from the car's location. Some of the passengers called him a little later to again try to encourage him to go, but he refused and made a last call to them at 0110 when he let them know he was going back to the party. Nobody ever mentioned or gave him any indication that they were going to take an airplane to Mesquite.

The airport was equipped with a video recording system that consisted of a fixed based security camera system. A review of the video files revealed that the airplane could be seen in the night time conditions by the blinking left-wing strobe light and the navigation light mounted on the tail. The airplane appeared to depart from runway 19 and maneuver at a low altitude for the length of the runway while increasing its airspeed. Near the end of the runway (about 2/3 of the way down the 9,300 ft runway), the airplane began a rapid ascent and continued out of the view of the camera. After about 7 seconds, the airplane reappears further down the frame in a rapid descent.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The pilot, age 23, held a commercial pilot certificate, with ratings for single and multiengine land, and instrument flight. His first-class medical certificate was issued on April 16, 2012, and contained no limitations. The pilot was employed by GoJet Airlines, LLC., as a first officer in the Bombardier CL-600 series airplanes.

The pilot's personal flight records were not recovered. On his last application for a medical certificate the pilot reported a total flight time of 3,000 hours.

The pilot's resume submitted to GoJet indicated that he had previously been employed at Comair Airlines; he additionally was employed as a line technician at St. George Jet Center from 2003 to 2006. The computerized flight logs at GoJet reported his last recorded total time as about 2,230 hours, with his last proficiency training occurring about 1.5 months prior to the accident.



The pilot's family stated that the airplane belonged to a friend of the family and the pilot would borrow the airplane occasionally. The owner was not aware that the pilot had intended to fly the airplane the morning of the accident, however, that was not unusual, and the pilot and his father had permission to use the airplane when they desired. The pilot acquired a significant portion of his flight time from the St. George Municipal Airport and would commonly take friends flying without much notice.

The pilot's friend indicated that he did not consume alcohol very often and he had only seen him drink on three occasions in the last 2 years. The pilot's family indicated that he did not consume alcohol.

AIRPLANE INFORMATION

The Cessna 172S airplane, serial number 172S8153, was manufactured in 1999. The last annual inspection record was not contained in the airplane's logbook, but was provided as a separate entry after the accident. It indicated that the last inspection was completed on August 10, 2011, at a total airframe and engine tachometer time of 1,091.4 hours.


The airplane's Hobbs sheet located within the wreckage indicated that the last recorded flights were performed by the accident pilot on October 17 and 20, where he wrote that he had amassed 18.6 and 4.4 hours, respectively.

Fuel

The last known date that the airplane was refueled at St. George was recorded from Above View Aviation on May 18, 2012. The airplane was fueled with 18.5 gallons, which the fuel technician reported was a top-off to full fuel tanks. The last known fueling occurred at Chandler Air Service, Chandler, Arizona, where the airplane received 20.54 gallons of fuel, which based on the distance calculation from the two airports, equates to additionally being topped-off to full fuel tanks on that occasion.

Using average fuel consumption rates in the airplane flight manual climb and cruise performance charts, investigators conservatively estimated that the airplane had about 28 gallons of fuel onboard at the time of the accident. The disposition of the fuel load between the two standard capacity wing tanks could not be determined. The calculations used are contained in the public docket for this accident.

Weight and Balance

Weight and balance computations were made for the accident takeoff at based on the airplane's empty weight, total moment, and center of gravity that were obtained from the operator's maintenance records. The takeoff condition used the previously estimated 28 gallons of fuel. The occupant weights and seating positions were obtained from the Utah Department Office of the Medical Examiner. The detailed computations are appended to this report.

For the takeoff condition, the gross weight was about 2,710 pounds and the center of gravity was 44.92-inches. The maximum authorized gross takeoff weight was 2,550 pounds with the center of gravity range at that weight between 41.0 and 47.3 inches forward and aft, respectively. Review of the Cessna Pilot's Operating Handbook (POH) for the Cessna 172S disclosed that with the flaps in the retracted position, at the maximum gross weight, the stall speed at zero degrees of bank is 48 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) and altitude loss during recovery "may be as much as 230 feet." Normal initial climb segment airspeed is 73 KIAS at 3,000 feet msl, with a 620-foot-per-minute climb rate.

Cessna does not provide or supply stall speeds outside the maximum gross weight envelope. The applicable POH states that the airplane's "stall characteristics are conventional and aural warning is provided by a stall warning horn which sounds between 5 and 10 kts above the stall in all configurations."

Ground Speed

The recorded video files were captured from security cameras located at the southwest corner of the St. George's Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Facility and at the upper southwest corner of the South Terminal Building.

One video file disclosed that at 04 seconds and 21 frames into the recording the first indication of the accident airplane appears in the right-hand portion of the frame. The only visible indication of the airplane was the port wingtip strobe, port wingtip position light and white tail navigation light. The airplane continued to cross the image plane toward the departure end of runway 19 until 16 seconds and 22 frames in the recording when the airplane began a rapid ascent in an upward facing arc. The airplane continued ascending upward until 19 seconds and 03 frames when it disappeared out of the upper region of the recorded frame. At 25 seconds and 28 frames, the airplane reappears in the upper region of the frame in a rapid descent. At 27 seconds and 24 frames, the airplane's position lights disappeared behind a bright light bloom from the South Terminal Building's ramp area. No other salient information pertaining to the accident was captured during the 51-second recording.

The other video file reveals that at 04 seconds and 01 frame into the recording the first indication of the accident airplane appears in the right-hand portion of the frame. The only visible indication of the airplane is the port wingtip strobe, port wingtip position light and white tail navigation light. The airplane continues to cross the image plane towards the departure end of runway 19 until 14 seconds and 05 frames into the recording when the last indication of the accident airplane's taillight disappears out of the image frame. No other salient information pertaining to the accident was captured during the 23-second recording.

In an effort to determine an approximate ground speed during the takeoff, geometric reference points were utilized and the time was analyzed as the airplane moved between each of the points. To accomplish this, lines of perspective were created from the center of the camera's lens through each known taxiway light position and beyond the runway centerline. Using the airplane's tail position light, a frame reference was taken at each of the perspective lines as the airplane moved through the image. As the airplane's taillight passed each perspective line, the time in whole seconds and number of carryover frames were recorded. Using mapping software, the distance between each line of perspective along the runway centerline was measured and the resulting average groundspeed of about 107 kts was calculated for the 637 feet of captured video. The last two segments of video showed a decrease of groundspeed from about 107 to 91 kts. The pitch and bank angle of the airplane could not be determined from the video.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

A routine aviation weather report (METAR) generated by an Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS) at the airport, indicated that about 5 minutes prior the accident the conditions were as follows: wind was from 260 degrees at 9 knots; temperature 66 degrees Fahrenheit; dew point 28 degrees Fahrenheit; and altimeter 29.60 inHg.

According to the U.S. Naval Observatory, on the morning of the accident, the time of sunrise was 0618. At the time of the accident, the moon was below the horizon and the sky was dark.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The accident site was located in the hard dirt area (the southerly primary surface) adjacent to the departure end of runway 19. Situated on the level terrain, the airplane came to rest in an inverted attitude and was oriented on a 315-degree magnetic bearing. The main wreckage, which consisted of a majority of the airframe and engine, was located about 525 feet from the edge of the runway.

The first identified point of impact was a ground scar impression about 40 feet from the main wreckage that dimensionally and geometrically resembled the wings with a crater-like impression in the center. The span of the ground disturbance was about 36.5 feet, with red lens fragments located near the east side and green fragments on the westerly side; the airplane's wingspan was 36 feet. Imbedded in the center crater was a portion of a propeller blade and the nose wheel. In the debris field from the ground scar to the main wreckage was oil sump, the propeller and engine accessories.

Contained within the wreckage were bottle caps from Bud light and Blue Moon beer bottles.

The destination airport in Mesquite (elevation 2,000 ft msl), was about 28 nm from St. George Municipal Airport (elevation 2,900 ft msl) on a bearing of about 245 degrees. A mountain range extended longitudinally between the two airports with peaks reaching up to 6,000 ft msl. The surrounding area was unpopulated desert and few lights were in the immediate vicinity. Driving an automobile between the two airports is about 37 nm and would take about 45 minutes.

MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION



The Utah Department of Health, Office of the Medical Examiner, completed an autopsy on the pilot. The examiner's pathological diagnosis as cause of death was noted as, "Multiple blunt force injuries."

The FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute (CAMI) performed toxicological screenings on the pilot. According to CAMI's report (#201200100001) the toxicological findings were positive for ethanol (alcohol). Specifically, the following was detected in the pilot's specimens: 0.105 gm/dL ethanol in blood, 0.121 gm/dL ethanol in brain, 0.098 gm/dL ethanol in heart; methanol and n-propanol was also detected in the blood as well. The toxicology report additionally noted no evidence of putrefaction in the specimens received.



Passengers

None of the passengers were FAA certificated pilots. CAMI additionally performed toxicological screenings on the passengers, of which two were positive for ethanol. One passenger's blood contained 0.088 gm/dL ethanol and the other passenger had 0.160 gm/dL of ethanol detected in his blood.

TESTS AND RESEARCH

Following recovery, the wreckage was examined at a hangar at the St. George Municipal Airport.

Investigators established continuity for the elevators and rudders from the aft bulk head area to the control surfaces. The ailerons cables separated in the cabin overhead area location, with the cable ends exhibiting a broom straw appearance consistent with overload. Continuity was established in the wings (from cabin to their respective bellcranks), but the cockpit area's extensive damage prohibited investigators from tracing the cable paths. The wing flap actuator jackscrew was flush with the body, which, according to the Cessna representative, corresponded to a flaps being in the retracted position. The elevator trim was measured to be 1.3 inches, which the Cessna representative stated was a neutral position.

The Lycoming IO-360-L2A, serial number L-28167-51A, sustained impact damage. Despite several attempts, investigators could not rotate the crankshaft and proceeded to remove cylinders No. 1 and 3 cylinders. The No. 2 and 4 cylinders were examined through the spark plug holes utilizing a lighted borescope. The combustion chambers were mechanically undamaged, and there was no evidence of foreign object ingestion or detonation. The valves were intact and undamaged. There was no evidence of valve to piston face contact observed. The gas path and combustion signatures observed at the spark plugs, combustion chambers and exhaust system components displayed coloration that the Lycoming representative said was consistent with normal to lean operation.

There was no oil residue observed in the exhaust system gas path. Ductile bending and crushing of the exhaust system components was observed.

Removal of the fuel manifold (spider) revealed that it contained slight traces of liquid that was consistent in odor with that of Avgas. The diaphragm was pliable and the spring was intact.

The left magneto was broken as a result of impact and could not be functionally tested. The right magneto, which was located away from the engine in the debris field, was rotated by hand. Spark was obtained at each post during rotation.

The vacuum pump was disassembled and the drive gear was found intact; there was no visible evidence of damage. The rotor/vane assembly was also intact and undamaged. Light rotational scoring was observed on both the rotor and housing.



The propeller and its respective flange were broken free of the crankshaft. One blade was twisted and bent aft with leading edge gouges and chordwise polishing/scratches; about 8 to 10 inches of the tip was broken away. The other blade was found relatively straight with some evidence of twisting and chordwise scratching.

There was no evidence of mechanical malfunction or failure with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation. A detailed examination report with accompanying pictures is contained in the public docket for this accident.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Regulations

FAA regulation 14 CFR 91.17, alcohol or drugs, in part, stated:

(a) No person may act or attempt to act as a crewmember of a civil airplane -- (1) Within 8 hours after the consumption of any alcoholic beverage; (2) While under the influence of alcohol; (3) While using any drug that affects the person's faculties in any way contrary to safety; or (4) While having 0.04 percent by weight or more alcohol in the blood. (b) Except in an emergency, no pilot of a civil airplane may allow a person who appears to be intoxicated or who demonstrates by manner or physical indications that the individual is under the influence of drugs (except a medical patient under proper care) to be carried in that airplane.

Alcohol Effects

The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism addressed alcohol dependent individuals and their automobile driving abilities in publication No. 28, April 1995. It stated that "The tolerance acquired for a specific task or in a specific environment is not readily transferable to new conditions," and that "a driver encountering a new environment or an unexpected situation could instantly lose any previously acquired tolerance to alcohol's impairing effects on driving performance."

Cellular Phones

Within the wreckage, four cellular phones were recovered, all of which sustained too much damage for any data recovery.

COMMUNICATION

The pilot was not communicating with any FAA air traffic control facility during the time period encompassing the accident sequence. The airport and casinos in Mesquite had not received a call from the pilot, a common practice for arriving aircraft that need a shuttle from the airport to the casinos.


http://registry.faa.gov/N953SP
 
NTSB Identification: WPR12FA230
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, May 26, 2012 in St. George, UT
Aircraft: CESSNA 172S, registration: N953SP
Injuries: 4 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On May 26, 2012, about 0120 mountain daylight time, a Cessna 172S, N953SP, collided with terrain shortly after departing from St. George Municipal Airport, St. George, Utah. Diamond Flying LLC was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The commercial pilot and three passenger sustained fatal injuries; the airplane sustained substantial damage. The local personal flight was departing from St. George with a planned destination of Mesquite, Nevada. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed.

A review of the recorded security camera footage at the airport revealed that the airplane could be seen in the nighttime conditions by the blinking left-wing strobe light and the navigation light mounted on the tail. The airplane appeared to depart from runway 19 and maneuver at a low altitude for the length of the runway while increasing its airspeed. Near the end of the runway, the airplane began a rapid ascent and continued out of the view of the camera. After about 7 seconds, the airplane reappears further down the frame in a rapid descent.

The accident site was located in the hard dirt area (the southerly primary surface) adjacent to the departure end of runway 19. Situated on the level terrain, the airplane came to rest in an inverted attitude and was oriented on a 315-degree magnetic bearing. The main wreckage, which consisted of a majority of the airframe and engine, was located about 525 feet from the edge of the runway's center point.

The first identified point of impact was a ground scar impression about 40 feet from the main wreckage that dimensionally and geometrically resembled the wings with a crater-like impression in between. The span of the ground disturbance was about 36.5 feet, with red lens fragments located near the east side and green fragments on the westerly side; the airplane's wingspan was 36.1 feet. Imbedded in the center crater was a portion of a propeller blade and the nose wheel. In the debris field from the ground scar to the main wreckage was the oil sump, the propeller, and engine accessories.

A routine aviation weather report (METAR) generated by an Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS) at the airport, indicated that about 5 minutes prior to the accident the conditions were as follows: wind was from 260 degrees at 9 knots; temperature 66 degrees Fahrenheit; dew point 28 degrees Fahrenheit; and altimeter 29.60 inHg.

================

Terry Lee Chapman, the mother of Christopher Jordan Chapman and the representative of his estate, filed the lawsuit Wednesday, claiming Bradford R. Holt was negligent in allowing his son, Tanner James Holt, to have “unfettered access” to the plane while Tanner was intoxicated.

Tanner Holt, 23, of Washington City, Alex Metzger, 22 of St. George, Colby Hafen, 28, and Christopher Chapman, 20, both of Santa Clara were killed during the early morning hours of May 26, 2012, when the plane they were flying in crashed seconds after takeoff at the end of the St. George Municipal Airport runway.

Tanner Holt is identified as the pilot of the plane in the lawsuit. He was a licensed commercial pilot certified to fly single-engine and multi-engine planes, and his father, Brad, is the chief operating officer and president of ExpressJet Airlines, or Atlantic Southeast Airlines, which is a subsidiary of SkyWest Inc. based in the Atlanta, Ga., area.

Brad Holt worked 25 years for SkyWest, 21 of them in leadership positions that included pilot instructor, director of flight standards and vice president of flight operations, according to an online resume. He joined ASA in December 2007.

Brad Holt did not reply to a request for comment on the lawsuit Thursday.

Terry Chapman alleges in the lawsuit that Tanner Holt and several other individuals, not including her son, had been consuming alcoholic beverages at a friend’s house prior to the incident.

The foursome met at the St. George airport after midnight and intended to fly to Mesquite, but after the aircraft left the ground at 1:20 a.m. it crashed, propeller first, near the end of the runway, the complaint states.

According to a preliminary NTSB report issued last year, security camera footage recorded at the airport showed the lights on the Cessna 172S’s left wing and tail as it departed the runway.

"The airplane appeared to maneuver at a low altitude for the length of the runway while increasing its airspeed. Near the end of the runway, the airplane began a rapid ascent and continued out of the view of the camera," the report states. "After about 7 seconds, the airplane reappears further down the frame in a rapid descent."

The report notes that a surface weather report generated at the airport about five minutes prior to the crash indicated winds were light at about 10 mph and the temperature was 66 degrees with no precipitation reported.

“(The plane’s owner) Diamond Flying and / or Bradford R. Holt negligently entrusted the aircraft to Tanner Holt when they knew or should have known that Tanner Holt was operating the aircraft impaired, under the influence of alcohol or in a manner inconsistent with the plane’s weight load limitations,” the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit seeks remuneration for economic and general damages to be determined at trial, stating that the economic amount would exceed $300,000.


http://www.thespectrum.com

http://www.sltrib.com

Related: 
http://www.kathrynsreport.com

More Damage To New Maryland State Medevac Helicopters

Another newly purchased AW-139 medevac helicopter has sustained damage, this time during routine maintenance. It marks the second time in less than a month that the state's recently purchased choppers have been sidelined.

State police say the chopper's top rotor was damaged when a technician used a rope in an effort to realign the bade. The chopper, known as 'Trooper Six,' flies out of the Easton barracks. 

Earlier this month another AW-139, known as Trooper 3, which is based in Frederick was stranded on the helipad of Maryland Shock Trauma. State Police said a bullet may have punctured the top rotor. 

Though Maryland State police speculated that the damage may have been caused by a stray bullet fired while the AW139 was providing air support during the chase of a Pennsylvania bank robbery, PA police later told FOX45 that they have no reports of shots fired by bank robbers at aircraft during the chase. 

Police have declined to release photos of the possible bullet hole damage.

The state borrowed $130 million to purchase ten AW-139s to replace an aging Medevac fleet. The decision to purchase 12 of the larger, more technologically advanced helicopters, rather than privatizing the fleet or refurbishing existing helicopters, was controversial when it was made in 2008 - and remains so today. 

Original article: http://www.foxbaltimore.com

Updated: Thursday, September 26 2013, 12:53 PM EDT Another newly purchased AW-139 medevac helicopter has sustained damage, this time during routine maintenance. It marks the second time in less than a month that the state's recently purchased choppers have been sidelined. State police say the chopper's top rotor was damaged when a technician used a rope in an effort to realign the bade. The chopper, known as 'Trooper Six,' flies out of the Easton barracks. Earlier this month another AW-139, known as Trooper 3, which is based in Frederick was stranded on the helipad of Maryland Shock Trauma. State Police said a bullet may have punctured the top rotor. Though Maryland State police speculated that the damage may have been caused by a stray bullet fired while the AW139 was providing air support during the chase of a Pennsylvania bank robbery, PA police later told FOX45 that they have no reports of shots fired by bank robbers at aircraft during the chase. Police have declined to release photos of the possible bullet hole damage. The state borrowed $130 million to purchase ten AW-139s to replace an aging Medevac fleet. The decision to purchase 12 of the larger, more technologically advanced helicopters, rather than privatizing the fleet or refurbishing existing helicopters, was controversial when it was made in 2008 - and remains so today.

Read More at: http://www.foxbaltimore.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/more-damage-new-state-medevac-helicopters-22533.shtml#.UkSQ_OKqbE0

How I Got My Job: Program Analyst at the Federal Aviation Administration

Byron is a 25-year-old employee of a federal government agency.

I understand that you are a Program Analyst at the FAA.


Yes.

What do you do all day?

I work in a department that deals with aviation safety. A lot of our work involves coordinating other parts of the FAA to ensure that they’re doing things that keep planes in the sky. I work on that, and I also do a lot of data analysis and presentation so that everyone in the office stays on the same page. I spend a lot of time updating spreadsheets and playing with databases, generally being a code monkey. I also take technical English and distill it down to something that a normal person can read.

And how much do you make doing that?


Um, a person who is doing this job would probably make between $60,000-$70,000, roughly.

For perspective on how far that goes, how much is an apartment in your building?

Well, I share a one-bedroom with my girlfriend. But the average rent for that size apartment in our building is somewhere in the $1,700-$1,900 range, which, considering the location and proximity to the metro, is a pretty reasonable price.

So I’m going to put forth a couple of theories as to how you got this job, and you tell me how accurate they are. Theory #1: You were a college aviation prodigy, and someone became familiar with your research and decided that they had to have you on their team.

That is not correct. First of all, I discovered my passion for aviation long before college, and second of all, I did not do any widely publicized research on it. In fact, I was an art major.

Wait, you really were passionate about aviation? But you didn’t do any academic stuff on it?

I mean, I wrote a paper on airline joint ventures, but it wasn’t published or anything. It’s technically enshrined at an institute at my college, I guess.

Okay. So my theory #1, that you were a wunderkind, is false.

Yes.

Theory #2: You come from a family of aviators, and you always knew that being a Program Analyst at the FAA was your destiny.


Well, I did grow up with a deep love of planes. (goes into brief soliloquy on different types of aircraft) But my family’s definitely not that way.

When you were in college, did you know that the job you have now even existed?


No, I always thought my passion was unrealistic to pursue. First of all, no one ever told me this was a thing. Also, I didn’t think they’d have any need for my skill set, but my skill set has actually come up and become something very useful.

How would you define your skill set?

Lots of computer ability. The ability to write English. Speaking several languages. I’m generally pretty congenial, and I think that’s actually part of why they hired me.

Read more and comments/reaction:  http://thebillfold.com

Piper Aerostar 602P, N35FD: Accident occurred September 23, 2013 in Sandpoint, Idaho

NTSB Identification: WPR13LA419 
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Monday, September 23, 2013 in Sandpoint, ID
Probable Cause Approval Date: 10/27/2014
Aircraft: PIPER PA60 602P, registration: N35FD
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.

NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

The pilot reported that, while on a right base leg visual approach, he received the current automated weather report and that he did not think that the 4-knot tailwind was an issue because the runway was 5,500 feet long. The pilot reported that, although the airplane landed long, he thought that he had sufficient runway to stop the airplane with heavy braking. However, as he applied the brakes, he felt the sensation of “no brakes” as the end of the runway quickly approached. The airplane’s owner, who occupied a seat in the rear cabin, reported that the pilot seemed to be having a problem aligning the airplane with the runway during the approach, that the airplane was high and fast and the flaps were full down, and that the pilot was trying to force the airplane down onto the runway. The passenger reported that he observed that the approach speed was 132 knots; per the airplane's flight manual, the calculated approach speed for the landing weight of the airplane was about 90 knots. The airplane subsequently ran off the end of the runway and impacted the localizer structure, which resulted in substantial damage to the airplane. A postaccident examination of the airplane's braking system revealed that the brakes were likely operating properly before the airplane exited the runway.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot's failure to fly the approach at the appropriate landing speed and attain the correct touchdown point, which resulted in a runway overrun.

On September 23, 2013, about 0815 Pacific daylight time, a Piper PA60 602P, N35FD, sustained substantial damage as a result of a runway overrun and subsequent impact with the airport's localizer equipment at the Sandpoint Airport, Sandpoint, Idaho. The airplane was registered to Young Living Essential Oils LC, of Lehi, Utah. The commercial pilot and one passenger were not injured, while the remaining passenger sustained minor injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the corporate cross-country flight, which was being operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91, and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed. The flight departed the Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah, about 0600 mountain daylight time, with SZT as its destination.

In a statement submitted to the National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge (IIC), the pilot reported while approaching SZT, he requested and was approved for the GPS approach [for Runway 01]. After descending out of the clouds at about 2,500 feet above ground level (agl), the pilot received the local automated weather; the wind was reported to be from 190 degrees at 4 knots. The pilot stated that as he was set up on a right base leg for runway 01, he considered the 4 knot tailwind minimal for the 5,500-foot runway. The pilot further stated that he landed quite a bit long, but thought he had sufficient room to stop with heavy braking, and [during the landing roll] had the sensation of "…no brakes at all." The airplane subsequently ran off the end of the runway, and impacted the localizer before coming to rest upright. The pilot concluded in his report that this accident could have been prevented by landing into the wind and on the numbers. The pilot reported no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. 

In a telephone interview with the IIC, the owner of the airplane reported that he was seated in the rear cabin at the time of the accident. The owner stated that during the approach he detected that the pilot was having an alignment problem with the approach. He further reported that the pilot was high, the flaps were full down, the airspeed over the threshold was 132 knots, and that there was a tailwind of about 10 knots; the airplane flight manual states that the approach speed for the reported landing weight of 5,156 pounds and full flaps (45 degrees) would have been about 90 knots. The owner stated that over the runway threshold, the airplane dropped down then went back up, and that the pilot tried to force the airplane down. The owner added that after the airplane went off the end of the runway and came to a stop, he exited the aircraft and noticed that while the brakes were not smoking, they were hot.

A postaccident examination of the airplane's braking system was performed by a Federal Aviation Administration airworthiness inspector, on September 25, 2013. The inspector reported that an inspection of the brake reservoir revealed that all of the brake fluid was gone, however, the inside area of the reservoir was observed to be wet and shiny, indicative that there had been brake fluid present recently. Further, inspection of the brake actuators on the pilot's rudder pedals revealed that all components appeared to be working correctly. The inspector concluded that all evidence observed supports the contention that the brakes were most likely operating properly prior to the airplane leaving the runway.


http://registry.faa.gov/N35FD


NTSB Identification: WPR13LA419
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Monday, September 23, 2013 in Sandpoint, ID
Aircraft: PIPER PA60 602P, registration: N35FD
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.


This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On September 23, 2013, about 0815 Pacific daylight time, a Piper PA60 602P, N35FD, sustained substantial damage as a result of a runway overrun and subsequent impact with the airport’s localizer equipment at the Sandpoint Airport, Sandpoint, Idaho. The airplane was registered to Young Living Essential Oils LC, of Lehi, Utah. The certified commercial pilot and one passenger were not injured, while the remaining passenger sustained minor injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the corporate cross-country flight, which was being operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91, and an instrument flight rules flight plan was filed. The flight departed the Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah, about 0600 mountain daylight time, with SZT as its destination.

In a post-accident interview with a Federal Aviation Administration aviation safety inspector, the pilot reported that on landing rollout he experienced a braking anomaly, which resulted in a runway overrun. During the overrun the airplane impacted the runway localizer array and a perimeter fence, which resulted in substantial damage to the airplane’s left wing.

The airplane was recoverd to a secured hangar for further investigation of the reported brake anomaly.
=====
  
SANDPOINT — It could take up to seven months to restore the instrument landing system that was damaged in Monday’s plane crash, according to Sandpoint Airport Manager Dave Schuck.

A pilot crashed off the north end of the airport’s runway during a failed landing.

The pilot and two passengers escaped the crash without injury, although the plane took out an antenna array for the airport’s distance-measuring equipment for instrument landings.

“That antenna array is obsolete and no longer available, so we need to replace the antenna array and the equipment that supports it. The initial estimate from our technician is $380,000 to $400,000,” Schuck said.

Schuck said it’s expected that insurance carried by the county, the pilot or some combination thereof, will cover the cost of restoring the distance-measuring equipment, known in pilotspeak as a localizer. The localizer provides runway guidance to inbound aircraft by emitting a directional radio beam that pilots can home in on while landing at night or in weather conditions with poor visibility.

Replacing the equipment could take up to seven months because demand for the outdated system is so slight that there isn’t any immediately on hand.

“We’re going to work very closely with the FAA and with the service providers to make sure that it’s as short as possible,” Schuck said of the instrument landing system outage.

Airport officials posted a Notice to Airmen on a national database to give pilots the heads-up that the localizer is out of service until further notice.

Although pilots can still rely on a GPS system to help guide landings in darkness or bad weather, Schuck said the localizer gave inbound pilots a lower altitude to decide whether proceed with their landing or to abandon it.

The localizer had a decision height of 989 feet.

“With the GPS approach, that height is 1,589 feet, so it’s 600 feet higher,” said Schuck.

The higher decision height could thwart landings at Sandpoint airport in adverse conditions, which could force pilots to seek an alternative airport to land at.

That prospect is concerning because the airport stimulates the local economy.

Sandpoint Police said the pilot, 55-year-old Donald Muirhead of Orem, Utah, was arrested on suspicion of operating the plane under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

However, there is no record of any criminal charges pending against Muirhead, according to the Idaho Statewide Trial Court Record System and the Idaho Supreme Court Data Repository.

Muirhead was also not listed as an inmate at the Bonner County Jail, although he could have bonded out shortly after being booked at the facility.

The status of the criminal investigation against Muirhead is unclear. Sandpoint Police Chief Corey Coon did not return calls Wednesday.

It’s the first plane crash at the airport since 2008, when a deer bolted into the path of a plane that was in the process of taking off.

There were no injuries in that collision.

“We’re very happy that no one was injured,” Schuck said of Monday’s crash, adding that the coordination of emergency responders from the city, Bonner County and Idaho State Police was “excellent.”

Original article:   http://www.bonnercountydailybee.com

Mercer County freeholders take on residents' complaints about Trenton-Mercer Airport (KTTN), New Jersey

The Mercer County freeholders voiced support this week for the county’s efforts to communicate with residents affected by increased flight traffic at Trenton-Mercer airport, but one freeholder suggested that a committee should be created to help people get their voices heard.

Freeholders were responding to complaints from Bucks Residents for Responsible Airport Management, a group of residents in Pennsylvania who live under the airport’s flight path and say they will sue to compel the county to conduct an environmental impact study.

At Tuesday’s board meeting Freeholder Chair John Cimino praised the county administration for working to address concerns about the airport in Ewing, which has seen an uptick in flights this year since Frontier Airlines began flying out of the facility.

“The administration has done a great job of trying to articulate and communicate with those residents,” Cimino said.

Officials have said the county has not been directed to perform a study by the Federal Aviation Administration, and is in compliance with the agency’s requirements.

But Freeholder Lucylle Walter said the complaints show the need for an airport advisory committee that would allow locals and other stakeholders to express their concerns.

“People are afraid for their housing values. They are afraid of rumors they hear,” said Walter, who lives in Ewing.

County Executive Brian Hughes said he would be willing to talk about an airport advisory committee in the future, but that it would not be practical to consult one on construction now underway at the airport.

Most flights have been suspended for two months, through Nov. 7, as the county reconfigures the terminal, expands the parking and installs a system on the main runway to stop runaway planes.

Hughes said the county could possibly form a committee of airport users, local residents, chamber of commerce members and other parties. He would want to better understand the committee’s responsibilities and whether stakeholders are interested before he considered it further, he said.

Hughes noted that people can call a complaint line, but said it is not heavily used. He said Frontier has generated fewer complaints that previous carriers at the airport because its planes, A319s, are much quieter.

Story and Comments/Reaction:    http://www.nj.com

Airplane propeller swiped: Squamish Airport, British Columbia, Canada

Squamish  Royal Canadian Mounted Police are investigating the theft of an airplane propeller from the Squamish Airport last week.

Last Tuesday (Sept. 17), police received a report of a propeller having been stolen from a Piper Cherokee while the aircraft was parked at the airport sometime between Monday (Sept. 16) and Sept. 17 at 1 p.m., RCMP Sgt. Wayne Pride wrote in a statement.

No other aircraft were targeted. The propeller, valued around $5,000, was a Sensenich 74DM6-0-60 model, silver/grey, with a maroon-colored spinner (base).

A white pickup truck with a crew cab that wasn’t familiar to those at the airport was seen in the area on the morning of Sept. 16. Police are following up on that tip, but it’s not known whether the truck is related to the theft.

Original article:   http://www.squamishchief.com

Air India employees to complain to United States regulator Federal Aviation Administration on alleged violations

National carrier Air India and the country's regulator, Directorate General of Civil Aviation,  could be heading for some serious trouble and embarrassment as a section of the Air India employees plan to approach the American regulator Federal Aviation Administration on the alleged violations being regularly committed by Air India. The union also threatens that if the matter isn't resolved within days they would not just report the matter to the FAA but also stop serving meals in the entire length of the long haul flight. This comes at a time when the FAA after its security audit just recently has placed the DGCA on a notice period to correct the lapses. If the FAA is not satisfied by the corrective measures put in place by the DGCA then the Indian regulator could be downgraded and that could mean trouble in the form of security checks and restrictions for Air India and Jet Airways flights flying to the US.

The All India Cabin Crew Association talking exclusively to Headlines Today maintained that time and again they have tried to present the pending issues to the management but the matters have never been addressed. This the union maintains has demoralized the workers immensely. The union adds that violations have now become a regular in Air India and that the lives of the passengers and the crew are being put in danger. The union directly charges the management for the current situation.

Headlines Today is in the possession of the letter which has been written by the union to the DGCA. The letter states that AI with minimum crew is conducting a full meal service and liquor service on each sector of the narrow body. On the wide bodied aircraft it is up to three full meal service and liquor service in violation of DGCA rules which have fallen into deaf years.

The letter further states that the management at times provides one or two cabin crew over and above the minimum crew and expect the crew to conduct the meal service without providing service procedure thereby putting a huge burden on the crew leading to increase in their fatigue factor and having a direct bearing on flight safety.

The FAA in its recent audit had expressed dissatisfaction over the training and safety procedures of the DGCA and had given DGCA little time to put measures into place.

When contacted the DG maintained that he was in the US for a meeting and that he would look into the matter once he returns. He also maintained that he has not received any letter so far.

Industry experts maintain that if the DGCA is downgraded then it will be a huge embarrassment for the country and that the brand name of Air India which has already sunken so low would further get eroded.

Original article: http://indiatoday.intoday.in

FAA Panel to Propose Limits on In-Flight Internet Use: WSJ

Updated September 25, 2013, 9:28 p.m. ET

By ANDY PASZTOR and JACK NICAS

The Wall Street Journal


A federal advisory committee is expected to call for expanded use of personal electronics during takeoffs and landings, but some key restrictions on voice calls and Web use are bound to remain.

The industry-government panel, which Thursday is expected to decide on specific recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration, is looking to ease controversial restrictions that currently prohibit passengers from turning on any electronic devices below 10,000 feet.

Despite the anticipated changes, onboard Internet connections likely would remain banned or inoperable on most flights below 10,000 feet for the near future, limiting the devices' usefulness in that airspace.

The committee and the FAA are likely to maintain the current prohibition on the use of cellular connections throughout the flight—whether for voice or data—and they may even require fliers to disable Wi-Fi capability on all types of devices during takeoffs and landings.

Even if Wi-Fi is allowed, Gogo Inc., the largest provider of in-flight Internet in the U.S., said its system isn't optimized for service below 10,000 feet.

Such regulatory revisions also pose potentially thorny enforcement issues. Flight attendants would be required to continue policing the use of devices during certain phases of flight, though checking whether fliers were in compliance could become far more nuanced than it is now. Cabin crews might have to determine whether a device's Wi-Fi or cellular connection has been deactivated.

Even before the panel wraps up its work, some airlines and leaders of flight-attendant unions have expressed concerns about how they will be able to make sure the revised rules are followed, and how passengers are likely to react.

"It would be impossible to enforce," said Julie Frederick, spokeswoman for the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, with 18,000 members working for AMR Corp.'s American Airlines. She said that sort of system would assume "a flight attendant could go through and examine each electronic device and know how to evaluate it and indicate to that individual that it needs to be in X or Y mode."

Airlines and airline labor unions have seats on the advisory committee and have been discussing enforcement concerns, people familiar with the meetings said. The recommendations are likely to be delivered Monday to the FAA, but the agency could take a long time to make a final determination.

Douglas Kidd, a panel member and executive director of the National Association of Airline Passengers, said the group will recommend that the FAA should approve the use of devices below 10,000 feet after testing aircraft to ensure that flight-control systems won't be affected. He said it is likely to take "months if not years" for any changes to be implemented.

The FAA has declined to comment on the status of the report, except to say that agency officials will study it before deciding on what to do. In addition to the engineering challenges of developing tests and design standards covering a wide range of aircraft and personal devices, the anticipated regulatory shift also could test the technical mettle of some passengers.

A draft copy of the report presented to the committee members in June but bearing a July date emphasized that "it would be very difficult for the standard set of passengers on an aircraft" to confirm that all of their devices were "in some type of safe airplane operational mode."

To support what it called "the expanded gate to gate use recommendations," the draft document called for systematic safety analyses to determine what impact, if any, passenger devices could have on various onboard navigation and instrument-landing systems. The broad outlines of the draft haven't changed, according to people familiar with the matter.

Reflecting intense interest in the general issue, after soliciting public input, the FAA received more than 200 separate written comments from individuals, airlines, trade associations, equipment makers and other groups. Robert Apodaca, who identified himself as a senior flight test engineer for Lockheed Martin Corp., said he has "never encountered an instance" of personal computers, radios and cellphones interfering with the safe operation of military aircraft. Urging the FAA to lift the current restrictions, he concluded: "Let's get back some common sense."

Though some fliers won't have to power down an e-book or a game they were looking at prior to takeoff of landing, most passengers probably would still have to take at least a limited break from connectivity—and attendants would still question them about their devices.

Almost a year ago, United Continental Holdings Inc. voiced concerns about how to enforce more nuanced rules. In public comments to the committee, United said that "the challenge for cabin crews to discern one device from the next…can not be understated and would be difficult to manage." Attendants wouldn't be able to monitor the use of devices during takeoffs and landings because they must first complete cabin checks and then be seated with safety belts, the airline said.

The current system of banning all devices below 10,000 feet "provides the clearest and most direct instruction to passengers," the company said, and pilots always should retain authority to unilaterally prohibit electronic devices at their discretion.

On Wednesday, a JetBlue Airways Corp. spokeswoman said attendants already face difficulties enforcing the current ban on devices, and any new "enforcement challenges will likely mirror what we see today."

Both JetBlue and Global Eagle Entertainment Inc., which provides in-flight Internet to Southwest Airlines Co., said their Wi-Fi solutions can be adjusted to function below 10,000 feet.

Still another U.S. carrier said that regardless of what the FAA eventually does, during takeoffs and landings it likely will keep Wi-Fi disabled and make passengers stow their electronic devices.

Delta Air Lines Inc.,  which has one of its senior safety officials as the co-chair of the committee, filed public comments last year emphasizing the importance of expanding approval for cellular phone calls "to all phases of ground operations"—presumably including after the boarding doors are closed and planes are moving around on the ground.

One more tough issue confronting the FAA stems from passengers potentially being hit by laptops and tablets in rough air. Qantas Airways Ltd. filed comments with the FAA saying the "risk of physical injury is still a factor for" devices "which are large."

Another committee member, Paul Misener, vice president of global public policy at Amazon.com Inc., said in public comments filed last year that electronic devices could be divided into categories, perhaps displaying some type of seal indicating approval for use only during certain phases of flight or in certain modes. To help ease the enforcement burden for attendants, Mr. Misener said such restrictions could be detailed "in seat-back literature or printed on the backs of tickets."

The July draft includes recommendations for regulators and industry officials to collaborate on public education efforts using "in seat-pocket magazines," ticketing counters and automated kiosks.

A spokeswoman for the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA said the union has warned authorities that replacing the blanket ban on devices with a policy that allows devices to be used only under certain conditions would be difficult to enforce because "it would be nearly impossible to just tell from physical appearance that a certain device was being used properly." The spokeswoman said that if the rules change, new training programs will likely be needed.


Source:  http://online.wsj.com

Brunswick, Maine: Kestrel Aircraft struggling to pay workers, rent

Beth Brogan and Whit Richardson, Bangor Daily News

Thursday, September 26, 2013 at 7:36 am

BRUNSWICK — Kestrel Aircraft Co., a major tenant at the former Brunswick Naval Air Station, continues to face funding problems, leading to problems with vendors and an inability to cover employee insurance.

Kestrel CEO Alan Klapmeier confirmed Wednesday that his startup company is behind on rent payments, has been late with paychecks and that Kestrel employees in Brunswick are currently without health, life and dental insurance after the company failed to pay premiums.

Kestrel employs about 40 people at Brunswick Landing, where Klapmeier announced in July 2010 that the company would invest $100 million to design and build a new turboprop single-engine plane. At the time, Klapmeier said it hoped to bring 300 jobs to the former Navy base, although he later said as many as 600 jobs could have been created.

But in October 2011, citing difficulties obtaining financing — including New Market Tax Credits — in Maine, Klapmeier announced that the company would manufacture the planes in Superior, Wis., although composite components of the planes would continue to be made in Brunswick. The company employs about 60 people in Superior.

On Friday, an employee alerted the Bangor Daily News that his insurance had been discontinued, direct deposit checks had been late and Kestrel was late in making rent payments to the Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority, which oversees Brunswick Landing and civilian reuse of the former Navy base.

The employee, who preferred to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation, said a Kestrel administrator told employees Friday that “the company could get funding at any time and that could clear things up.”

Kestrel also owes vendors who supply the company with materials to manufacture its prototype turbo-jet. Delays in acquiring those materials — as well as the process of becoming certified by the Federal Aviation Administration — have caused Kestrel to push back the delivery date.

“Originally we were supposed to have a plane in the air in January of next year,” the employee said Tuesday, “but we only have two or three parts molded, and we need about 200 parts.”

A former employee, who said he left Kestrel because of its inability to make payroll on time for about four months, said Wednesday that several vendors have “put Kestrel on a credit hold due to nonpayment.”

“I’ve been at work and not had materials to work with due to the vendors not getting paid,” he said.

Klapmeier confirmed by phone Wednesday that completion of the prototype is “a year behind schedule,” and that Kestrel has “not started building conforming prototypes in any meaningful way.”

Klapmeier also confirmed that “the company has been short of cash, and we’re working to finance our operations … We appreciate the patience of everybody as we go through cash flow issues.”

The CEO said the company is current with payroll, although some employees have been furloughed or on reduced work or pay. He said the company expects a significant source of funding to come through shortly — funding that would finance “essentially the majority of the project.”

At an aviation industry conference in late July, Klapmeier said the company needs to raise $125 million to see the aircraft through FAA certification, according to Aviation International News.

“We’re very optimistic about where we’re at and what’s going on,” he told the BDN. “I understand how frustrating it is for people. We’re definitely behind on some things. [But] we’re really pleased with the progress that we’ve made. The progress on the design is much further than I would have expected, given the slow pace of financing.”

Funding challenges and cash flow problems are hurdles any aircraft manufacturing start-up should expect to face, according to industry watchers.

“That comes with the territory. It’s almost a guarantee,” said Mike Boyd, an aviation industry consultant at Boyd Group International in Colorado. “You don’t ever achieve anything unless you risk something, and that’s what this company is doing.”

Boyd said the airplane Kestrel wants to make should be popular in the marketplace, if they can get it to the marketplace.

“They have an ambitious design and ambitious program,” said Boyd, a former Bangor resident and vice president of Bar Harbor Airlines. “It’s very clear to me there is a niche for this airplane, but it’s a tough business to break into.”

Bob Wiecezak, head of the aviation practice at the Washington, D.C.-based Avascent Group, concurred that the aviation business is “a tough environment,” but he offered hope for Kestrel.

“It’s a beautiful airplane — just amazing,” Wiecezak said Wednesday.

While larger aviation companies such as Boeing have a significant share of the market and the money and access to government to make the financial world work for them, smaller companies such as Kestrel have to have demand lined up.

“Ultimately that will happen for Kestrel,” he predicted. “I look at the airplane and I think people will be drawn to it. Composites are the future now — Boeing is going that way. Kestrel is very forward-leaning.”

Steve Levesque, executive director of MRRA, said his organization is working with the company to address its financial situation.

“They’re trying to recapitalize things and they’re keeping us informed,” Levesque said Wednesday. “I’m not pushing any panic buttons … they’re pretty convinced that they have the capital resources coming that are going to allow them to get caught up.”

Levesque pointed to other businesses that leased space at the former Navy base that since have gone out of business, including Integrated Marine Systems and Resilient Communications, which closed its doors after selling some assets to Oxford Networks.

“This isn’t an uncommon situation that companies go through periods of financial struggle,” he said, adding that it’s especially true for start-up companies such as Kestrel that have large capital needs.

Regardless of the challenges, Klapmeier remains confident.

“I think we have accomplished a lot over the last three years, and we expect to accomplish more,” he said.


Original article:  http://www.sunjournal.com