Monday, September 15, 2014

Navy wants to harvest retired Japanese helos for parts

It's unusual for the United States - by far the biggest defense spender in the world - to seek scrapped military equipment from other nations. Typically, those roles are reversed.

But for the past several years, according to internal emails obtained by The Virginian-Pilot, the U.S. Navy has been negotiating to acquire Japan's retired fleet of MH-53E Sea Dragons. The Navy wants to harvest the old helicopters for parts to help keep its own Sea Dragons flying until 2025.

"It's telling when we are put in a position where we need to buy scrapped aircraft to keep ours going," said Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, an independent think tank in Washington. "For the most part, we're buying the most recent generation of equipment and discarding the last generation. And many of our global partners and allies are still using them, so they'll gladly take them off our hands."

Japan is the only other country that bought Sea Dragons back when Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. was building the mine-clearing helicopters for the U.S. Navy in the 1980s. Unlike the United States, Japan decided to retire and replace its fleet last decade as the aircraft approached the end of their planned service life.

Navy and Japanese military officials have declined to discuss the potential exchange. The arrangement, however, highlights the difficulty the Navy has faced in the upkeep of its oldest and most maintenance-intensive helicopters as they near their fourth decade in service.

The Navy's desire for discarded aircraft from Japan is likely, at least in part, a reflection of national priorities, Harrison said.

The Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force has invested heavily in mine-clearing ships and helicopters, part of a strategy to counter the threat posed by China, a country boasting an enormous and sophisticated arsenal of sea mines. Japan began making plans in the late 1990s to replace its fleet of 11 Sea Dragons with a smaller and more efficient Italian-built helicopter, the MCH-101. The last of Japan's Sea Dragons were retired within the past year.

Contrast that with the Navy, which initially planned to replace its Sea Dragons last decade. But as plans to outfit a smaller helicopter with mine-clearing equipment fizzled, and as other anti-mine technologies tied to the littoral combat ship have been delayed, the Navy has repeatedly pushed back plans to retire the Cold War-era helicopters.

While the Navy wavered, defense manufacturers stopped making many Sea Dragon replacement parts, assuming the helicopters were going away. That's forced the service to get creative.

In November, a Marine officer in the Naval Air Systems Command office that's responsible for overseeing the Navy's Sea Dragon program emailed senior officials with the Navy's Fleet Readiness Center in Japan. In the message, obtained by The Pilot, the officer outlined plans to acquire Japan's remaining eight Sea Dragons.

"We have been negotiating with the Government of Japan for years to make this happen, and we are finally on the cusp," the officer wrote. "We are going to negotiate for 'nominal price,' meaning hopefully as close to free as we can get."

A few obstacles stand in the way of completing the deal, according to the email, including the need for high-level approval at the Pentagon and the risk that the scrapped helicopters were exposed to radiological contamination while responding to Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster following a 2011 earthquake.

If everything worked out, the officer wrote in a follow-up message, the Navy would most likely just harvest the scrapped airframes for parts. But the retired Japanese airframes could also serve another purpose if needed, the officer wrote:

"Unfortunately, last year we had two mishaps in the U.S. Navy that resulted in the destruction of two of our MH-53Es. We used to have 31, now we have 29. Since there may be more mishaps in the future, we would like to reserve the possibility of making a flyable aircraft someday with these airframes."

Two months after the email was sent, another MH-53E crashed, this one off the coast of Virginia Beach, killing three crew members and reducing the Navy's inventory of flyable Sea Dragons to 28.

The January crash revealed an unforeseen mechanical flaw that was repeated in every other Sea Dragon, requiring fleetwide repairs to replace worn fuel lines and wiring bundles. The Navy, however, remains confident in the long-term viability of the Sea Dragon, Capt. Todd Flannery said last week while briefing reporters on the mishap investigation.

Flannery, the commander of Helicopter Sea Combat Wing Atlantic, acknowledged that the helicopters are aging and that new parts can be hard to come by. But the shortage doesn't usually affect day-to-day operations, he said.

"As components start to wear out, things that we haven't had to replace for a very long time start to need to be replaced," Flannery said. "And then we discover, no, we only have three or four of those in the supply system.... When an item that hasn't failed for a very long time fails, it's very difficult to find."

Kelly Burdick, a spokeswoman for Naval Air Systems Command, said she could not discuss negotiations with other countries for parts or aircraft.

"We are currently exploring several options to supplement parts that are no longer in production for the MH-53 helicopter," Burdick wrote in an email.

The issue is part of a bigger problem, said Harrison, the defense analyst. The Sea Dragon is one of several platforms that the Pentagon intended to replace last decade.

But because of delays and cost overruns related to the delivery of new combat systems - including the littoral combat ship - several older platforms have had to remain in service well beyond original plans, Harrison said.

Keeping aging equipment going comes with its own set of problems, he added: "As these systems age, they cost more and more money to maintain. So then there's even less money available to replace them."

One other problem: The older an aircraft gets, Harrison said, the more likely key components are to fail.

"It's really a downward spiral."

Story, Comments and Photo:  http://hamptonroads.com


Capt. Todd Flannery speaks on the Sea Dragon helicopter crash in January at Norfolk Naval Station, Sept. 11, 2014.
 (The' N. Pham | The Virginian-Pilot)

Neosho Retired Military Helicopter Display Repair Needs

NEOSHO, MO.--- "I did two tours to Southeast Asia, one was in 70-71 and then I went back in the end of 75," said Dr. William Doubek, Vietnam veteran.

During his years of service, Vietnam Veteran Dr. William Doubek was no stranger to helicopters.

"I've crashed in them a couple of times and I was just a passenger," said Dr. Doubek.

Crashing and surviving has left him with a special connection to military aircraft, especially this UH-1, or Huey as he calls it, on display in Morse Park. Doubek says it's difficult to see all of the damage the helicopter has endured from vandals through the years.

"They don't realize how many wounded or dead G.I.'s rode on a Huey," he said.

The helicopter was deeded to the city in 1997 and again in 2001. The city manager says a lot of people have probably seen it, but not many know why it's here.

"The story behind it is that there was an officer up in Washington D.C. whose mother lived in Neosho and they contacted the city to see if the city would be interested in putting up a display of a helicopter and the city agreed to it. That's kind of how it came to Neosho," said Troy Royer, Neosho City Manager.

In recent years, city leaders have looked into fixing up the helicopter, but a contract with the U.S. Army makes the repairs difficult.

"If there are broken windows, you can't just take a piece of Plexiglas and go out there to redo it. It has to be a military grade glass that goes back in it. Even painting it, you have to have the colors and the type of paint approved," said Royer.

Also, restoring the UH-1 would not be cheap.

"We are planning on doing some things to it, but it's just not an emergency need right now. We've got other things that are taking precedents over that at this point," said Royer.

Dr. Doubek says he would like to see the helicopter restored and rededicated. To him, the display is a symbol of appreciation for those who served in Vietnam.

"When you've been on one, when you've crashed in one, when you know people that were evacuated on them, it means a lot. It does bring back memories, some good, some sad, but even the sad memories are good memories because I'm one, I don't want to forget," said Dr. Doubek.

The city manager says they are considering moving the helicopter to the Neosho airport. However, it could be a lengthy process to get approval from the Army. If you would like to make a donation to help restore the Vietnam display, you're asked to contact Neosho City Hall.

- Source:  http://www.fourstateshomepage.com

Results of California Highway Patrol (CHP) aircraft speed enforcement detail

On Sunday, September 14, 2014, California Highway Patrol (CHP) Bridgeport Area, in conjunction with the CHP’s Inland Division Air Operations Unit, based at Apple Valley Airport, conducted an aircraft speed enforcement detail on US-395, south of Topaz Lane (between Topaz Lane and Cunningham Lane).  This section of highway has a posted 55 mile per hour maximum speed limit.

During the approximately two hour detail, the CHP aircraft officer identified vehicles traveling in excess of the maximum speed limit and directed officers on the ground to make enforcement contacts.  A total of 11 enforcement contacts were made resulting in nine citations and two verbal warnings.  Eight citations were issued for exceeding the maximum speed limit, one citation was issued for a registration violation, and two verbal warnings were issued to drivers from out of the country.

Read more here:  http://www.sierrawave.net

In-Flight Meal 'Lizard' Case Is Still Squirming

Courthouse News Service 
 Monday, September 15, 2014
Last Update: 4:40 PM PT
By ADAM KLASFELD 


      
MANHATTAN (CN) - Whether she bit into a lizard, a feather or something else, a Puerto Rican beautician still disgusted by her in-flight meal 11 years ago thinks the jury that cleared American Airlines got it wrong.

In July 2003, Monserrate Luna and her son boarded a flight from New York to her native Puerto Rico to visit her family, and she ordered a chicken dinner that came with rice, peppers, peas and carrots.

Although Luna now insists her meal also included a lizard common in Puerto Rico, she originally complained of insects in her lawsuit. Her lawyer chalked up the discrepancy to his Spanish-speaking client's language barrier.

Luna's 5-year-old son said that it looked like some "animal," and a flight attendant testified that it was a feather.

Whatever it was drove her to the restroom to vomit "a little bit," Luna says.

The flight attendant offered to let Luna keep the meal as evidence, but Luna declined.

Luna then filed a federal complaint against American Airlines and LSG Sky Chefs in Manhattan, alleging physical, emotional and economic injuries. The airline, in turn, fingered its California-based frozen-meal provider Overhill Farms.

A federal magistrate whittled the claims down to a single count of negligent infliction of emotional distress, which a federal jury rejected in late 2010.

Still a resident of Puerto Rico, Luna traveled to Manhattan on Monday to watch her lawyer try to revive the case before a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit.

"She is still struggling for justice," Bhatia & Associates attorney Nadi Viswanathan said.

Viswanathan portrayed the case as a tale of "David against Goliath," pitting a "very simple woman" against an airline's sophisticated legal team. His "uninformed" client should be forgiven her failure to preserve the evidence, he said.

The jury should have heard all of his client's allegations, not only the negligence charge that went to trial, Viswanathan added.

Kenneth Gormley, representing American Airlines for Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, countered that Luna received a "full and fair opportunity to present any and all evidence with respect to all of her claims."

"Simply put, the jury did not believe the central element of the plaintiff's case, that there was something in her food," he said.

Judge Rosemary Pooler asked Gormley how the jury could have rejected that the meal was "unfit for human consumption" even though the flight attendant spotted the feather in it.

Gormley replied that Luna denied the flight attendant's account.

Judge Raymond Lohier chimed in: "They insisted on the narrow lizard?"

The panel, which included U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni of New York's Southern District, reserved decision on the matter.


- Source:  http://www.courthousenews.com

Government under fire for scavenging aircraft parts from museum plane

Canada’s search-and-rescue system is being held together by “tape and baling wire,” say experts and opposition critics, after revelations that the Royal Canadian Air Force had to raid an old Hercules airplane at a museum for parts.

The Citizen reported Monday that air force technicians went through a Hercules on display at the National Air Force Museum of Canada in Trenton, Ont., in July 2012 because they needed navigational equipment for a similar aircraft still in use.

Asked about the issue in the House of Commons Monday, Defence Minister Rob Nicholson referred only to “a mistake” but did not explain what he meant. His office had earlier defended the scavenging of the museum-based aircraft, saying the military “took the initiative to remove these functional, perfectly good parts and use them effectively.”

News of the museum visit prompted opposition MPs to question the government’s commitment to Canada’s search-and-rescue capabilities in light of growing concerns about the state of the rescue system, which they argue has gotten worse under the Conservative government.

“This is a basic commitment for the Canadian Forces,” NDP defence critic Jack Harris said of search and rescue. “And the government is not giving it priority. It really makes you wonder why we can be so cavalier about foreign operations and at the same time we haven’t got our act together here at home.”

The Canadian Forces and Coast Guard respond to thousands of emergency calls around the country every year, from stranded fishermen and lost children to downed pilots and avalanche survivors. Search and rescue is considered a “no-fail mission,” meaning failure to find the target is unacceptable.

In April 2013, Auditor General Michael Ferguson said the military and coast guard had been able to “adequately respond” to search-and-rescue emergencies and distress calls in recent years. However, he also said unless urgent action was taken to address critical personnel and equipment challenges, response times and capabilities would fall dramatically. That included replacing the air force’s aging search-and-rescue airplanes.

Successive Liberal and Conservative governments have promised new planes since 2002, but documents obtained by the Citizen show defence officials don’t expect them to begin arriving until at least 2018.

Harris said he admired the “inventiveness” of the military personnel who were able to scour for parts from a museum to keep planes flying, “but it’s really clearly an indication of how badly these new aircraft are needed.”

Liberal search-and-rescue critic Yvonne Jones said it isn’t just the air force’s airplanes that are of concern; the air force also doesn’t have the right helicopters to do the job, while the coast guard is using old icebreakers.

“There’s no stability in search and rescue anymore,” she said. “There has been nothing done (by the Conservative government) to strengthen search-and-rescue activity in Canada.”

Rob Huebert of the University of Calgary said the fact the search-and-rescue system works as well as it does is a testament to the professionalism of the military and coast guard officials involved, given that it is being held together by “tape and baling wire.”

But he said there are no obvious quick fixes, especially when it comes to getting new equipment through the country’s troubled military procurement system.

“They’re (the government) trying to dig themselves out of a hole,” Huebert said of efforts to fix the search-and-rescue system. “But if it was you or me, I don’t know how we would do it.”

The Citizen reported Monday that the search-and-rescue squadron at CFB Trenton contacted the air force museum’s executive director in 2012 to see if they could go through the Hercules on display there.

They were seeking two inertial navigation units that they could take from the museum’s airplane and install in one of their H-model Hercules, which range in age from 20 to 40 years.

RCAF Capt. Julie Brunet said in an email, “These high value and essential systems allow long non-stop flights to be able to provide better response time to any search-and-rescue mission.”

Once air force technicians confirmed the museum’s Hercules still had its navigational units, it only took about half an hour to get them out.

- Source: http://ottawacitizen.com

Boeing Takes Lead to Build Space Taxi: Aerospace Giant Poised to Beat SpaceX for U.S. Contract to Ferry Astronauts

The Wall Street Journal
By Andy Pasztor

Updated Sept. 15, 2014 7:39 p.m. ET


Boeing Co. appears positioned to beat out two smaller rivals for the bulk of a multibillion-dollar NASA contract to ferry astronauts to and from orbit, according to government and aerospace-industry officials.

An award to Boeing would represent a victory over the newer Space Exploration Technologies Corp., or SpaceX, which had been considered a favorite in many quarters because of its lower costs and nimbler approach. The decision on the development of space taxis will be a milestone for commercial space endeavors, locking in unparalleled authority for contractors to develop and operate vehicles with limited federal oversight. An announcement is expected as early as Tuesday.

Recent signals from the Obama administration, according to the officials, indicate that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's leadership has concluded on a preliminary basis that Boeing's proposed capsule offers the least risky option, as well as the one most likely to be ready to transport U.S. crews to the international space station within three years. The officials cautioned that a last-minute shift by NASA chief Charles Bolden, who must vet the decision, could change the result of the closely watched competition.

But interviews with numerous space experts from industry, government and elsewhere—all of whom have been monitoring developments closely—reveal a growing consensus that Boeing is likely to emerge as the big winner to develop and operate the nation's replacement for the space-shuttle fleet, which was retired in 2011.

If Boeing ends up with the largest share of the commercial-crew program's future dollars, the Chicago company could buttress its position as a leading force in U.S. manned space efforts for generations.

One of the two other bidders—SpaceX or Sierra Nevada Corp.—is expected to obtain a smaller contract as a second source, these experts said. SpaceX is in a very strong position to get the nod, the experts added.

For virtually the first time in its history, NASA is also seeking to reduce risk and keep a lid on prices by maintaining competition involving a major program. The success of NASA's commercial efforts depends on long-term competition, according to James Muncy, an industry consultant and former congressional staffer. "I actually care more about NASA choosing two providers than any specific company I happen to favor."

NASA currently relies on Russian rockets and capsules to fly U.S. astronauts to and from the space station. The price tag has climbed to about $70 million a seat even as U.S. policy makers and lawmakers worry about continued dependence on the Kremlin.

A NASA spokesman declined to comment on the status of the proposals except to say "we anticipate an announcement in September." The agency plans to issue fixed-price contracts extending through 2017 that will include at least one manned demonstration flight linking up with the space station. Some industry officials expect a number of additional fights to be part of this round of awards.

Without commenting on the outcome, a Boeing spokeswoman said the company has demonstrated that "the method and order in which we design and test has been successful." Boeing's team "realizes this is a really tough decision for NASA," she said, and is "waiting patiently to roll full steam ahead" assuming the company wins the contract.

A spokesman for SpaceX also declined comment on its chances. But he said the company "has a track record of 100% primary mission success" on every flight of its Falcon 9 rocket. The company has developed more hardware for manned missions than any rival, the spokesman added.

A spokeswoman for Sierra Nevada, the only company proposing a winged vehicle designed to return to earth by landing on a runway, couldn't be reached for comment.

Southern California-based SpaceX had been widely seen as the leading competitor because of its success in reliably transporting cargo to the orbiting international laboratory. SpaceX's proposed manned system uses many of the same components, and the company and its supporters have long argued that its entrepreneurial style promises lower prices, newer technology and an opportunity to shake up NASA's traditional way of doing business.

But people familiar with the process said Boeing, with its greater experience as a NASA contractor, appears to have become the favorite partly because it has met earlier development goals in the same program on time and on budget. SpaceX didn't fully meet all of the critical design requirements, according to a person familiar with the details.

The dollar value of Boeing's potential contract isn't yet clear, and it depends on how many missions end up being included in the award. NASA currently budgets nearly $700 million annually to support the development of a domestically built alternative to Russian spacecraft, and it could spend billions more over the next decade to pay for ongoing transportation services.

Boeing's role in NASA projects stretches back nearly four decades and includes serving as the prime contractor on the space station. The company also has a primary role developing a deep-space rocket for NASA. "They know the customer and what the customer wants to hear," said a former NASA official keeping tabs on the program.

Many of the agency's engineers and scientists favor Boeing, which intends to use 1990s-vintage Atlas V rockets to blast crews into orbit. Boeing officials have repeatedly said they won't continue to develop the CST-100 manned capsule, which has been in development for three years, without further government support.

By contrast, SpaceX supporters emphasize that in little more than a decade, the closely held company has developed two rockets, three different engines and a capsule designed, from the beginning, with the essential safety features required for manned missions. Founder and Chief Executive Elon Musk and other senior company managers have said they plan to continue development of the Dragon capsule regardless of NASA's decision.

William Gerstenmaier, a 37-year veteran of NASA and the associate administrator in charge of manned exploration programs, is the lead official in the section process.

- Source:  http://online.wsj.com

St Petersburg and Federal Aviation Administration must improve safety at Albert Whitted Airport (KSPG), Florida

WFLA News Channel 8

ST PETERSBURG, FL (WFLA) - 

Around 7,000 planes took off from or came in low over St. Petersburg last year to land at city-owned and operated Albert Whitted airport.

The plane crash at Vinoy Park Monday morning was the rare exception.

Kerry Moser was drinking his morning coffee. He heard no engine sound, saw the plane crash, and was on the scene in seconds.

"If I was in one of those condos, I'd been running for cover," Moser said.

8 On Your Side's investigation found Monday's was the third crash in the last six months near the airport. Earlier this month a banner pulling aircraft slammed into the bay, killing the pilot. In March, another banner pulling plane also went into the water.

This one came really close to hitting people on the ground, the question is, is this airport too close for comfort?

In 2003, St. Petersburg voters overwhelmingly decided to keep Albert Whitted where it is. Pilot Joe Zwissel claims he's landed on this exact approach with absolutely no problem.

"Keep Albert Whitted. It's a public service airport, a lot of traffic, people coming for ball games, and serving the population of St. Petersburg," Zwissel said.

8 On Your Side wanted to know, would the downtown be better off without the airport?

"I think the voters said they wanted to keep it, it would be simpler without it," said St. Petersburg city council member Karl Nurse, who contends one possible safety issue is the city and FAA keep approving taller buildings in the approach pattern.

He told 8 On Your Side it's time to address safety issues here.

"It is an asset if we can increase the safety and we obviously have to take a fresh look at what we can to increase the safety," he said.

Story, Video and Photo Gallery:   http://www.wfla.com



Incident occurred September 15, 2014 at Oakland International Airport (KOAK), California

OAKLAND, Calif. -- An Arizona-bound jetliner has made an emergency landing at the Oakland airport after its flaps failed to fully retract after takeoff.

Southwest Airlines spokesman Brad Hawkins says the problem was noticed shortly after Flight 468 took off from San Jose Monday morning on a flight to Phoenix.

Hawkins says instruments showed that the wing flaps used for takeoff hadn't full retracted and the captain diverted to Oakland airport, where Southwest has a maintenance base.

Source: http://www.sacbee.com

Wreckage of suspected North Korean drone found near border island - Yellow Sea



SEOUL, Sept. 15 (Yonhap) -- The wreckage of a suspected North Korean drone was found on Monday near a sensitive inter-Korean maritime border in the Yellow Sea, the military said.

The wreckage was collected by a fisherman at around 2:20 p.m. while he was fishing in waters near the South Korean border island of Baengnyeong, the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) said.

The military said it believes the remains belong to a small-size, unmanned aerial drone from North Korea because it looked similar to other North Korean drones found in border areas earlier this year.

Previously, three drones were found crashed in South Korea in March and April, with officials concluding that they were sent from the North for spying missions.

The North, however, has rejected the investigation result.

"All equipment such as an internal engine or a camera has been lost and only an empty fuselage remains with (the suspected drone's) wings damaged," said an official at the JCS. "Currently, it is hard to determine when or where this wreckage fell (on the waters)."

The military said it plans to analyze the wreckage to find out the timing and the place of its crash.

If the wreckage is found to be part of a North Korean drone, South Korea's military is likely to be under criticism over its lax supervision over its air defense zone.

In light of the border incursions by North Korea's spy aircraft, the South Korean military earlier vowed to beef up air security by acquiring low-altitude surveillance radars and other strike weapons.

The North is estimated to have about 300 spy drones, according to the defense ministry.

The two Koreas are technically at war as the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a ceasefire, without signing a peace treaty. 


- Source:  http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr

Cessna 421 Golden Eagle, N51RX, registered to Elite Medical Air Transport and operated by Amigos Aviation: Fatal accident occurred August 27, 2014 near Las Cruces International Airport (LRU), Las Cruces, New Mexico

Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board: https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms

Aviation Accident Data Summary - National Transportation Safety Board:https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

The National Transportation Safety Board traveled to the scene of this accident. 

Additional Participating Entities:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Albuquerque, New Mexico
Textron Aviation; Wichita, Kansas
Continental Motors Inc; Mobile, Alabama
Ram Aircraft, LP; Waco, Texas

Registered to Elite Medical Air Transport, LLC, El Paso, Texas
Operated by Amigos Aviation, Inc., Harlingen, Texas
http://registry.faa.gov/N51RX

NTSB Identification: CEN14FA462
Nonscheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Wednesday, August 27, 2014 in Las Cruces, NM
Probable Cause Approval Date: 05/03/2017
Aircraft: CESSNA 421C, registration: N51RX
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.

According to the line service technician who worked for the fixed-base operator (FBO), before taking off for the air ambulance flight with two medical crewmembers and one patient onboard, the pilot verbally asked him to add 40 gallons of fuel to the airplane, but the pilot did not specify the type of fuel. The line service technician drove a fuel truck to the front of the airplane and added 20 gallons of fuel to each of the multiengine airplane's wing tanks. The pilot was present during the refueling and helped the line service technician replace both fuel caps.

Shortly after takeoff, a medical crewmember called the company medical dispatcher and reported that they were returning to the airport because smoke was coming from the right engine. Two witnesses reported seeing smoke from the airplane Several other witnesses reported seeing or hearing the impact and then immediately seeing smoke or flames.

On-scene evidence showed the airplane was generally eastbound and upright when it impacted terrain. A postimpact fire immediately ensued and consumed most of the airplane. Investigators who arrived at the scene the day following the accident reported clearly detecting the smell of jet fuel.

The airplane, which was equipped with two reciprocating engines, should have been serviced with aviation gasoline, and this was noted on labels near the fuel filler ports, which stated "AVGAS ONLY." However, a postaccident review of refueling records, statements from the line service technician, and the on-scene smell of jet fuel are consistent with the airplane having been misfueled with Jet A fuel instead of the required 100LL aviation gasoline, which can result in detonation in the engine and the subsequent loss of engine power. Postaccident examination of the engines revealed internal damage and evidence of detonation. It was the joint responsibility of the line technician and pilot to ensure that the airplane was filled with aviation fuel instead of jet fuel and their failure to do so led to the detonation in the engine and the subsequent loss of power during initial climb.

In accordance with voluntary industry standards, the FBO's jet fuel truck should have been equipped with an oversized fuel nozzle; instead, it was equipped with a smaller diameter nozzle, which allowed the nozzle to be inserted into the smaller fuel filler ports on airplanes that used aviation gasoline. The FBO's use of a small nozzle allowed it to be inserted in the accident airplane's filler port and for jet fuel to be inadvertently added to the airplane.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The misfueling of the airplane with jet fuel instead of the required aviation fuel, and the resultant detonation and a total loss of engine power during initial climb. Contributing to the accident were the line service technician's inadvertent misfueling of the airplane, the pilot's inadequate supervision of the fuel servicing, and the fixed-base operator's use of a small fuel nozzle on its jet fuel truck.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On August 27, 2014, about 1903 mountain daylight time, a Cessna 421C airplane, N51RX, impacted terrain during initial climb near Las Cruces International Airport (LRU), Las Cruces, New Mexico. The pilot, two medical crewmembers, and one patient were fatally injured. The airplane was destroyed. The airplane was registered to Elite Medical Air Transport, LLC, El Paso, Texas, and was operated by Amigos Aviation, Inc., Harlingen, Texas, as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 air ambulance flight. Day visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident at the accident site, and an instrument flight rules flight plan had been filed. The airplane departed LRU destined for Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), Phoenix, Arizona.

The airplane arrived at LRU about 1822 to load the patient for a flight to PHX. According to the line service technician who worked for the fixed-base operator (FBO), both engines were shut down and the pilot was still seated in the cockpit when he asked the technician to add 40 gallons of fuel to the airplane; the pilot did not specify the type of fuel. The line service technician drove a fuel truck to the front of the airplane and then added 20 gallons of fuel to each wing tank. The pilot then helped the line service technician replace both fuel caps. The line service technician then printed the fuel ticket, which the pilot signed.

At 1901:45, shortly after departure, a medical crewmember onboard the airplane called the company medical dispatcher and reported that the flight was returning to LRU because smoke was coming from the right engine. A witness driving on the interstate highway near the airport reported seeing the airplane flying about 200 ft. above ground level (agl) with smoke coming from the right engine. The airplane then began descending and entered a left turn. Another witness driving on the highway reported seeing smoke trailing from the airplane when it passed over him about 100 ft. agl. He saw the descending airplane continue to turn left and then lost sight of it. Several other witnesses reported seeing or hearing the impact and then immediately seeing smoke or flames.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

Pilot

The pilot held a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airline transport pilot certificate with airplane single-engine land and multiengine land ratings. He also held an FAA flight instructor certificate with airplane single-engine, multiengine, and instrument airplane ratings. The pilot was issued an FAA first-class airman medical certificate with no limitations on October 28, 2013.

The pilot's personal logbooks were not available for examination. Based on FAA records, pilot training documents, and other records from Amigos Aviation, the pilot's flight experience was estimated to be 2,432 total flight hours, of which 1,553 hours were in multiengine airplanes and about 1,379 hours were in Cessna 421 airplanes.

Line Service Technician

The line service technician had been employed by the FBO since April 7, 2014. He stated that he had no previous work experience in aviation, he did not hold an FAA airman certificate of any kind, and he was not a pilot or an aircraft mechanic. FBO records showed he had completed its on-job-training program and been issued an American Petroleum Institute Class C training certificate. At the time that he refueled the airplane, he was the only FBO employee on duty.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The low-wing, retractable-landing-gear, pressurized, multiengine airplane, serial number (S/N) 421C0871, was manufactured in 1981. It was powered by two 375-horsepower Continental Motors GTSIO-520-L turbo-charged engines. Engine S/N 292408 was installed on the left side, and engine S/N 292022 was installed on the right side. Each engine drove a three-bladed, variable pitch, full-feathering McCauley propeller.

A review of the aircraft maintenance records showed that an annual inspection had been completed on March 5, 2014, at an aircraft total time of 8,181.4 hours and an hour meter reading of 869.6 hours. A maintenance logbook entry dated August 24, 2014, showed the hour meter reading was 904.3 hours. FAA records showed that the airplane had been registered to Elite Medical Air Transport, LLC since April 15, 2010.

The airplane was equipped with Micro Aerodynamics vortex generators, which were installed in accordance with FAA-approved Supplemental Type Certificate SA5193NM.

Preaccident photographs of the airplane showed labels near the fuel filler ports that had black letters on a white background and stated, in part, "AVGAS ONLY." A postaccident review of refueling records and statements from the line service technician revealed that the airplane had been misfueled with 40 gallons of Jet A fuel instead of the required 100LL aviation gasoline.

The airplane was not equipped with, and was not required to be equipped with, either a cockpit voice recorder or a flight data recorder.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

At 1855, the automated weather observing system at LRU, located about 4 miles northeast of the accident location, reported wind from 040° at 5 knots, visibility of 10 miles, broken clouds at 6,500 ft., temperature 23°C, dew point 16°C , and an altimeter setting of 30.16 inches of m ercury.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The airplane impacted desert grasslands operated by the United States Bureau of Land Management at a terrain elevation of about 4,420 ft. mean sea level. On-scent evidence showed that the airplane was generally eastbound and upright when it impacted terrain, which resulted in the separation of the left propeller blades and right aileron. The airplane came to rest inverted about 78 ft. east of the initial impact point on a wreckage debris path of about 93°, and an immediate postimpact fire consumed most of the airplane. The nose of the inverted fuselage was oriented to about 160°. All major components of the airplane were observed and accounted for at the scene. Investigators who arrived at the scene on the day following the accident reported clearly detecting the smell of jet fuel.

Both engines, most of the left wing, the inboard portion of the right wing, and all of the tail surfaces remained attached to the fuselage. The right aileron was completely separated from the airplane and came to rest about 55 ft. to the southeast of the main wreckage.

Control cable continuity was confirmed from the cockpit to the respective flight control surfaces except for cable separations consistent with either cable cuts by first responders or tensile overload. Thermal and impact damage prevented an assessment of any of the cockpit instruments.

The left aileron trim actuator extension was measured, and it was about 1/4 inch, which corresponded to a setting of about 21° trim tab trailing edge down (airplane nose up). The left and right elevators remained attached to their respective horizontal attachment points. The right elevator trim tab remained attached to the right elevator. The right elevator trim actuator extension was measured, and it was 11/16 inch, which corresponded to a setting of about 21° trim tab trailing edge down.

The rudder remained attached to the vertical stabilizer attachment points, and the rudder trim tab remained attached to the rudder. The rudder trim actuator extension was measured, and it was 2 1/4 inches, which corresponded to a neutral rudder trim position. Measurements of the flap mechanism corresponded to a flap extension of about 9° flaps down. All three landing gear assemblies remained attached and appeared to be in the retracted position.

The left propeller hub remained attached to the left engine crankshaft propeller flange; however, all three propeller blades were completely separated from the propeller hub. The propeller blade marked as "1" was found 502 ft. southwest of the main wreckage; the propeller blade marked as "2" was found 285 ft. east of the main wreckage; and the propeller blade marked as "3" was found 55 ft. southeast of the main wreckage. None of the propeller blades exhibited significant twisting, leading edge gouges, or chordwise scratches; however, the outer 12 inches of the No. 2 blade was bent toward the camber side, and the outer 8 inches of the No. 3 blade was bent toward the camber side.

The right propeller assembly remained attached to the right engine crankshaft propeller flange, and all three blades remained attached to the propeller hub. The propeller blade marked as "A" exhibited no significant twisting, leading edge gouges, or chordwise scratches. The propeller blade marked as "B" was melted into two sections about 16 inches from the blade root. The propeller blade marked as "C" exhibited no significant twisting, leading edge gouges, or chordwise scratches; however, the outer last 14 inches of the blade was bent toward the noncamber side.

The fuel caps were found securely fastened to their fuel tank filler ports. The fuel caps were then removed, and it was observed that the filler ports had been modified with smaller restrictive inserts about 2 inches in diameter that would prevent insertion of a larger refueling nozzle.

The engines were removed for further examination.

MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Office of the Medical Investigator, Albuquerque, New Mexico, conducted an autopsy of the pilot. The cause of death was listed as "thermal injuries, inhalation of products of combustion and blunt thoracoabdominal trauma."

The FAA's Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, conducted forensic toxicology testing on specimens from the pilot. The toxicology report stated that no listed drugs were detected in urine. The toxicology testing detected 17 ml/hg ethanol was detected in the urine, and an unquantified amount of n-propanol was detected in the urine. No ethanol was detected in blood or liver. Such low levels of ethanol are likely produced postmortem, particularly when not detected in the blood.

TESTS AND RESEARCH

Left Engine Examination

Examination of the left engine revealed that it exhibited significant fire and impact damage. The oil cooler, induction system, and intercooler were partially melted by the postcrash fire. All of the engine accessories were impact and thermally damaged. The right magneto case was melted, exposing the internal components. Both magnetos cases were melted, and only the rotating magnet remained attached to the engine. The fuel pump was thermally damaged and remained attached to the engine, and the drive coupling was intact. The alternator and propeller governor were thermally damage and remained attached to the engine. The remainder of the external surfaces of the engine exhibited varying degrees of impact and thermal damage.

All of the internal components of the left engine exhibited thermal damage but no signs of lubrication distress. The cylinders exhibited heat damage and evidence of detonation. All pistons exhibited scuffing and heat signatures on the skirt. The Nos. 2, 5, and 6 pistons showed evidence of detonation on the face of the piston with portions melted away on the outer edge.

The main and rod bearings exhibited normal operating signatures and thermal damage from the postcrash fire. The crankshaft, camshaft, gears, connecting rods, and reduction gears all exhibited thermal damage and normal operating signatures. The crankcase exhibited normal operating signatures and impact and thermal damage. The fuel system components were impact and fire damaged. The engine accessories were intact and exhibited thermal damage.

Right Engine Examination

Examination of the right engine revealed that it exhibited significant fire and impact damage. The induction system and intercooler were separated. All of the engine accessories were impact and thermally damaged. The right magneto case was melted, exposing the internal components. The left magneto remained attached but exhibited thermal damage. The fuel pump was thermally damaged and remained attached to the engine. The drive coupling was intact. The alternator and propeller governor were thermally damaged and remained attached to the engine. The remainder of the external surfaces of the engine exhibited varying degrees of impact and thermal damage.

All the internal components of the right engine exhibited thermal damage due to the postcrash fire but no signs of lubrication distress. The cylinders exhibited heat damage and evidence of detonation. All pistons exhibited scuffing and heat signatures on the skirt. The Nos. 1, 2, and 5 pistons showed evidence of detonation on the face of the piston with portions melted away on the outer edge.

The main and rod bearings exhibited normal operating signatures and thermal damage from the postcrash fire. The crankshaft, camshaft, gears, connecting rods, and reduction gears all exhibited normal operating signatures. The crankcase exhibited normal operating signatures and impact and thermal damage. The fuel system components were impact and fire damaged with portions melted away. The engine accessories were intact and exhibited thermal damage. Only portions of the induction system remained attached to the right engine; the remainder was melted away by the postcrash fire.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Federal Guidance

According to the FAA Pilot Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, page 6-19:

Detonation is an uncontrolled, explosive ignition of the fuel/air mixture within the cylinder's combustion chamber. It causes excessive temperatures and pressures which, if not corrected, can quickly lead to failure of the piston, cylinder, or valves. In less severe cases, detonation causes engine overheating, roughness, or loss of power."

According to the FAA Airframe & Powerplant Mechanics Powerplant Handbook, AC 65-12A, Chapter 10,

Unless detonation is heavy, there is no cockpit evidence of its presence. Light to medium detonation may not cause noticeable roughness, observable cylinder head or oil temperature increase, or loss of power. However, when an engine has experienced detonation, we see evidence of it at teardown as indicated by dished piston heads, collapsed valve heads, broken ring lands or eroded portions of valves, pistons and cylinder heads. Severe detonation can cause a rough-running engine and high cylinder head temperature."

According to FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 20-122A, "Anti-Misfueling Devices: Their Availability and Use," paragraph 6.1 , "Aviation statistics indicate that the use of improper fuel has caused or contributed to an inordinate number of accidents and incidents. Most of these have involved single-engine aircraft (and some multiengine) that were misfueled with jet or turbine engine fuel instead of gasoline, which these aircraft use. Misfueling a reciprocating engine-powered aircraft with jet…fuel can and has produced catastrophic results when engines failed during the critical takeoff phase of flight."

Paragraph 6.3, states, "Fuel tank filler openings in reciprocating engine-powered aircraft may be equipped with pilot-installed adapter rings reducing the opening size from 3 inches to 2.3 inches in diameter. Jet or turbine engine fuel nozzle assemblies will be equipped with spouts with a minimum diameter of 2.6, thereby reducing the probability of introducing jet or turbine engine fuel nozzles into the filler openings of aircraft requiring gasoline."

Paragraph 7.3, states, in part, "in the interest of safety and standardization, it is recommended that Fixed Base Operators…equip their turbine fueling equipment…with the larger size nozzles…to prevent misfuelling."

According to FAA AC 150/5230-4B "Aircraft Fuel Storage, Handling, Training, and Dispensing on Airports," page 1, Paragraph 3, "Application," "This AC provides an acceptable means of complying with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 139 (hereinafter referred to as Part 139) for all Part 139 airport operators. Although non-certificated airports are not required to develop fuel standards, the FAA recommends these airports use the guidance contained in this AC to develop such standards for the continued enhancement of aviation safety."

Page 7, chapter 2, paragraph 1, e, states, "14 CFR §139.321 (b) places the responsibility of determining standards for fueling safety on the individual airport based on state, local, or municipality fueling regulations. The FAA does not intend this AC to replace airport procedures that are tailored to meet requirements imposed because of the use of special equipment or as a result of local regulations."

Industry Guidance

In 2005 , the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Air Safety Foundation issued Safety Brief Number 4 SB04-07/05, "Misfueling." The safety brief cautioned about the dangers of misfueling and recommended that pilots specify the fuel type and grade when ordering fuel, be present at the refueling and actively observe the fueling process, match the fuel truck color coding with the wing fueling decal, confirm that the fuel nozzle is compatible with the aircraft's fuel filler, and confirm that the fuel grade on the invoice matches the fuel grade ordered.

The July/August 2006 issue of National Air Transportation Association's "NATA Safety 1st eToolkit," Page 1, "Aircraft Misfueling – A Continuing Threat," recommended that an effective misfueling prevention program should be adopted into the standard practices at all fueling operations and that the prevention program should include the following: "Training; Grade Confirmation; Written Fuel Order Forms; Grade Decals for Aircraft and Fueling Equipment; Selective Nozzle Spouts; and Fuel Receipt Quality Control Procedures."

In March 2016, the NTSB issued a Safety Alert SA-050 "Pilots: Fueling Mistakes." The General Aviation Safety Alert cautioned pilots on the dangers of misfueling and gave several recommended preventive safety procedures.

In March 2016, the NTSB issued a Safety Alert SA-051 "Line Personnel: Fueling Matters". The General Aviation Safety Alert cautioned line personnel on the dangers of misfueling and gave several recommended preventive safety procedures.

In January 2017, the Energy Institute issued Publication EI 1597, "Procedures for Overwing Fueling to Ensure Delivery of the Correct Fuel Grade to an Aircraft," 2nd edition. The publication included recommended procedures for confirmation of the proper fuel grade, wing decals, fuel grade confirmation forms, use of selective nozzle spouts, fueling procedures, control of unattended fuelings, control of self-service fuelings, grade identification markings for refueling equipment, and training.



NTSB Identification: CEN14FA462
Nonscheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Wednesday, August 27, 2014 in Las Cruces, NM
Aircraft: CESSNA 421C, registration: N51RX
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 August 27, 2014, about 1900 mountain daylight time, a Cessna Airplane Company 421C, multi-engine airplane, N51RX, was destroyed after impacting terrain during initial climb near Las Cruces International Airport (LRU), Las Cruces, New Mexico. The pilot, two medical crewmembers and one patient were fatally injured. The airplane was registered to Elite Medical Air Transport, LLC; El Paso, Texas, and was operated by Amigos Aviation, Inc.; Harlingen, Texas. Day visual meteorological conditions (VMC) prevailed at the time of the accident and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan had been filed for the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 air ambulance flight. At the time of the accident the airplane was departing LRU for a flight to Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), Phoenix, Arizona.

The airplane arrived LRU about 1834 to pickup a patient for a flight to PHX. The pilot was still seated in the cockpit when he gave the line service technician a verbal order for a total of forty gallons of fuel. The line service technician drove the fuel truck to the front of the airplane and refueled the airplane putting 20 gallons in each wing. The pilot then assisted the line service technician with replacing both fuel caps. They both walked into the office and the pilot signed the machine printed fuel ticket.

After departing LRU to the west a medical crewmember onboard the airplane called their medical dispatcher on a satellite telephone and reported they were returning to LRU because of a problem with smoke coming from the right engine. A witness driving westbound on the interstate highway reported the airplane was westbound and about 200 feet above ground level (agl) when he saw smoke begin to appear from the right engine. The airplane then began descending and started a left turn to the east. Another witness, driving eastbound on the interstate highway, reported the airplane was trailing smoke when it passed over him about 100 feet agl. He saw the descending airplane continue its left turn to the east and then lost sight of it. Several witnesses reported seeing the impact or hearing the sound of impact and they then immediately saw smoke or flames.

Evidence at the scene showed the airplane was generally eastbound and upright when it impacted terrain resulting in the separation of the left propeller and the separation of the right aileron. The airplane came to rest inverted about 100 feet from the initial impact point, and there was an immediate postimpact fire which consumed much of the airplane. Investigators who arrived at the scene on the day following the accident reported detecting the smell of jet fuel.

A postaccident review of refueling records and interviews with line service technicians showed that the airplane had been misfuelled with 40 gallons of Jet A fuel instead of the required 100LL aviation gasoline.

At 1855 the automated weather observing system at LRU, located about 3 miles northeast from the accident location, reported wind from 040 degrees at 5 knots, visibility of 10 miles, broken clouds at 6,500 feet, temperature 23 degrees Celsius (C), dew point 16 degrees C, with an altimeter setting of 30.16 inches of Mercury. LAS CRUCES, N.M. – Las Cruces City Council voted to fund a new action plan for city’s international airport. The item was approved as part of Monday’s consent agenda.  

The decision comes a few weeks after a plane received 40 gallons of the wrong kind of fuel then crashed after takeoff.

Council members told KFOX14 new safety measures could be imposed but Monday’s action was in regards to funding the update.

The Las Cruces International Airport has a master plan that was written in 1997.  Airport officials issued an update in 2008.  Since then the airport has experienced many changes, according to the meeting packet.

Councillor Gill Sorg is on the airport advisory committee but can’t say too much about last month’s plane crash because it’s under investigation.

“Hopefully we’ll find out what went wrong,” Sorg told KFOX14, “whatever went wrong, we’ll correct it.”

Mayor Pro-Tem Greg Smith said he wants people to feel safe when using the Las Cruces airport.

“We anticipate the airport will get more use in the coming years with Spaceport America and other activities going on here,” said Smith.  “So we want to make sure our airport is position as safe and understood to be safe.”

Residents told KFOX14 they want to see new safety measures keep accidents like last month’s plane crash from happening again.

“They need to take a lot more measures,” said one resident.  “You got to do what you got to do to keep everyone alive.”

Carolyn Stuve agreed and told KFOX14, “That would probably be a good idea.  Just double-check things because if that was the case it’s a really sad situation.”

Council members said they’ll continue the conversation once the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation is completed.


- Source:  http://www.kfoxtv.com


NTSB Identification: CEN14FA462
Nonscheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Wednesday, August 27, 2014 in Las Cruces, NM
Aircraft: CESSNA 421C, registration: N51RX
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 August 27, 2014, about 1900 mountain daylight time, a Cessna Airplane Company 421C, multi-engine airplane, N51RX, was destroyed after impacting terrain during initial climb near Las Cruces International Airport (LRU), Las Cruces, New Mexico. The pilot, two medical crewmembers and one patient were fatally injured. The airplane was registered to Elite Medical Air Transport, LLC; El Paso, Texas, and was operated by Amigos Aviation, Inc.; Harlingen, Texas. Day visual meteorological conditions (VMC) prevailed at the time of the accident and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan had been filed for the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 air ambulance flight. At the time of the accident the airplane was departing LRU for a flight to Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), Phoenix, Arizona.

The airplane arrived LRU about 1834 to pickup a patient for a flight to PHX. The pilot was still seated in the cockpit when he gave the line service technician a verbal order for a total of forty gallons of fuel. The line service technician drove the fuel truck to the front of the airplane and refueled the airplane putting 20 gallons in each wing. The pilot then assisted the line service technician with replacing both fuel caps. They both walked into the office and the pilot signed the machine printed fuel ticket.

After departing LRU to the west a medical crewmember onboard the airplane called their medical dispatcher on a satellite telephone and reported they were returning to LRU because of a problem with smoke coming from the right engine. A witness driving westbound on the interstate highway reported the airplane was westbound and about 200 feet above ground level (agl) when he saw smoke begin to appear from the right engine. The airplane then began descending and started a left turn to the east. Another witness, driving eastbound on the interstate highway, reported the airplane was trailing smoke when it passed over him about 100 feet agl. He saw the descending airplane continue its left turn to the east and then lost sight of it. Several witnesses reported seeing the impact or hearing the sound of impact and they then immediately saw smoke or flames.

Evidence at the scene showed the airplane was generally eastbound and upright when it impacted terrain resulting in the separation of the left propeller and the separation of the right aileron. The airplane came to rest inverted about 100 feet from the initial impact point, and there was an immediate postimpact fire which consumed much of the airplane. Investigators who arrived at the scene on the day following the accident reported detecting the smell of jet fuel.

A postaccident review of refueling records and interviews with line service technicians showed that the airplane had been misfuelled with 40 gallons of Jet A fuel instead of the required 100LL aviation gasoline.

At 1855 the automated weather observing system at LRU, located about 3 miles northeast from the accident location, reported wind from 040 degrees at 5 knots, visibility of 10 miles, broken clouds at 6,500 feet, temperature 23 degrees Celsius (C), dew point 16 degrees C, with an altimeter setting of 30.16 inches of Mercury.

Cessna 172: Fatal accident occurred September 15, 2014 in Newcastle, South Africa

UPDATE: Two confirmed dead in Newcastle plane crash

A small plane crashed and exploded into flames on a farm just outside of Newcastle shortly after 6pm this evening.


The wreckage of the plane crash.


The silent night air was split open by the splintering of metal and sparks of flame after a Cessna 172 crashed and exploded into flames shortly after 6pm this evening.

It is believed the plane was en-route to Rand Airport in Johannesburg when the pilots encountered a ‘dark zone’ and  lost control of the aircraft, slamming into the ground on farm just outside of Newcastle. 


Tragically, both pilots lost their lives in the ensuing crash.

A witness to the aftermath of the crash described the scene:

“I heard the plane flying very low, and then a huge noise. When I got outside the plane and the area around was already on fire.”

Close to 100m of the area surrounding the plane had been set ablaze by the fiery wreckage of the plane.

The witness believed the only reason as to why the fire did not spread further, was due to the wreckage of the plane coming to a rest in the nearby stream.

ER24 and EMRS paramedics as well as Protection Services members rushed to the scene, but were hampered by the inaccessibility of the remote location.

Nearby farm owners and farmhands helped to stop the fire from spreading further and wreaking more devastation to the nearby farms.

Currently SAPS forensic units are on scene looking for any possible clues that may suggest a possible mechanical failure leading to the tragic crash.

The Civil Aviation Authority has been informed, and will conduct a full investigation tomorrow.


Story, Comments and Photo:  http://newcastleadvertiser.co.za

Dick Rochfort, ATP, CFII: Flying an Unpublished Hold with the Garmin GTN 650 Navigator

 


Published on September 15, 2014 

Master Instructor Dick Rochfort describes the techniques and procedures for flying the unpublished holding pattern using the Garmin GTN 650 Navigator. Dick Rochfort is a full-time pilot trainer specializing in the Piper PA46 Matrix, Mirage and Meridian aircraft. He provides pre-purchase valuation, training, corporate service and expert witness services worldwide. You may view hundreds of additional videos and articles about flying the PA46 aircraft at http://www.rwrpilottraining.com/ or contact Dick directly at mail@rwrpilottraining.com

Fly Safely - Train Often

Willmar Municipal Airport (KBDH) busy flying workers to and from North Dakota oil patch

 
Willmar,Minn., airport on-site supervisor Eric Rudningen of Eric’s Aviation Services has a commercial pilot’s license and an airframe and power plant mechanics certificate. His two-year airport management contract with the city runs out at the end of the year, and a new three-year agreement is going before the Willmar City Council. Rand Middleton/Forum News Service



WILLMAR, Minn. — Early every Monday morning, four twin-engine airplanes carrying from six to eight construction workers each take off from Willmar Municipal Airport in Willmar, Minn., bound for western North Dakota. 

The workers, who are employees of a Willmar construction company, are building street, sewer, water and infrastructure projects for small cities whose population has swelled due to the oil boom.

The four planes return empty to Willmar. On Friday, the planes take off from Willmar and return with the workers. The cycle resumes the following week.

The Willmar company has flown workers to distant cities in the past, but not to the extent seen this year, says Eric Rudningen, airport operations supervisor and owner of Eric’s Aviation Services Inc.

Rudningen says Willmar Airport benefits from the increase in takeoffs and landings — known as “operations” — by the local company along with other business aircraft and individually owned aircraft.

“This summer operations are averaging 35 to 40 a week,’’ he said. “It’s improved from five years ago."

Rudningen said private recreational and businesses aircraft operations fell dramatically during the Great Recession. Rudningen said a few construction companies sold their airplanes and companies that continued flying did so at a lower rate.

Rudningen explains that the increase in operations is good because Federal Aviation Administration and Minnesota Department of Transportation airport funding is based on the number of operations. It’s also based on the number and type of aircraft based at the airport.

“It’s great for the airport and for the community," said Rudningen. “One of the things the airport does for the region is that it brings in outside dollars into the region. It’s work that is going on somewhere else and a company here is finding success and profitability because of that. That just helps the region to grow economically."

Funding to airports is derived from the nationwide aircraft fuel tax. Smaller airports like Willmar benefit because it keeps smaller airplanes from flying into major airports like Minneapolis-St. Paul International and clogging up the airspace, said Rudningen.

“The aviation world is very user-funded," he said.

Last week the City Council’s Public Works/Safety Committee voted to renew the airport operations supervisor agreement with Eric’s Aviation Services. The agreement will be considered by the council tonight.

The six-page agreement, which was also recommended by the Airport Commission, spells out the supervisor’s daily activities needed to keep the airport safe, accessible and operational.

The current two-year agreement with Rudningen expires Dec. 31, 2014. The new three-year agreement provides a 1.5 percent increase per year in the monthly fee the city pays for the service, which will increase from $6,428 per month in 2015 and $6,524 per month in 2016 to $6,622 in 2017.

Rudningen told the committee that local airport use is very good. He said a lot of very successful companies in the area are using the airport and are happy with how things are going, although he hesitated to identify the companies.

“Just be aware that a lot of the very successful companies in the area are utilizing the airport on a very regular basis," he said.

- See more at: http://www.prairiebizmag.com

Propulsion Technologies International of Miramar, Florida: Aircraft engine repair company reaching new heights

Luciano Bencosme works on an aircraft engine part at Propulsion Technologies International in Miramar. The company will recognized this week as one of South Florida's top manufacturing companies. 
(Carline Jean / Sun Sentinel / September 10, 2014)



In some ways, airliners are similar to your car.

“After so many miles, you have to bring it in for an oil change or tune-up,” said Kimberly Gardner, plant leader at Propulsion Technologies International of Miramar. “After so many hours running an [aircraft] engine, you basically have to service the engine.”

That work is creating double-digit growth at Propulsion Technologies, which repairs parts for one aircraft engine line for General Electric Aviation and France-based Snecma. The engine, the CFM56, powers Boeing and Airbus commercial aircraft.

Propulsion Technologies will be recognized this week as one of the South Florida Manufacturing Association’s 2014 Manufacturers of the Year. The others are Hotpie in Fort Pierce, PAC Seating Systems in Palm City and Techno Coatings in Miami.

Propulsion Technologies’ revenues grew 28 percent in 2012 and 22 percent last year, said Gardner, who joined Propulsion Technologies in 2012 after a long career at GE in Hartford, Conn.

The company increased staff by 6 percent in 2013 and will more than double that growth this year, she said. The Miramar company employs 153 people and is hiring for manual machinists, process engineers and quality engineers.

Gardner is working with Snecma partner Thomas Grosclaude to launch a program at Broward College to generate local workers with the skills they need.
Photos: 100 things to do with your kid this summer

“They’re not just employing people at high-level jobs; they’re investing in our community,” June Wolfe, president of the South Florida Manufacturers Association, said of Propulsion Technologies’ move from Doral to Miramar in 2011.

Gardner said leadership principles she learned at GE have served her well. At Propulsion Technologies, she manages autonomous teams, rather than layers of management.

“The team makes decisions based on the customers’ needs,” she said.
Employees also attend team-building events at Broward College’s Tigertail adventure learning program.

Norm Seavers, associate vice president at the college’s Institute for Economic Development, said Tigertail is designed to help organizations improve communications, resolve conflict or address other issues.

South Florida Manufacturers Annual Meeting

WHEN: 4 p.m. Thursday

WHERE: Coral Springs Marriott, 11775 Heron Bay Blvd.

EVENT: "State of the Art Thinking," with keynote by management consultant Mike Adams and a panel discussion with the award-winning manufacturers

CONTACT: Kaitlin Centonze at 954-941-3558

- Source:   http://www.sun-sentinel.com

Anonymous 'Citizens for Readington' group focused on Solberg-Hunterdon Airport (N51), New Jersey

READINGTON TWP. — - A group calling itself "Citizens for Readington" has distributed a mailer and is seeking signatures on an online petition, likes on its new Facebook page and followers on Twitter.

The identity of these "citizens" isn't shared on any of its platforms, but its message "at this time" is focused on the preservation of Solberg Airport.

Its "about us" page on its website says group members "have endeavored to be as factual as possible, citing source documents where appropriate." On that same page is a graphic of a pony-tailed girl whose facial features are obscured, except for her big blue eyes, by a gas mask as she jumps rope in a meadow, surrounded by airplanes. 

"Citizens" calls Township Committee candidates John Broten and Sam Tropello "pro-Solberg" and "pro-airport." In its mailer it says that with their "votes in hand, only one more vote is needed to achieve a pro-Solberg pro-airport majority on the Township Committee."

In June the men narrowly defeated Republican incumbents Committeeman Frank Gatti and Mayor Julia Allen for their party's nomination for two three-year Township Committee seats.

The primary race was heated, centered on the township's longtime efforts to prevent further development of Solberg Airport and surrounding lands.

The Solberg Airport condemnation trial started in June and is set to continue through the middle of October. The only date in September was canceled; the trial is to continue the first three Wednesdays and Thursdays in October.

A closed-door session by the Township Committee on the subject of Solberg Aviation lands lasted more than five hours on Sept. 5, but didn't lead to action.

The mailer was distributed late last week, titled "Learn the facts before it's too late; Expansion of Solberg Airport will impact you."

Addressed "To Our Neighbors," it says that a "pro-airport township committee is imminent" and "recent events could accelerate jetport expansion."

As for what "you can do," it urges readers to "make a difference" by spreading "the word," signing the petition, liking the group and following it.

On the group's website, citizensforreadington.org, it says it is a nonprofit and non-partisan group and its mission is "informing and educating the public about issues that affect the quality of life in our township.

"Like you, we have kids, dogs, cats, stressful jobs, and don't particularly like politics. But we think residents should be fully informed about issues that will change the character of our township forever."

The petition online asks the Township Committee to "continue its efforts to implement permanent limits on the expansion of Solberg-Hunterdon Airport to protect the character and quality of life in our town while enabling the airport to continue as a general aviation airport."

At 3 p.m. on Sept. 15 it had garnered 192 of 500 signatures sought.

The group can be contacted via email to info@citizensforreadington.org, or a Three Bridges post office box.

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