Friday, September 26, 2014

Why PEOPLExpress Closed

By Douglas A. McIntyre 

In an era in which almost all U.S. airlines flourish, a new one, PEOPLExpress, could not make it. The company announced it has suspended service. Like many business enterprises that halt operations, PEOPLExpress said it would be back. In a world crowded by carriers, that is not a good bet.

PEOPLExpress management wrote:

PEOPLExpress today announced that it is temporarily suspending service effective immediately and plans to resume service on or about Oct. 16.

Recent aircraft and crew availability and maintenance issues, including an aircraft recently damaged by a vendor’s truck, an engine change and a lack of a planned spare aircraft, have made it challenging to operate a full schedule, preventing us from delivering the passenger experience we are striving for.

We are currently processing refunds for passengers for flights booked through Oct. 15, which will take five to seven business days. For reservations beyond Oct. 15, passengers will receive a notification by e-mail as soon as our service resumption plans are in place.

PEOPLExpress has successfully served 55,000 passengers on 817 flights since launching service on June 30, demonstrating the need for additional non-stop air service to underserved markets as a result of airline industry consolidation.

Our customers have been very receptive and supportive of our service from the beginning but not being able to complete all of our scheduled flights has been inconsistent with our brand promise to provide a fun, creative and innovative approach to air travel. This difficult business decision affects thousands of loyal customers, and we apologize for the sudden nature of our temporary suspension and thank people for their understanding and support.

We are still committed to restoring the concepts of respect, value and excitement to the air travel experience but to do so successfully we need to enhance our platform to operate aircraft not just safely but also with the ability to provide consistently outstanding schedule integrity.


Among the headwinds the company faces are its size and route systems

It flew from Newport News into extremely competitive markets, which include Boston, New York/Newark, Atlanta, West Palm Beach and Tampa. Each of these is a large destination for at least one the country’s four largest airlines: Delta Air Lines Inc., United Continental Holdings Inc., American Airlines Group Inc. and Southwest Airlines Co.

Although there are a few upstart airlines like JetBlue Airways Corp., which has taken a piece of some regions across the country, the industry is too entrenched for such a move to be more than a long shot.

Why PEOPLExpress Suspended Service - 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com

Three months after PEOPLExpress Airlines got up in the air, the company has suspended service, effective immediately. 

The setback is temporary, the company said, in a statement. It aims to relaunch "on or about Oct. 16."

"Recent aircraft and crew availability and maintenance issues, including an aircraft recently damaged by a vendor's truck, an engine change and a lack of a promised spare aircraft, have made it challenging to operate a full schedule, preventing us from delivering the passenger experience we are striving for," the company said.

A few minutes after the company issued its statement, it sent a revised release changing the term "promised" aircraft to "planned" aircraft.

 The airline said it is processing refunds for passengers for flights booked through Oct.15. For reservations beyond that time, PEOPLExpress said its passengers will receive a notification as soon as our resumption plans are finalized.

In August, the airline stranded more than 80 passengers when its captain and first officer were unable to fly and there was no back-up crew available. The airline called the scheduling situation a "perfect storm" and said it was working on agreements with other airlines to provide emergency back-ups.

PEOPLExpress started service June 30 on a handful of routes from its headquarters at Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport in Virginia. Base fares for tickets started at $59, with extra fees for checked luggage, use of overhead bin space and even in-flight beverages such as coffee, tea or water.

 The company said 55,000 passengers have so far flown on it 817 flights.

The airline has been flying to Newark, New Jersey; Boston; Pittsburgh; West Palm Beach, Florida; Atlanta; New Orleans and St. Petersburg, Florida.

On Sept. 3, the company announced it planned to start service between Charleston's Yeager Airport and Orlando International Airport as of Oct. 16. The company said today it still plans to start flying that route as of Oct. 16.

The airline shares its name with a low-cost airline that still stirs fond nostalgia from former passengers. The old PEOPLExpress was based at Newark until it was acquired by Continental, which was then acquired by United. "Other than the name there is no affiliation, however a number of our employees previously worked for the old PEOPLEexpress," CEO Jeff Erickson told CNBC in May.

PEOPLExpress wasn't the only new airline to launch this summer. La Compagnie, an all-business class airline flying between Paris and Newark, started service July 21.

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

Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six, Cougar Aviation LLC, N9103K: Accident occurred July 31, 2014 in Helena, Alabama

NTSB Identification: ERA14LA369
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Thursday, July 31, 2014 in Helena, AL
Probable Cause Approval Date: 01/14/2015
Aircraft: PIPER PA-32-300, registration: N9103K
Injuries: 4 Serious.

NTSB investigators may have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

The pilot reported that he had the airplane completely fueled before departing on a cross-country flight. The departure was uneventful, and the airplane was cruising about 2,500 ft above ground level and was about 2 hours into the planned 3 hour 30 minute flight when the pilot noted that the engine power did not seem correct despite all of the gauges indicating normal. He chose to divert to a nearby airport; however, the engine began to lose power at that point, and it then lost all power as the airplane was descending toward the airport. The airplane subsequently impacted trees about 1 mile south of the airport, and a postcrash fire consumed the wreckage. A witness near the accident site reported observing the engine sputtering and black smoke emanating from the right side of the airplane as it flew overhead. Examination of the engine revealed that one propeller blade was bent aft and exhibited chordwise scratches. The other blade exhibited an outward bend at the tip. The top spark plugs were removed; all of their electrodes were intact and gray or oil-soaked in color, except for the No. 6 spark plug, which exhibited dark soot. Further examination of the No. 6 cylinder did not reveal any other anomalies. The valve covers were removed, and oil was noted throughout the engine. When the propeller was rotated by hand, camshaft, crankshaft, and valve train continuity were confirmed to the rear accessory section, and thumb compression was attained on all cylinders. The magnetos, engine-driven fuel pump, vacuum pump, and fuel injector exhibited thermal damage from the postcrash fire and could not be tested. The postcrash fire damage precluded a determination of the cause of the loss of engine power.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
A total loss of engine power for reasons that could not be determined due to postcrash fire damage. 

On July 31, 2014, about 1352 central daylight time, a Piper PA-32-300, N9103K, operated by a private individual, was destroyed during a forced landing, following a total loss of engine power during cruise flight near Helena, Alabama. The private pilot and three passengers were seriously injured. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the planned flight to Dickson Municipal Airport (M02), Dickson, Tennessee. The flight originated from Northwest Florida Beaches International Airport (ECP), Panama City, Florida, about 1142. 

The pilot reported that the airplane was completely fueled prior to departure. The departure was uneventful and the airplane was cruising at 2,500 feet mean sea level. About 2 hours into the flight, the pilot noted that the engine power did not seem correct, despite all the gauges indicating normal. He elected to divert to Bessemer Airport (EKY), Bessemer, Alabama; however, the engine began to lose power at that point and then lost all power as the airplane was descending toward EKY. The propeller continued to windmill as the pilot glided the airplane toward EKY. The pilot also switched fuel tanks and activated the electric fuel pump in effort to restore engine power, but was unsuccessful. The airplane impacted trees about 1 mile south of EKY. During the impact with trees, the airplane rolled inverted and then impacted the ground. All four occupants were able to egress before the airplane was consumed by a postcrash fire. 

A witness, who was a firefighter standing outside a fire station near the accident site, observed the accident airplane flying northwest. The witness stated that the engine was sputtering and black smoke was emanating from the right side of the airplane. The smoke seemed to darken as the airplane flew further away from his view. He was then dispatched to the airplane accident about 5 minutes later. 

A handheld Garmin 496 GPS was recovered from the cockpit and forwarded to the NTSB Vehicle Recorder Laboratory, Washington, DC. Data were successfully downloaded and plots were created of the accident flight. 

The airplane was manufactured in 1978 and equipped with a Lycoming IO-540, 300-horsepower engine. A factory rebuild was completed on the engine in 2002. The airplane's most recent annual inspection was completed on July 3, 2014. At that time, the airframe had accumulated 2,888 total hours and the engine had accumulated 866 hours since the factory rebuild.

Post-accident examination by an NTSB investigator revealed a majority of the airplane was consumed by postcrash fire and the engine was partially separated from the airframe. One propeller blade was bent aft and exhibited chordwise scratches. The other blade exhibited an outward bend at the tip. The top spark plugs were removed; their electrodes were intact and gray or oil soaked in color, except for the No. 6 spark plug, which exhibited dark soot. A borescope examination of the No. 6 cylinder did not reveal any other anomalies. The valve covers were removed and oil was noted throughout the engine. When the propeller was rotated by hand, camshaft, crankshaft, and valve train continuity were confirmed to the rear accessory section and thumb compression was attained on all cylinders. The magnetos, engine driven fuel pump, vacuum pump, and fuel injector exhibited thermal damage from the postcrash fire and could not be tested. The oil filter and fuel flow divider also exhibited thermal damage. The fuel injector valve was open. The propeller governor oil screen and oil sump screen were absent of debris. The fuel injector nozzles were also absent of debris.

http://registry.faa.gov/N9103K

NTSB Identification: ERA14LA369
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Thursday, July 31, 2014 in Helena, AL
Aircraft: PIPER PA-32-300, registration: N9103K
Injuries: 4 Serious.

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 have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On July 31, 2014, about 1400 central daylight time, a Piper PA-32-300, N9103K, operated by a private individual, was destroyed during a forced landing, following a total loss of engine power during cruise flight near Helena, Alabama. The private pilot and three passengers were seriously injured. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the planned flight to Dickson Municipal Airport (M02), Dickson, Tennessee. The flight originated from Northwest Florida Beaches International Airport (ECP), Panama City, Florida, about 1230.

During an interview with a Federal Aviation Administration inspector, the pilot reported that the airplane was completely fueled prior to departure. The departure was uneventful and the airplane was cruising at 2,500 feet mean sea level. About 205 nautical miles into the trip, the engine suddenly lost all power without any prior indication or anomalies. The propeller continued to windmill as the pilot glided the airplane toward Bessemer Airport (EKY), Bessemer, Alabama. The airplane impacted trees about 1 mile south of EKY. During the impact with trees, the airplane rolled inverted and then impacted the ground. All four occupants were able to egress before the airplane was consumed by a postcrash fire.

A handheld Garmin 496 GPS was recovered from the cockpit and retained for further examination. The engine was also retained for further examination.





 
Katey Hargrove 
(from Facebook)


Just two months after being seriously injured in a plane crash in Alabama, Dickson County High School senior Katey Hargrove will be crowned 2014 Homecoming queen Friday night.

DCHS students elected Hargrove to be queen earlier this month following her return to school.

The 17-year-old daughter of Joyce Norman and Vince Hargrove, Katey suffered a broken back when her boyfriend’s family’s plane crashed July 31 in Alabama.

Dan and Sharon Smith, son Andy and Hargrove were returning to Dickson from Panama City, Florida, when the plane developed engine trouble and crashed near Helena, Alabama, while trying to reach the Bessemer Airport.

All four suffered numerous injuries including broken bones and were assisted by witnesses in getting away from the  Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six before it was engulfed in flames.

Hargrove underwent surgery in Birmingham for a fractured vertebra in the days immediately after the wreck and managed to walk wearing a back brace with a walker in the days following. She was the first victim to be released from the hospital and returned to Dickson but was still unable to begin her senior year at DCHS for several weeks.

Hargrove and her court will ride in the parade through Dickson starting at 1 pm Friday and then celebrate the coronation ceremony in Dickson County Stadium at 6:30 pm prior to the game between the Cougars and Wilson Central.

The Federal Aviation Administration and National Transportation Safety Board have not released the results of their investigation into the crash.


- Source:  http://wdkn.com

(L-R) Andy Smith, Katey Hargrove, Dan Smith and Sharon Smith. 











Cessna 525A CitationJet CJ2, CREX-MML LLC, N194SJ: Fatal accident occurred September 29, 2013 in Santa Monica, California

NTSB Identification: WPR13FA430 
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, September 29, 2013 in Santa Monica, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 04/14/2016
Aircraft: CESSNA 525A, registration: N194SJ
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.

The private pilot was returning to his home airport; the approach was normal, and the airplane landed within the runway touchdown zone markings and on the runway centerline. About midfield, the airplane started to drift to the right side of the runway, and during the landing roll, the nose pitched up suddenly and dropped back down. The airplane veered off the runway and impacted the 1,000-ft runway distance remaining sign and continued to travel in a right-hand turn until it impacted a hangar. The airplane came to rest inside the hangar, and the damage to the structure caused the roof to collapse onto the airplane. A postaccident fire quickly ensued. The subsequent wreckage examination did not reveal any mechanical anomalies with the airplane's engines, flight controls, steering, or braking system. 

A video study was conducted using security surveillance video from a fixed-base operator located midfield, and the study established that the airplane was not decelerating as it passed through midfield. Deceleration was detected after the airplane had veered off the runway and onto the parking apron in front of the rows of hangars it eventually impacted. Additionally, video images could not definitively establish that the flaps were deployed during the landing roll. However, the flaps were deployed as the airplane veered off the runway and into the hangar, but it could not be determined to what degree. To obtain maximum braking performance, the flaps should be placed in the ”ground flap” position immediately after touchdown. The wreckage examination determined that the flaps were in the ”ground flap” position at the time the airplane impacted the hangar. 

Numerous personal electronic devices that had been onboard the airplane provided images of the passengers and unrestrained pets, including a large dog, with access to the cockpit during the accident flight. Although the unrestrained animals had the potential to create a distraction during the landing roll, there was insufficient information to determine their role in the accident sequence or what caused the delay in the pilot’s application of the brakes.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot’s failure to adequately decrease the airplane’s ground speed or maintain directional control during the landing roll, which resulted in a runway excursion and collision with an airport sign and structure and a subsequent postcrash fire.

HISTORY OF THE FLIGHT

On September 29, 2013, at 1820 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 525A Citation, N194SJ, veered off the right side of runway 21 and collided with a hangar at the Santa Monica Municipal Airport (SMO), Santa Monica, California. The private pilot and three passengers were fatally injured, and the airplane was destroyed by a post-crash fire. The airplane was registered to CREX-MML LLC, and operated by the pilot under the provision of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which operated on an instrument flight rules flight plan. The flight originated from Hailey, Idaho, about 1614.

Witnesses reported observing the airplane make a normal approach and landing, on centerline and within the runway touchdown zone markings. The airplane started to drift to the right side of the runway during the roll out, the nose pitched up suddenly and dropped back down, then the airplane veered off the runway, and impacted the 1,000-foot runway distance remaining sign. It continued to travel in a right-hand turn, and impacted a hangar structural post with the right wing. The airplane came to rest inside the hangar, and the damage to the hangar structure caused the roof to collapse onto the airplane. A post-accident fire quickly ensued.

On-scene examination of the wreckage and runway revealed that there was no airplane debris on the runway. The three landing gear tires were inflated and exhibited no unusual wear patterns. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) control tower local controller reported that the pilot did not express over the radio any problems prior to or during the landing.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The pilot, age 63, held a private pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single & multiengine land, and instrument airplane, issued March 27, 2004, and a third-class medical certificate issued May 21, 2012, with the limitation that he must wear corrective lenses. The pilot's current logbook was not located. An examination of copies from the pilot's previous logbook showed the last entry was dated June 5-7, 2009, and totaled his flight time as 3,463.1 hours, with 1,236.2 hours in the Cessna 525A. On the pilot's May 21, 2012, application for his FAA medical certificate he reported 3,500 hours total time, and 125 hours within the previous 6 months. The pilot had logbook endorsements from Flight Safety International, Orlando, Florida, for flight reviews and proficiency checks dated January 19, 2002, November 2, 2002, November, 15, 2003, June 4, 2004, March 2, 2005, March 22, 2006, March 21, 2007, and March 31, 2008. Training records provided by Flight Safety showed that he had completed the Citation Jet (CE525) 61.58 Recurrent PIC training on February, 27, 2013.

The person occupying the right seat in the cockpit was a non-pilot rated passenger.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The low wing, six-seat, retractable landing gear, business jet, serial number 525A0194, was manufactured in 2003, and was based at the Santa Monica Airport. It was powered by two Williams International FJ44-2C engines, each capable of producing 2,400 pounds of static thrust at sea level. A review of the maintenance records revealed that the most recent maintenance was performed on September 7, 2013, and included hydrostatic test of the fire extinguisher bottles, battery functional check, pitot-static system check, transponder calibration check, visual corrosion inspections on the landing gear and horizontal/vertical stabilizer spars, and a generator control unit wire bundle service bulletin. The records showed that as of September 7, the total airframe hours were 1,932.8. Total time on the number one engine (SN 126257) was 1,932.8 hours with 1,561 cycles, and the total time on the number two engine (SN 126256) was 1,932.8 hours with 1,561 cycles. Total landings were 1,561. The aircraft was not equipped with a flight data recorder or a cockpit voice recorder.


Flap Position & Speed Brakes

The flap system description from the Cessna 525 Operating Manual states: "The trailing edge flaps are electrically controlled and hydraulically actuated by the main hydraulic system. Normal flap travel is from 0 to 35 degrees and any intermediate position can be selected. A mechanical detent is installed at the takeoff and approach (15 degrees) position of the flap lever. The full flap position (35 degrees) is reached by pushing down on the flap lever when passing through the takeoff and approach detent."

"The flaps have an additional position called GROUND FLAPS (60 degrees) which provides additional drag during the landing roll."

The speed brake system description from the Operating Manual states: "The speed brakes are installed on the upper and lower surfaces of each wing to permit rapid rates of descent, rapid deceleration, and to spoil lift during landing roll. The speed brakes are electrically controlled and hydraulically actuated by a switch located on the throttle quadrant and may be selected to the fully extended or fully retracted positions. When the speed brakes are fully extended a white SPD BRK EXTEND annunciator will illuminate to remind the pilot of the deployed status of the speed brakes. The angular travel for the upper speed brake panels is 49 degrees, +2 or -2 degrees and the lower panels travel 68 degrees, +2 or -2 degrees. The lower speed brake panels close with the upper panel. The speed brakes will also automatically deploy when GROUND FLAPS position or selected on the flap handle."

Brake System

The brake system description from the Operating Manual states: "An independent power brake and anti-skid system is used for wheel braking. The closed center hydraulic system is comprised of an independent power pack assembly (pump, electric motor, and filter), accumulator and reservoir which provides pressurized hydraulic fluid to the brake metering valve and anti-skid valve. A hand-controllable pneumatic emergency brake valve is provided in the event of a power brake failure. Pneumatic pressure is transmitted to the brakes though a shuttle valve integral to each brake assembly."

"The brake metering valve regulated a maximum of 1,000 psi +50/-20 psi to the brakes based upon pilot/copilot input to the left and right rudder pedals. RPM transducers at each wheel sense the onset of a skid and transmit information to the anti-skid control box. The anti-skid control box reduces brake pressure by sending electronic inputs to the anti-skid valve. Pressure to the brake metering valve is controlled by mechanical input through a bellcrank and push-rod system from either the pilot or the copilot's rudder pedals. A manually operated parking brake valve allows the pilot to increase the brake pressure while the brake is set, and provide thermal relief at 1,200 psi. After thermal relief, pressure will drop to no less than 600 psi, and the pilot or copilot must restore full brake pressure prior to advancing both engines to take-off power."

"Pneumatic pressure from the emergency air bottle is available as a backup to the normal system."

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

Recorded weather data from the Santa Monica Airport automated surface observation system (ASOS elevation 177 feet) at 1824 showed the wind was from 240 degrees at 4 knots, visibility was 10 statute miles with clear sky, temperature was 21 degrees C and dew point 12 degrees C, and the altimeter was 29.97 inHg.

Sun position was calculated using the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) solar position calculator. The Los Angeles location of 34 degrees, 3 minutes, 0 seconds latitude, and 118 degrees, 13 minutes, 59 seconds longitude was used for the solar position calculation on September 29, 2013, at 1820 PDT. The solar azimuth was calculated to be 264.33 degrees, and solar elevation was 3.59 degrees above the horizon. This position placed the Sun near horizon level, about 54 degrees to the right of the centerline of runway 21.

AERODROME INFORMATION

The Santa Monica Municipal Airport (KSMO), is at an elevation of 177 feet msl. The airport consists of a single 4,973 by 150-foot asphalt/grooved runway oriented southwest to northeast (03/21), with a downhill gradient to the west of 1.2%. There are no overrun areas for either runway, and the departure end of runway 21 terminates in an approximately 50-foot drop off into residential housing to the west and south (residential homes are located approximately 220 feet from the departure end of both runways). Along the last 3rd of the northern side of runway 21 are privately-owned hangars with an approximately 30-foot rising embankment behind the hangars. The runway physical condition was good with no evidence of broken asphalt, debris, pot holes, or water on the runway at the time of the accident.

WRECKAGE & IMPACT INFORMATION

Visible tire track marks from the right main landing gear tire on the runway started at 2,840 feet from the threshold of runway 21; the airplane veered right, colliding with the 1,000-foot runway remaining sign, crossing over the tarmac between taxiway A2 and A1, and finally colliding with the last row of hangars on the northwest corner of the airport. The tire marks on the runway consisted of light scuff marks from the right main landing gear tire and became dark black transfer marks of all three landing gear tires after the airplane had veered off the runway and impacted the 1,000-foot remaining sign. The collision with the hangar resulted in the hangar collapsing over the airplane. A post-accident fire erupted, damaging adjacent hangars.

The collapsed hangar structure was lifted using cranes and shored up using wood timbers. The wreckage was removed by attaching chains to the airframe structure and pulling it out of the hangar with a forklift loader. The fuselage had separated from the wing structure in scissor fashion. The fuselage had rotated counter clockwise about 60 degrees around the longitudinal axis so that the cabin door was pointed towards the ground. The pilot was located in the left front seat, an adult female passenger was in the right front seat, an adult female was located with her back against the cabin door, and an adult male was sitting in a right-hand seat mid cabin. The remains of two cats and a dog were also located within the cabin. The tail section aft of the pressure bulkhead was exposed to extreme heat/fire. The nose landing gear was extended with the wheel and tire attached to the mount. The continuity between the nose wheel steering linkage up to the cockpit rudder pedals was verified. The tire was inflated and exhibited no usual wear.

The right wing had separated from the fuselage at the attach points. The wing spar had broken outboard of the wheel well rib, and a semicircular leading edge indentation was evident at the fuel filler cap location. Aileron and flaps were attached to the wing, and the speed brake/spoiler was deployed. The aileron control cable was attached to the aileron bell crank and the cables were traced to the center fuselage. The right main landing gear was extended with the wheel and tire attached. The tire was inflated and did not exhibit any unusual bald or flat spots.

The tail section aft of the pressure bulkhead separated from the airframe due to extreme fire damage, and was the only part of the airplane that remained outside of the collapsed hangar structure. The horizontal stabilizer was present with both elevators attached. The vertical stabilizer was present with the rudder attached. Both engines remained attached to their respective engine mounts. The emergency locator transmitter (ELT), manufactured by ACR Electronics, was located in the tail section, exhibited minor heat damage and was transmitting during the time immediately following the accident.

The left wing exhibited extreme fire damage at the wing root, and the wing extending outboard of the root was discolored gray/black. There was slight denting along the leading edge of the wing. The flap and aileron were attached to the wing, and the speed brake/spoiler was deployed. The aileron control cables were traced from the aileron bell crank to the center fuselage section.

The fuel control cables were attached to both engines fuel control units; both engine's bleed valves were movable. The left engine N1 section had seized and the visible fan blades were free of dirt or soot. The right engine N1 section could be rotated by hand, and the intake fan blades were evenly coated with black soot. Borescope examination of the high pressure compressor of both engines showed soot and small particulate matter within the compressor section, consistent with the engines operating while ingesting smoke, soot, and ash.


MEDICAL & PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

An autopsy was performed on the pilot on October 3, 2013, by the Los Angeles County Coroner. The cause of death was ascribed to the combined effects of inhalation of combustion products and thermal burns.

The FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) performed toxicology on specimen from the pilot with negative results for ethanol, and positive results for 10 ug acetaminophen detected in urine, and Rosuvastatin detected in urine.

An autopsy was performed on the passenger, who was in the cockpit's right seat, on October 3, 2013, by the Los Angeles County Coroner. The cause of death was ascribed to the combined effects of inhalation of combustion products and thermal burns.

The FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) performed toxicology on specimen from the passenger with negative results for ethanol, and positive results for 0.077 ug/ml diazepam detected in liver, 0.042 ug/ml diazepam detected in blood, 0.524 ug/ml dihydrocodeine detected in liver, 0.109 ug/ml dihydrocodenine detected in blood, 0.659 ug/ml hydrocodone detected in liver, 0.258 ug/ml hydrocodone detected in blood, 0.132 ug/ml nordiazepam detected liver, and 0.064 ug/ml nordiazepam detected in blood.


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Brake System Examinations

The following airplane brake system components were removed from the wreckage; skid control unit fault display, left and right wheel transducers, brake control valve assembly, and the skid control box. The components were examined at Crane Aerospace, Burbank, California, on January 22, 2014, under the oversight of the NTSB investigator-in-charge (IIC). Each component was examined and tested per Crane Aerospace acceptance testing procedures. No discrepancies or anomalies were identified that would have precluded normal operation of the components. The complete examination report is available in the public docket of this investigation.

Both the left and right main brake assemblies were examined at UTC Aerospace Systems, Troy, Ohio, under the oversight of the NTSB IIC, on February 11, 2014. A hydraulic fitting was placed on the primary port of the shuttle valve and pressurized to 100 psi. No leakage was observed, piston movement was observed on all 5 pistons, and the rotors could not be moved by hand. Hydraulic pressure was released and adjuster assemblies were observed to return to their normal position. The system was pressurized to 850 psi, no leaks were observed and the rotors could not be moved by hand. The wear pins extensions indicated about 2/3 wear on both brake assemblies. The system held pressure at 850 psi for 5 minutes. The system was depressurized to 9 psi. The pistons retracted and a feeler gauge measured a gap between rotor and stator disks. The hydraulic fitting was removed from the primary port and placed on the pneumatic port (emergency system). When pressurized to 100 psi the shuttle valve could be heard to move from primary to emergency, indicating the last actuation was via the normal (primary) brake system. The system was pressurized to 850 psi, no leaks were observed, and piston movement was evident. The complete examination factual report is available in the public docket of this investigation.

The parking brake valve assembly had been exposed to extreme thermal heat and was deformed in such a way that disassembly by normal means was impossible. To determine the parking brake internal configuration and condition, the parking brake valve was subjected to x-ray computed tomography (CT) scanning. The scanning was conducted from April 29-30, 2014. The scans were performed by Varian Medical Systems, Inc., under the direction of the NTSB using the Varian Actis 500/225 microfocus CT system CT system. The components were scanned using a total of 1,522 slices. The images were examined for any signs of missing or damaged parts, contamination, or any other anomalies. Nothing was identified in the scan images that would have precluded normal operation of the parking brake. The complete examination factual report is available in the public docket of this investigation.

Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS) Data

The EGPWS was removed from the airplane and sent to the NTSB Vehicle Recorders Laboratory for further examination. The accident flight was identified as flight leg 1592. Only warning data pertaining to the event flight The data in the warning file for flight leg 1592 began recording at operational time 2614:08:08. The event that triggered this recording was an excessive bank angle warning that occurred at 2614:08:28 operational time, when the aircraft was at about 15,000 feet about 3 minutes after takeoff. There were no other warnings on the accident flight. The landing time was recorded as 2616:08:04. The complete examination factual report is available in the official docket of this investigation.

The complete EGPWS Factual Report is available in the public docket of this investigation.

Airplane Performance Study

Available information for the accident flight included the radar track, ground marks from the aircraft's tires, and airport security camera footage.

Radar data was used to describe the accident airplane's ground track, altitude, speed, and estimated attitude on approach to the airport. Radar data was obtained from the Los Angeles, California, LAXA ASR-9 (airport surveillance radar), and sampled at 4.5-second intervals. The radar is approximately 5.5 nautical miles (NM) from the aircraft's final location. The aircraft approached Santa Monica from the northeast. The last radar return was recorded at 18:20:26 PDT, about 1,500 ft before the airport threshold. The aircraft's groundspeed final groundspeed was about 115 kts. Wind was 4 kts from 240°, which would have added a slight headwind when landing on runway 21. The approach speed (VAPP) for the 525A for 15° of flaps is between 98 kts indicated airspeed (for 8,000 lbs landing weight) and 122 kts (for 12,375 lbs landing weight). The aircraft's glide slope during the approach was 3.9°. Runway 21 at Santa Monica has a four light precision approach path indicator (PAPI) for a 4.00° glide slope.

The rubber tire marks left by the aircraft on the runway and other paved surfaces were photographed and their locations recorded. The first tire mark was found about 2,800 ft from the threshold of runway 21 and 35 ft right of the centerline. The aircraft's path was determined by connecting the recorded tire marks. Aircraft braking causes rubber from the tires to be deposited onto the runway. The tire marks consist of light scuff while on the runway, but become heavy and dark once the airplane departs the runway veering off to the right.

Six security cameras at the airport recorded the accident sequence. The airplane was first recorded on the ground and approximately 2,000 ft from the runway 21 approach threshold. Additional configuration information, such as flap or spoiler settings or thrust reverser deployment could not be determined from the video due to low resolution. However, the average speed of the aircraft was estimated for each camera recording. The calculated speeds do not uniformly decrease between camera views partially due to the uncertainty of estimating the speed from video. The calculated ground speeds as the airplane passed through mid field varied between 82 knots and 68 knots, with a calculated average of 75 knots. The details of the speed calculations can be found in the NTSB Video Study.

Cessna Aircraft Company provided data from two exemplar landings and ground rolls for a Citation 525A. The data included distance along the runway, calibrated airspeed, GPS speed, left and right brake pressures, brake pedal inputs, and flaps. To compare the exemplar and the accident aircraft landings and ground rolls, it was assumed that all aircraft touched down at the 1,000 ft mark. Assuming a 1,000 ft touchdown point, the first speed estimate is about 10 kts faster than the exemplar ground rolls at the same location. This may indicate that during the first 1,000 ft of the ground roll, the accident aircraft was decelerating near as expected. The exemplar aircraft slowed to a stop more than 1,700 ft before the accident aircraft impacted the hanger.

The aircraft's flight path, altitude, and calculated speeds during the approach were consistent with the standard approach for a Citation 525A into SMO. The aircraft's ground roll was longer and faster than exemplar landings. Tire marks indicate braking occurred late in the ground roll. The aircraft's flap and spoiler settings and thrust reverser deployment are unknown. A reason for the lack of normal deceleration could not be determined using the available data.

The complete Aircraft Performance Factual Report is available in the public docket of this investigation.

Personal Electronic Devices (PED)

Five PED's were recovered from the airplane and sent to the NTSB Vehicle Recorder Laboratory for examination. The laboratory was unable to recover data from three of the devices, however, data was recovered from the remaining two devices.

An Apple iPhone 4 contained text messages and photo activity just before and during the accident flight. A text message "Leaving the Valley" and a photo showing a woman in the right cockpit seat of the airplane before departure. A video captured the takeoff from Hailey, Idaho. The phone contained 14 in-flight photos. A photo of the instrument panel showed a climb through 37,300 feet, airspeed was 251 knots, and the anti-skid switch was in the up (ON) position. One photo was oriented aft into the cabin. In the foreground was a large, red/brown-haired dog in the aisle with its head towards the camera and torso forward of the rearward-facing seats; and in the background were two people seated (each with a cat in their lap) in the forward-facing seats. Another photo showed the dog further forward and both cats were now on the lap of one of the occupants. None of the animals were restrained or caged. Most of the remaining photos were pointed outside the airplane.

None of the content on the iPad 2 was from the accident flight, however, it did contain pertinent photos and video related to N194SJ. The iPad contained a low resolution, 52-second, video of the airplane taking off from the Santa Monica Airport on an undetermined date. The video was taken from a position consistent with the right cockpit seat and began as the airplane started its takeoff roll. About 10 seconds into the video, the camera panned left showing the interior of the cockpit. A red/brown-haired dog (same as was seen in the iPhone 4's images), was positioned facing forward with its nose about 18 inches aft of the throttle quadrant. As the airplane rotated, 19 seconds into the video, a person in the cockpit said "…you want to be up front too, huh?" The video then panned outside to show a row of hangers on the right, then the ocean, and generally clear skies. The video ended with Santa Monica Tower directing N194SJ to contact "SoCal departure."

The full PED Factual Report is available in the official docket of this investigation.

Surveillance Video

The NTSB Vehicle Recorder Division's Image Laboratory received two files containing images from 9 unique security camera feeds from a Bosch DIVAR 700 Series recorder. The recording contained six camera streams and captured the accident sequence and subsequent Airport Rescue Firefighting (ARFF). The six camera streams contained images from cameras 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 17, each of which captured the accident aircraft at some portion during its landing roll and subsequent impact with the hangar structure. The recording provided was 1 hour 40 minutes and 5 seconds in length. The beginning portion of the recording showed the landing roll and impact and the remainder of the recordings showed subsequent ARFF activities related to the accident The video file was provided by a local Fixed Base Operator (FBO) and the majority of the cameras (3, 4, 7, 8, and 9) were recorded from a cluster of locations near the FBO ramp entrance area. Camera 17 was mounted remotely on a different area of the airport property.

Images from the collection of cameras in this feed showed view of portions of runway 03/21 and the ramp area of the fixed base operator. Cameras 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 were oriented toward the southeast and showed the ramp area and the center portion of runway 03/21. Camera 17 faced southwest toward an aircraft parking area and a distant group of hangar structures on the boundary of the airport's property. The camera locations were evaluated in chronological order of the aircraft's appearance in each camera's field of view. The aircraft was first captured by camera 7 as it moved toward the departure end of runway 21, and last captured in camera 17 as it impacted the hangar structure. The aircraft was assumed to be on the centerline of runway 03/21 until it is out of view of camera 4.

Camera 7 - The aircraft first appears in the upper left corner of the frame as the cockpit area of the fuselage is shown behind an open hangar structure. Calculated average speed of the airplane was 82.5 knots.

Camera 8 - The aircraft first appears in the upper left corner of the frame as the cockpit area of the fuselage is shown in front of an open hangar door on the far side of runway 03/21. Calculated average groundspeed was 75.2 knots.

Camera 3 - The aircraft first appears in the upper left corner of the frame as the cockpit area of the fuselage is shown in front of the corner of a large hangar structure on the far side of runway 03/21. Calculated average groundspeed was 68.1 knots.

Camera 4 - The aircraft first appears in the upper left corner of the frame as the cockpit area of the fuselage is shown in front of the three chimney structure on the far side of runway 03/21. Calculated average groundspeed was 70.7 knots.

Camera 9 - The aircraft first appears in the upper left-hand corner of the recording as the fuselage is shown traveling down runway 03/21. Calculated average groundspeed was 79.0 knots.

Camera 17 - The aircraft first appears in the upper left-hand corner of the recording as the nose of the aircraft is shown veering towards a tarmac area between runway 03/21 and the intersection of Taxiway A1 and Taxiway A. A trajectory was estimated using photographs from the on-scene portion of the investigation which showed witness marks from the aircraft's tires as it moved toward the impact location. This trajectory was used to calculate the overall distance the aircraft traveled through the measurable segment. Calculated average groundspeed was 50.5 knots.

The accident aircraft's speed can be averaged throughout a portion of runway 03/21 that is not covered by security camera footage. An image from camera 9 in which the aircraft is shown passing behind a hangar structure near the FBO's ramp area at a recorded common timestamp and the nose of the accident aircraft appears 9.75 seconds later on camera 17. The calculated distance the airplane traveled was approximately 1,040 feet, providing an estimated average groundspeed of 63.2 knots.

The calculated average groundspeed for the airplane as it passed through the field of view of each camera in sequential order is summarized in the following table.

Camera 7 82.5 kts
Camera 8 75.2 kts
Camera 3 68.1 kts
Camera 4 70.7 kts
Camera 9 79.0 kts
Between 9 – 17 63.2 kts
Camera 17 50.5 kts



Exported still images from each camera position were examined to attempt to make a determination of the accident aircraft's flap position. The still images selected were the best examples of potential flap position recognition. Still images from cameras 7, 8, 3, 4, and 9, provided inconclusive results as to flap position. Camera 17 provided an image that showed the flaps deployed, however, the extent of flap deployment could not be quantified.

The complete Video Study Factual Report is available in the official docket of this investigation.

CREX-MML LLC: http://registry.faa.gov/N194SJ
 
NTSB Identification: WPR13FA430
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, September 29, 2013 in Santa Monica, CA
Aircraft: CESSNA 525A, registration: N194SJ
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 September 29, 2013, at 1820 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 525A Citation, N194SJ, veered off the right side of runway 21 and collided with a hangar at the Santa Monica Municipal Airport, Santa Monica, California.  The private pilot and three passengers were fatally injured, and the airplane was destroyed by a post-crash fire. The airplane was registered to CREX-MML LLC, and operated by the pilot as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 91 flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which operated on an instrument flight rules flight plan. The flight originated at Hailey, Idaho, about 1614.

Witnesses reported observing the airplane make a normal approach and landing.  The airplane traveled down the right side of the runway, eventually veered off the runway, impacted the 1,000-foot runway distance remaining sign, continued to travel in a right-hand turn, and impacted a hangar structural post with the right wing.  The airplane came to rest inside the hangar and the damage to the hangar structure caused the roof to collapse onto the airplane. A post-accident fire quickly ensued.

On-scene examination of the wreckage and runway revealed that there was no airplane debris on the runway. The three landing gear tires were inflated and exhibited no unusual wear patterns. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) control tower local controller reported that the pilot did not express over the radio any problems prior to or during the landing.



The city of Santa Monica has filed a negligence suit against the heirs of the pilot of a small plane that crashed into the local airport and killed four people on  September 29, 2013.

The lawsuit was filed Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court against the estate of Mark Benjamin as well as the Cessna 525A Citation’s owner, CREX-MML LLC. 

The suit seeks more than $54,000 in cleanup costs stemming from the crash.

According to the lawsuit, the city’s expenses related to the accident included removing plane debris from the runway, securing the site until the Santa Monica Fire Department finished its investigation and the conducting of testing to see whether hydrocarbons from the plane and chemicals from the fire suppressant foam seeped into the soil.

The suit alleges Benjamin negligently landed the aircraft by veering to the right side of the runway and striking some objects before hitting a hangar.

The complaint further alleges that the estate did not respond to a creditor’s claim filed April 17.

Robert Given, the personal representative of the Benjamin estate, could not be immediately reached.

Killed in the Sept. 29, 2013, crash were Benjamin, 63, the president of a Santa Monica-based construction company; his son Lucas, 28; Lucas Benjamin’s girlfriend, 28-year-old Lauren Winkler; and Kyla Dupont, 53.

A report released last year by the National Transportation Safety Board found that all of the tires were inflated and there was no debris on the runway when the plane slammed into the hangar and burst into flames. 


The hangar collapsed onto the plane, which had taken off from Hailey, Idaho.

Last Nov. 4, three sons of Dupont also sued the Benjamin estate. Charles Dupont, Elliot Dupont and Jackson Dupont allege Benjamin failed to maintain  proper control over the plane, did not act “reasonably in the ownership of the plane,” did not undertake the necessary actions to accomplish a safe flight, did not act reasonably in landing the plane and failed to keep it in good repair.


- Source:   http://westsidetoday.com


November 2013:  Wrongful-Death Lawsuit Filed In Santa Monica Plane Crash
 
LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Three sons who lost their mother in a plane crash at Santa Monica Airport filed a wrongful-death lawsuit Tuesday against the estate of the aircraft’s pilot, alleging negligence.

Kyla Dupont, 53, was killed aboard a Cessna 525A CitationJet CJ2 aircraft that went off the runway Sept. 29 before colliding with a runway sign and crashing into a hangar. The hangar collapsed on the plane, which then caught on fire. Authorities said the blaze, which spread to two nearby hangars, burned at unusually high temperatures due to jet fuel.

Kyla Dupont’s sons Charles Dupont, Elliot Dupont and Jackson Dupont brought the complaint in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging the pilot failed to maintain proper control over the plane, did not undertake the necessary actions to achieve a safe flight, acted unreasonably in the landing of the plane and failed to maintain the aircraft with proper repairs.

Mark Benjamin, the 63-year-old president of Santa Monica-based construction company Morley Builders, was believed to be at the controls at the time of the crash. The passengers were returning from a trip to Hailey, Idaho.

Benjamin’s 28-year-old son Lucas and 28-year-old Lauren Winkler, Lucas’ girlfriend,  were also killed in the crash.

The suit seeks unspecified damages from the estate of Mark Benjamin and Malibu-based MML Investments LLC, a real estate and aircraft management company. A representative for the Benjamin estate could not be reached for comment.

The cause of the crash remains unclear. A preliminary report from the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation found no debris on the runway at the time of the crash and said all four of the aircraft’s tires were inflated upon landing.

At the time of the crash, NTSB officials said the pilot never contacted authorities stating there was a problem.

Source:   http://losangeles.cbslocal.com


Pilot and three passengers were killed in a plane crash at Santa Monica Airport Sept. 29, 2013: Lauren Winkler, 28, top left; Mark Benjamin, 63, top right; Luke Benjamin, bottom left; Kyla Dupont, 53, bottom right.


 


Engines and wings are part of two loads of damaged aircraft hauled away from Santa Monica Airport.  Santa Monica Airport Operations Administrator Stelios Makrides said the trucks contained the Cessna jet that crashed Sunday and a prop plane that was burned when the jet hit a storage hangar at the airport.

Foothills Regional (KMRN), Morganton, North Carolina: Motion to dismiss former airport manager’s appeal filed

The federal government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of the former manager of Foothills Regional Airport.

But Alex Nelson has requested, and was granted, more time to respond to the motion, according to federal court documents.

Nelson appealed his three-year sentence for embezzlement, money laundering and participating in a public-corruption conspiracy. His sentence also includes three years supervised probation and paying restitution of $179,781.51.

Nelson reported to prison in Beckley, W.Va. on June 9.

He pleaded guilty to the charges in September 2012 at the Asheville federal courthouse.

The federal government filed a motion on Sept. 15 to suspend the briefing schedule in the case and to dismiss Nelson’s appeal on the basis that he waived his right to appeal his sentence in his plea agreement. The government says Nelson was aware of the maximum and minimum sentences the charges carried and would have no right to withdraw his plea even if his sentence was more than he expected. The only exceptions to waiving his rights of appeal in his plea agreement is if there is a basis for claiming ineffective counsel or prosecutorial misconduct, the motion says. The government says Nelson’s appeal doesn’t include any of those claims.

The federal government motion to dismiss goes on to cite several cases, saying the federal courts have repeatedly said he waived the right to appeal his sentence in a valid plea agreement.

Nelson filed a motion Tuesday to extend, by 15 days, his response to the government’s motion to dismiss. Nelson was given until Sept. 29 to respond to the government’s motion, according to federal court documents.

On Wednesday, the courts granted the motion to extend the time Nelson has to respond to Oct. 14.

Former Foothills Regional Airport Chairman Randy Hullette pleaded guilty Aug. 21, 2013, to embezzlement and witness tampering but has not been sentenced. He filed a response to his federal presentence report, which is required before someone is sentenced in federal court. Because presentence reports have sensitive personal information included in it, the reports are typically sealed. Hullette’s presentence report is sealed.

Hullette faces a total maximum sentence of 30 years.

The charges stem from an FBI investigation of embezzlement from the airport, which is funded by federal, state and local money. Burke and Caldwell counties and the cities of Morganton and Lenoir fund local money to the airport.

The FBI raided the airport in June 2012, seizing files, records, computers, log books and other information. The warrant included records from the airport involving Nelson, Adkins and Hullette defrauding the airport of at least $100,000.

The federal court in Asheville holds sentencing every other month, with the next sentencing set for October, according to court officials.


- Source:   http://www.morganton.com

Russellville Regional (KRUE), Arkansas: Airport fuel sales on steady climb

Russellville Municipal Airport Commissioner Less Teaff (left) and manager Bobby Day look over a map of the airport, specifically of areas of timber or forest land, during Wednesday’s meeting at the airport terminal. 
(THE COURIER / Sean Ingram) 



Russellville Municipal Airport Manager Bobby Day told commissioners during their regular meeting Wednesday that fuel sales continued to increase for the period during August 2013 to last month.

Total monthly fuel sales were 7,636 gallons in August 2014, an increase of 1,405 gallons from one year ago (6,231). Sales for jet fuel were three gallons fewer last month than the year before, but aviation gas was up 3,203 gallons in August 2014 over 1,795 gallons in August 2013.

Year-to-date jet fuel sales total 26,210 gallons, aviation gas sales are at 18,129 gallons, giving the airport total fuel sales of 44,339 gallons this year — ahead of 37,719 gallons sold through August 2013.

Day also reported the city hangar occupancy was at 77.8 percent for August, down from the 81 percent occupancy in July.

The manager told commissioners he had ordered a Ford F-350 truck from Cogswell Motors and has sought bids to refurbish the vehicle into a fuel truck. The Russellville City Council in June approved $60,000 for the airport to purchase a new fuel truck.

Master plan items

Engineer Bob Chatman said a preconstruction meeting took place for the installation of new runway end identifier lights (REIL) and precision approach path indicator (PAPI) systems, part of the airport’s Master Plan. The contractor for the project, Rick McGinty Co. of Greenbrier, indicated it would take eight to nine weeks to order the equipment and it reach the Russellville airport.

The PAPI system consists of four lights that turn progressively from white to red as seen by the pilot from a too-high to a too-low position. A pilot on a correct glide slope sees two red and two white lights. More white lights appear when they are too high, and all red lights indicate a pilot is too low. The last light must turn red with at least one degree clearance above the highest obstacle within 10 degrees either side of the runway centerline.

A REIL system increases the probability that pilots will be able to spot the runway when breaking out of the clouds after an instrument approach in low-visibility weather.

Preliminary cost estimates for the 2014 FAA/state 90-10 funded projects total slightly more than $200,000, with no cost to the city of Russellville.

Chatman also reported items to be added to the Master Plan — or a “wish list” of possible projects that would improve the airport’s safety and appearance, discussed by Day and commissioners — would be submitted to a committee for approval.

In a related matter, Day said he had advertised for the clearing of timber around the airport to reduce wildlife habitat, primarily deer, in order to improve airport safety.

Attending Wednesday’s meeting were Day, Chatman, commission chair Bob Burris and commissioners Phil Cowger, Paul Horney, Tommy Littleton, Dwight Talburt and Less Teaff.

The Russellville Municipal Airport Commission meets at 6 p.m. the fourth Wednesday of each month inside the airport terminal.


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

New military planes roll out of Jacksonville plant

The aircraft, which also performs as an advanced trainer, is the first of 20 that are being delivered to the Air Force for its Light Air Support program, which supports the stability of Afghanistan as that country assumes increased responsibility for its own defense. 



JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - Sierra Nevada Corporation, Embraer Defense and Security and the U.S. Air Force held a roll-out ceremony Thursday at a North Jacksonville plant for the first United States-built A-29 Super Tucanos, a light-air support aircraft.

The aircraft, which also performs as an advanced trainer, is the first of 20 that are being delivered to the Air Force for its Light Air Support program, which supports the stability of Afghanistan as that country assumes increased responsibility for its own defense.

Maj. Gen. Emmett Titshaw said after 13 years building up Afghanistan's military, it's important to teach them how to protect themselves.

"There is a real need in their air force they do not have the capability to protect their military forces from the air except in a very limited way right now," said Titshaw.

The training will take place at Moody Air Force Base in Valdosta. The exercises will teach Afghan pilots how to help the security efforts in their own country.

So far, one A-29 is ready for flight and six more in various states of building, with a total of 20 that will go to the Afghan Air Force. It takes about five months to complete each aircraft.

“The Super Tucano is a robust and powerful turboprop aircraft capable of carrying out a wide range of missions and, in more than ten years of operations, it has confirmed to be a cost-effective air power solution for nations around the world,” Jackson Schneider, president and CEO of Embraer.  “These characteristics, along with its well-proven combat record, make it highly reliable and the logical choice for the LAS mission.”

In March 2013, Embraer officially opened a 40,000-square-foot facility in Jacksonville to produce the LAS aircraft and to date has hired 72 employees. The facility in Jacksonville performs pre-equipping, mechanical assembly, structural assembly, systems installation and testing, and flight testing of A-29 aircraft. Through the LAS program, SNC and Embraer support more than 1,400 jobs with more than 100 companies throughout the United States.

Story, Photos and Comments:   http://www.news4jax.com



Martha's Vineyard (KMVY), Vineyard Haven, Massachusetts: County Commission expands airport commission, appoints two new members

The Dukes County Commission met Wednesday and voted to expand the size of the Martha’s Vineyard Airport Commission from seven to nine members. The commissioners then  immediately appointed two new members, both frequent critics of airport management.

By a ballot vote, the commissioners appointed Myron Garfinkle of West Tisbury, a former businessman and a local representative for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, and Robert Rosenbaum, a seasonal resident of Chilmark, former businessman and pilot.
 
The county commissioners, who have been embroiled in a battle with their appointed airport commission, said the move was warranted because a large number of qualified candidates had expressed interest in filling the seat left vacant by the recent departure of Peter Bettencourt.

“I had a tough choice between three candidates for one slot,” chairman Leonard Jason, Jr., of Chilmark said. “If we can get good candidates on there sooner rather than later, it’s a benefit to the entire community.”

“I think an injection of new people with fresh ideas, for me that’s important,” said commissioner Tristan Israel of Tisbury. “It seems to be within our rights as an appointing authority.”

Former airport commissioner and county commissioner John Alley of West Tisbury was the only dissenting vote. Mr. Alley questioned whether the expansion would violate grant assurances, documents signed by the commissioners in exchange for state and federal funding that prohibit the county commissioners from interfering with airport operations or diminishing the authority of the airport commission.

County manager Martina Thornton cited two other publicly owned airports governed by similar grant assurances, which recently expanded airport commissions. She said she consulted with the authorities at the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Aeronautics Division, and was assured that the expansion did not violate the grant assurances.

The county commission and the airport commission have been embroiled in controversy for much of 2014. The two sides recently went to court over control of the county-owned Martha’s Vineyard Airport and its operations.

On August 7, Dukes County Superior Court Associate Justice Richard J. Chin handed the airport commission a significant victory in its legal battle.   In an 11-page decision, Judge Chin ruled in favor of the airport commission on every point in its request for a preliminary injunction against the County Commission, county treasurer Noreen Mavro Flanders, and county manager Martina Thornton. That lawsuit is still pending.

The next regularly scheduled meeting of the airport commission is Friday, September 26th.

- Source:  http://www.mvtimes.com

Airlines fly slower to cut fuel bill: Kemp

September 26, 2014
By John Kemp

(Reuters) - Higher oil prices have had a traumatic effect on U.S. airlines, forcing carriers to re-examine every aspect of the way they do business in a bid to control costs.

Between 2002 and 2012, the price of jet fuel quadrupled from 70 cents per gallon to over $3. Fuel bills rose from 15 percent to more than 40 percent of the total operating costs of U.S. airlines to become their single largest operating expense.

The airlines have responded by changing almost every element of their operations - from restricting capacity growth, eliminating short routes and hiking baggage fees to instructing crews to fly aircraft more slowly and reducing the amount of water carried on board for lavatories and washing.

The results have been impressive. After peaking in 2005, jet fuel consumption in the United States has fallen by almost 15 percent, the equivalent of more than 200,000 barrels per day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

U.S. airlines' fuel saving program is just one example of how higher oil prices over the last decade have transformed transportation, and led to demand destruction which is likely to prove permanent. Most of the fuel economies which have been implemented in the last decade will not be undone, even if oil prices fall.

RESTRAINING CAPACITY

"There is a strong correlation between airline mission fuel efficiency and fuel price," the National Center of Excellence for Aviation Operations Research wrote in a recent report ("The impact of oil prices on the air transportation industry" March 2014).

"There is ample evidence that airlines adopted new operational strategies to reduce total fuel burn for the same amount of traffic," the center concluded.

Some of the changes have been obvious. U.S. airlines have restrained growth in capacity and increased seat occupancy.

U.S. airlines measure capacity in available seat-miles while utilization is measured in revenue passenger-miles.

Between 2007 and 2013, the number of available seat miles flown in the United States was cut by around 34 billion (3.25 percent) while revenue passenger-miles rose by 6 billion (0.8 percent).

The result is that seat occupancy, which the airlines call "load factor", has risen from around 76 percent in 2004 to almost 83 percent in 2013, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

While airlines have mostly maintained capacity on major trunk routes, shorter and less profitable ones with lower load factors have seen the number of seats cut or been eliminated altogether.

Carriers have also shrunk the amount of space between seats to increase the number of passengers on each flight and saved more space and weight on the aircraft by installing thinner seats.

FLYING SLOWER

 
Other changes have been much less visible. One of the biggest fuel savings has come from flying aircraft more slowly.

From the perspective of fuel consumption, there is an optimal cruising speed for each aircraft based on altitude. Flying faster increases the amount of fuel burnt.

Historically, commercial aircraft have flown on average about 8 percent faster than their optimal cruising speed. Getting the aircraft to its destination quicker to pick up another load of passengers and minimize crew cost was worth the extra fuel expense.

The trade-off between fuel consumption and time is captured in the airline cost index and implemented in the carrier's flight management system.

But between 2004 and 2011, the average ground speed of seven major U.S. airlines decreased by 1.1 percent, resulting in an even bigger reduction in fuel consumption, according to the center for operations research.

REDUCING WEIGHT

Airlines have been pushing for other changes in crew behavior and operations. Several airlines told the operations researchers they had instructed pilots to use only one engine while taxiing around the airport in order to save fuel.

Most airlines are also trying to maximize the use of ground power for aircraft instruments, heating, cooling and starting turbine engines when the aircraft is on stand rather than using the aircraft's own auxiliary power units (which consume jet fuel).

One airline has stipulated ground power must be plugged in within 1 minute of the plane arriving at the gate.

More than anything else, however, airlines have focused on reducing excess weight.

In most cases, airlines found aircraft were carrying more water than was actually consumed on the journey. By modelling consumption by the number of passengers and the length of the flight airlines have been able to cut the amount of water loaded on board.

The number of magazines carried has been reduced, and those that are must "pay their way". Airlines have removed onboard ovens from flights that didn't need heated food. Safety equipment for a water landing has been removed from aircraft which do not fly over water.

One airline told the researchers that its weight reduction program had cut the weight of a typical Boeing 777 by 700 pounds.

For some fleets, average weights have actually been cut by as much as 10-15 percent, according to the operations research center.

USING BIG DATA

One of the most attractive targets for weight reduction is the amount of fuel carried on board. Aircraft must carry contingency fuel to deal with delays, storms or diversions but the reserves add significantly to aircraft weight.

Most airlines are now trying to trim the amount of contingency fuel by using modelling to estimate how much extra fuel must be carried to ensure safe operation of the aircraft based on weather conditions and the availability of alternative airports in case the flight must be diverted.

In fact, big data and computer modelling are revolutionizing most aspects of aircraft operation, but changing behavior is not always easy.

There is often a tension between trusting decisions about contingency fuel, water and flying speed up to the professional judgement of the pilots and allowing them to be determined by a computer model. In many cases pilot contracts limit the operational data which gets reported back to the airline and the ways in which it can be used.

"Two airlines noted the difficulty of enforcing the single engine taxi policy," the operations researchers explained. "The reason for this is because pilot contracts with airlines often limit access to pilot specific performance data, which includes specific reverse thrust settings."

Cutting fuel reserves has been a particular source of contention. "For pilots, fuel is like insurance, they take extra fuel to deal with uncertainties in flight. They more fuel the less they care if uncertainties like traffic or weather come up. For the pilot, carrying more fuel means less stress."

But most airlines are now using computer models to encourage pilots to modify their decisions, and in some cases to compel changes in operating practices.

The result has been a huge improvement in fuel efficiency. Between 1991 and 2012, U.S. airlines cut their fuel consumption at an average annual rate of 2.27 percent per revenue passenger-mile.

Between 1991 and 2001, when jet fuel prices were stable, most of the improvement came from upgrades in the aircraft fleet. Older more fuel hungry aircraft were replaced by more modern and efficient ones. After 2004, however, most of the gains have come from network rationalization and changes in operating behavior. 


- Source:  http://uk.reuters.com