Thursday, March 23, 2017

Sentient Jet: Q&A with Andrew Collins, CEO

Most weekday mornings, Andrew Collins drives from his home in Needham to Braintree, where he works as president and CEO of Sentient Jet, one of the world’s largest private aviation companies. Founded in 1999, Sentient Jet invented the jet card model, which allows travelers to purchase a minimum of 25 hours of flight time on a hand-selected network of independent jet operators. Collins, who has a master’s degree from the MIT Sloan School of Management, is Sentient Jet’s “chief evangelist” he says, laughing. “Essentially, my job is to make sure we’re all singing from the same sheet music. I have to set corporate strategy, I work on branding, I am the lead company spokesperson, and do a lot of client and partner visitations in the field.” The 47-year-old Red Sox fan recently shared the advantages of taking a jet, Sentient Jet’s typical Boston clients, and, for would-be-jet travelers, proper “jetiquette.” (This interview has been edited and condensed.)

 Q. How does the jet card work?

A. It’s a similar to companies like Uber and Airbnb in that in 1999 we figured out that there was excess capacity in the private jet space from corporate and ultra-high net worth owners of jets. So we certified 1,000 out of the 7,000 available private jets based on issues, such as quality of the planes and safety records, so our clients can fly on the best jets out there with the best operators (pilots and crew) drawing down against the card as they fly.

Q. Are there other jet card companies out there?

 A. We invented it, but many people followed suit.

Q. How much the SJ card cost?

A. It starts at around $125,000 (for 25 hours of private jet flight time) and the average new client purchases a card of around $140,000.

Q. Who are your clients?

A. We have a base of about 5,000. Many of them are of extreme wealth or they’re corporate executives. About 6 to 7 percent hail from the Boston area. I can’t give names, but can tell you their walks of life — hedge fund investors, professional sport team owners, real estate magnates, and entrepreneurs (venture capital, technology, biopharmaceutical). We have a good chunk of celebrities on television and in film, as well as authors and athletes.

Q. Nature of their flights?

A. 60 percent fly for business and 40 percent for pleasure.

Q. Jet options?

A. Clients can choose either a light jet, which seats 5-6 passengers and has a range of about here to Chicago, a mid-size jet, which seats 7 people comfortably, a super-mid aircraft, which seats 8 to 9 passengers and can go across country or a large cabin or heavy aircraft, which can seat up to 15 passengers and go transatlantic.

Q. Advantages over flying commercially?

A. It’s mainly the efficiencies from wheels up to wheels down. Let’s use Boston to Cleveland for a lunch meeting and coming back the same day as an example, which I do all the time. For a commercial flight, I have to leave my house around 5 a.m. to catch 7:30 a.m. flight, having checked in and made it through security. I get to Cleveland around 9:30 a.m. Then, I have to pick up my rental car and drive to my meeting, which in my case, is usually 45 minutes away at a noncommercial airport. Say the meeting lasts for 1½ hours, I then have to get in my rental car, go back to my airport, return the car and wait for the next flight out. Some of them don’t leave until 6 p.m. So I’ve got a lot of dead time there. I leave at 6 p.m., land at 8 p.m., and arrive home around 10-10:30 p.m. Privately, I could leave my house at 10 a.m., drive 15 minutes over to Concord to Hanscom Field, where I’m going to get the jet. I can park my car, show my ID, and walk onto the jet. I land where I am having my meeting (at that smaller airport). After my meeting, I turn around and fly back and can probably pick my kids up from school at 3 p.m. and still feel refreshed.

Q. Can a client work directly with the operators that you use?

A. Yes, but they probably won’t get the same guarantees (Sentient Jet guarantees an available jet with only 10 hours advance notice) or the same pricing (it could be higher). We also work with a lot of partners to give clients what we call, “surprise and delights.” We give exclusive access to unique things, like for the Kentucky Derby, we’ve gained access for our clients to the Mansion (at Churchill Downs), a private viewing area usually off-limits to most people except for celebrities.

Q. Most popular destinations for Boston clients?

A. Nantucket, New York City, and Palm Beach.

Q. What about a weekend in Paris?

A. We do that, but jet aviation is really good for, say, a business person who lives in Boston and has several manufacturing plants across the country and needs to be in three different destinations in a day or it could be someone who is in finance and has to take a client and put them in front of five different banks in different parts of the country.

Q. Most unusual request?

A. We have a passionate, well-known individual that likes to save animals and we’ve brought baby bear cubs home on our jets to be put back into the wild or into a refuge.

Q. What’s jetiquette?

A. Just because you’re flying privately, it doesn’t mean you can be a Ninja. (You may or may not be traveling with the card holder.) You have to bring identification, it’s very rude to show up late, don’t over pack (jets have luggage and weight limitations), I typically wear business casual, you want to be gracious and grateful (to your host and the crew). Lastly, just because it’s private, doesn’t give you the excuse to get intoxicated and do crazy things on board.

Q. I read that people often bring a gift.

A. It’s the same thing as when people invite you over to a dinner party. We’ve seen anything from a bottle of wine to people returning the favor with dinners. In one case someone bought a rare book on a topic the client was into.

Q. Is food served?

A.If someone doesn’t order through catering we have a default selection of soft drinks and alcohol and snacks like KIND bars, high-end chocolates, chips, jarred nut selections.

Q. Any inflight entertainment?

A. Generally, most folks work.

Q. Your ideal jet destination?

A. I dream about taking a one-way trip to Greece. 

Original article can be found here:

Incident occurred March 23, 2017 at Salt Lake City International Airport (KSLC), Salt Lake City, Utah

SALT LAKE CITY — A fixed-base operator maintenance employee was hospitalized after crashing into a private plane at Salt Lake City International Airport Thursday morning, officials said.

The employee was driving a Ford F-250 on the east side of the airfield at about 6 a.m. when he struck the plane, according to Salt Lake City International Airport spokeswoman Nancy Volmer.

“(The pickup) hit an aircraft that was parked on the Atlantic Aviation ramp,” she said. “It hit the plane’s wing and spun around before going off into a field area.”

Volmer said the driver had to be extricated from the vehicle and was transported to a local hospital. She said she was unsure of the man's condition.

Nobody was inside the plane at the time of the crash.

Volmer said it is unclear what caused the crash and that it remains under investigation. She added there was “substantial damage” to both the truck and the plane, but was unsure of the exact cost. The crash did not impact travel at the airport.


Hundreds of jobs lost as North State Aviation closes Kinston & Winston-Salem locations

KINSTON, NC (WITN) - An aviation company that has facilities in both Kinston and Winston-Salem has shut down.

North State Aviation repaired large aircraft and opened up in September 2015 at the Global TransPark.

In a letter to the state Department of Commerce, North State said yesterday's shut down was due to "an unforeseeable, significant downturn in business."

The closing will effect 345 employees.

Then-Gov. Pat McCrory came to Kinston to announce North State's decision to locate another facility here. At the time, the company said it planned to hire 109 employees in Kinston and invest $900,000.

To help finance the expansion, the company received a One North Carolina Fund performance-based grant of up to $250,000 from the state.

Story,  video and comments:

Cessna 162, N3029F: Incident occurred March 23, 2017 in Glen Rock, Codorus Township, York County, Pennsylvania

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Aircraft experienced engine problems and landed in a field.  

Date: 23-MAR-17
Time: 22:35:00Z
Regis#: N3029F
Aircraft Make: CESSNA
Aircraft Model: 162
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: PERSONAL
Operation: 91

Craig McDonald explains to a reporter how he landed his plane, background, in Codorus Township field Thursday, March 23, 2017. "This was a perfect emergency landing," McDonald said after his Cessna 162 had engine-related problems while he was flying from Lancaster Airport in Lancaster County to Carroll County Regional Airport in Westminster, Md. McDonald reported no injuries and said he would have a mechanic look at the plane the following morning.

While piloting his own plane, Mike Bullock of Glyndon, Md., took this photo of friend Craig McDonald's Cessna 162 in the air shortly before McDonald was forced to make an emergency landing in a Codorus Township field Thursday, March 23, 2017.

A pilot landed his single-engine Cessna plane in an agricultural field in Codorus Township Thursday evening.

The pilot, Craig McDonald, of Columbia, Maryland, took off from Lancaster Airport around 6 p.m. for a 40-minute flight to Carroll County Regional Airport, where his Cessna 162 sits in a hangar.

A friend of McDonald's, Mike Bullock, also of Maryland, flew McDonald to Lancaster where the navigation system of his plane was being worked on. The pair then took off separately for the flight back to Maryland.

McDonald was about 12 minutes from his destination when he started getting indications that he was losing power, even though he had a nearly full tank of gas.

"It would be no different if you're on the highway, you run out of gas and you know you need to pull over," McDonald said.

McDonald knew he had to perform an emergency landing so he started broadcasting over an emergency frequency on the radio, giving as much information about his plane and location.

Bullock was about a quarter mile away, in his own plane, close enough to see and make sure his friend was OK. He took a photo of McDonald's plane at about 3,200 feet in the air before McDonald started navigating his way down to the ground.

Mike Bullock of Glyndon, Md., helps stake down friend Craig McDonald's Cessna 162 in the Codorus Township field where McDonald landed the plane earlier Thursday, March 23, 2017. 

McDonald said he was scanning below, keeping an eye out for a clear place to land, free of power lines and thick brush.

He finally landed in a large field at the intersection of Sticks and Mummert roads. The field appeared to be used for growing food, but it wasn't clear which kind.

At least three 911 calls were placed around 6:46 p.m. in connection with the emergency landing. There were no injuries, but fire crews were dispatched to investigate.

By 7:50 p.m., McDonald stood in the field alone, on his phone and waiting for Bullock to arrive. He said he's been a pilot for 13 years. He said responding fire crews arrived to make sure he was OK and an area resident checked on him.

He also received a call from the Federal Aviation Administration, which confirmed in a statement to the York Daily Record that the crash occurred and said that the plane had reportedly experienced an engine-related problem.

Bullock drove his car to the field after landing in Carroll County. The two tied the plane down for the night.

McDonald said he'd be calling an aviation mechanic to check what went wrong with the plane. He said the plane still starts and expects to be able to fly out on Friday.

"For Craig to land this thing and walk away from it, you can't ask for a better ending than that," Bullock said.

McDonald said this is the type of landing pilots learn about and practice for.

Story, photo gallery and video:

Beech 1900D, North Caribou Air, C-FNCL: Incident occurred March 23, 2017 at Kelowna International Airport (YLW), British Columbia


A North Cariboo Air aircraft travelling from Victoria was able to land safely at the Kelowna International Airport after having landing gear issues on Thursday.

The aircraft finally touched down at 9:55 a.m. after circling the sky before attempting to land.

“The aircraft circled for about an hour and half to ensure they could get the landing gear down,” said Phillip Elchitz, airport director.

Airport officials were notified at 8:30 a.m. that the plane, which had seven people on board, was having problems.

“There was an indicator on the aircraft that indicates three green, which means all three landing gears are down. When an aircraft does not get those indications there is a potential issue with the landing gear,” said Elchitz.

The pilots were able to get the landing gear down while in the air.

A five-alarm was issued for the airport and four trucks from Kelowna Fire Department, two ambulances, two RCMP vehicles and their own fire crew was all on scene.

“Out of an abundance of precaution we go on what's called standby, our airport response firefighting team gets into position as well as we call for back up from Kelowna Fire department, Lake Country, as well as Ellison,” he said.

Spectators in the airport cheered and clapped when the small plane landed.

Elchitz said this is not a rare occasion but they want to make sure every precaution is met.

UPDATE: 10:10 a.m.

A plane with seven people on board has landed safely after some tense moments.

A North Cariboo Air aircraft, operating on behalf of Pacific Coastal Airlines, touched down safely at Kelowna airport at about 10 a.m.

It was experiencing potential landing gear issues.

UPDATE: 9:50 a.m.

According to officials at Kelowna International Airport, a North Cariboo Air aircraft, operating on behalf of Pacific Coastal Airlines, advised the air traffic control tower there were indications that there could be issues with the landing gear.

Emergency crews are standing by.

The flight originated from Victoria.

ORIGINAL: 9:05 a.m.

Emergency crews are rushing to the Kelowna International Airport.

Details are unclear.

There were tense moments at YLW earlier this month when a small plane reported potential landing gear issues.

Story, video and photo:

Police on Treasure Coast want to know why plane flew so close to baseball fans: Incident happened on St. Patrick's Day

PORT ST. LUCIE, Florida  —

The Port St. Lucie police department needs your help in finding someone who may have flown their plane too close to First Data field during a Mets game last Friday.

Police are asking anyone who was at the game and may have snapped a photo or has video to contact detectives.

The game took place on St. Patrick's Day.

Master Sergeant Frank Sabol said an aircraft buzzed the First Data Field in St. Lucie West just prior to the start of the baseball game.

Sabol said the plane was about 150 feet from the ground and police want to know why and who was flying.

"It's a concern because they were flying really close to the stadium and we don't we don't have any intelligence to believe it was anything other than a plane just got to close to the stadium but we want to make sure. You know for the safety of our residents and for the safety to the patrons who go to the baseball games," said Sabol.

The plane is described as a white single-engine plane.

Police said they're contacting the Federal Aviation Administration and other airports in the area to try and learn the more.

"We don't have any intelligence to say that it was terror related or anything like that but we are curious and I do want to know and I know that from our side there's now criminal investigation it's just intelligence to see who it was," said Sabol.

Story and video:

United Nations Air-Safety Arm Pushes for Video Recorders in Cockpits: International Civil Aviation Organization supports new technology to aid crash probes, faces pilots’ privacy concerns

The Wall Street Journal
Updated March 23, 2017 12:29 p.m. ET

The United Nations’ air-safety arm is pushing for video recorders to be installed in future airliner cockpits to assist investigations of serious incidents and crashes, in a move that puts safety gains above privacy drawbacks, according to agency documents and people familiar with the details.

Such a step has been opposed by pilots for decades due to concerns that such filming, which could potentially capture their images during a fatal accident or be used by airlines to monitor crews in nonemergency situations, would violate their privacy rights.

The proposal by the International Civil Aviation Organization, the world’s leading advocate of air safety and technical standards, aims to allay those concerns by using new technology that would avoid recording the faces or bodies of aviators.

The ICAO envisions systems designed to capture only images of flight instruments and the positions of switches. The goal is to re-create for investigators precisely what flight crews saw during emergency situations, and to determine whether cockpit displays were consistent with crew commands and actual flight conditions.

An agency spokesman said pilots would be able be able to erase the images at the end of flights. The recordings would be stored in crash-resistant “black boxes,” which would have to be accessed for viewing.

The ICAO spelled out its proposal, which hasn’t been reported before, in letters this year seeking comments from national aviation regulators by April 20. The agency wants airliners built in the next decade to adopt the technology.

The ICAO is the first major regulatory authority or standard-setting organization to formally call for using such technology to help unravel accidents. If adopted, the phasing-in of cameras would likely take at least several years.

Accident investigators, including the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board and the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, have long advocated cockpit-video cameras as important supplements to traditional cockpit-voice recorders and flight-data recorders.

“There’s no question it would help when a crash involves an intentional act,” said Richard Healing, a former NTSB member.

ICAO experts have determined that video images would have provided a significant aid to investigators in various crashes in which terrorism or pilot suicide were suspected.

The agency doesn’t have direct enforcement authority. But national regulatory bodies, industry trade associations and airline managers typically embrace its standards, which largely end up as mandatory rules. International treaty obligations and ICAO’s ability to publicly identify countries that balk also give the agency’s pronouncements substantial clout.

“It’s long past due” because “tragedies have occurred while ICAO has been studying the issue,” said Kenneth Quinn, a former senior U.S. aviation regulator who now heads the aviation practice of the law firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.

Mr. Quinn said public expectations demand trade-offs between pilot privacy and “a very clear and overdue need” to determine precisely what occurred each time a commercial aircraft goes down.

According to an internal ICAO working document prepared by Russian representatives to support the proposal, video images could accelerate future probes “to determine explicitly causes of the crash and to increase public trust” in the investigations. The document also notes that cockpit voice recorders are sometimes inadequate in conclusively determining the sequence of events “in cases of unlawful interference into civil aviation operations” such as sabotage or intentional pilot misconduct.

Pilot groups around the globe have strongly opposed the concept, setting the stage for what promises to be a testy debate over its potential benefits and downsides, including costs and risks of improper release of images.

A spokesman for the Air Line Pilots Association, North America’s largest pilot union, said that instead of “focusing on subjective interpretations of video recordings,” limited safety resources “should be focused on proactive safety programs that prevent accidents and enhance aviation safety by identifying potential safety risks and mitigations.”

The International Air Transport Association, the airline industry’s leading trade group, told the ICAO in a joint letter with pilot representatives last year that it opposed video recordings on the grounds that they could “lead an investigator down an incorrect path” if other, less obvious evidence was overlooked, an IATA spokesman said. IATA also expressed concerns about privacy protections, he said.

Debates over the ICAO’s proposal are expected to last a year or more, according to industry officials, as the agency responds to comments from countries, regional safety organizations, pilot representatives and other parties. The final resolution could vary significantly from the proposal, according to safety experts inside and outside ICAO.

Press officials for the Federal Aviation Administration and the European Aviation Safety Agency didn’t have any immediate comment.

Cockpit-voice and flight-data recorders are embraced by the industry and pilot unions, though confidentiality issues sometimes crop up around the globe. All recorded flight data is supposed to be used solely for safety purposes, and ICAO’s latest language maintains that restriction.

ICAO’s Air Navigation Commission, which stopped short of proposing cockpit cameras several times before, this time agreed to embrace recordings that “would be less invasive,” according to agency documents. The images are more likely to remain confidential, according to one document, because they “would be less appealing to the media.”

Over the years, leaders of the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations, the umbrella group representing pilots globally, have been outspoken on the issue. In 2015, when efforts were stirring inside ICAO to revive the issue, Don Wykoff, then the association’s president, told members “we need to stop this” by seeking allies “in our home countries.” IFALPA’s current leadership didn’t have any immediate comment.

Proponents of video monitoring point to widespread reliance on recorded images to pinpoint procedural lapses in various settings, inside helicopters, locomotives, law-enforcement vehicles and operating rooms—along with the increasingly routine use of body cameras by police across the U.S.

“Legitimate privacy concerns are outweighed here by safety concerns,” said Ted Ellett, who also was a high-ranking U.S. aviation regulator and now is a Washington-based aviation partner at the law firm Hogan Lovells.

Original article can be found here:

Man accuses Tri-State Airport (KHTS) Authority of sexual discrimination

HUNTINGTON – A man is suing Tri-State Airport Authority after he claims he was discriminated against based on his sexual orientation.

Karen Adkins and Paul Butcher were also named as defendants in the suit.

Richard Anthony Napier began working for the airport in November 2014, according to a complaint filed March 7 in Cabell Circuit Court.

Napier claims during the course of his employment, he experienced derogatory comments about his sexual orientation from co-workers.

At one point, a co-worker said a derogatory statement in the presence of Adkins, Napier’s supervisor and boss, according to the suit.

Napier claims he was reprimanded by an officer at one point in front of eight other employees, despite the fact that he had followed procedures properly and he told the officer that he had followed procedures and invited him to look back at the security footage for proof.

“The officer dropped the subject and proceeded to tell plaintiff about a time he had pulled over ‘two fag-homos’ he had caught having sex,” the complaint states. “He then began to describe the incident in detail, making lude, mocking gestures and mimicking the sexual encounter. Everyone present laughed, but several employees approached plaintiff later and apologized, saying they meant no offense to him.”

Napier claims he worked part time for the airport and part time for a hair salon and one day, in early June, he was asked to work, but he informed the airport he could not because he had a client scheduled in the salon at that time.

Later, Butcher came to the salon and told him he needed to come to work, which Napier felt was an invasion of privacy, according to the suit.

Napier claims he heard degrading statements daily toward homosexuals at the airport by other employees.

The defendants had actual knowledge of Napier’s sexual orientation and, despite this, the defendants’ conduct in allowing the discriminatory actions constitutes a clear violation of Huntington Municipal Ordinance 147.08, according to the suit.

Napier claims the defendants bullied him and their unwelcome conduct of mistreatment and abuse toward him was sufficiently severe and pervasive as to alter the conditions of employment so as to create an abusive work environment.

The defendants retaliated against Napier and terminated his employment for reporting illegal conduct, which is a violation of the West Virginia Human Rights Act, according to the suit.

Napier is seeking compensatory and punitive damages. He is being represented by Mark L. French of The Law Office of Mark L. French.

The case is assigned to Circuit Judge Alfred E. Ferguson.

Cabell Circuit Court case number: 17-C-150

Original article can be found here:

Cirrus SR22, DRC Air LLC, N146GS: Accident occurred March 22, 2017 at Dekalb-Peachtree Airport (KPDK), Atlanta, Georgia

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office;  Atlanta, Georgia

NTSB Identification: GAA17CA201
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, March 22, 2017 in Atlanta, GA
Aircraft: CIRRUS DESIGN CORP SR22, registration: N146GS

NTSB investigators will use data provided by various entities, including, but not limited to, the Federal Aviation Administration and/or the operator, and will not travel in support of this investigation to prepare this aircraft accident report.

Upon landing Runway 3L, aircraft landed long. Attempted go around. Aircraft veered left off runway.

Date: 22-MAR-17
Time: 16:50:00Z
Regis#: N146GS
Aircraft Make: CIRRUS
Aircraft Model: 22
Event Type: ACCIDENT
Highest Injury: UNKNOWN
Aircraft Missing: No
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91

De Havilland Canada DHC-2 MK. I(L20A), N264P, Pacific Airways : Accident occurred March 22, 2017 at Ketchikan Harbor Seaplane Base (5KE), Ketchikan, Alaska

Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board:

Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board:

Aviation Accident Data Summary - National Transportation Safety Board: 
Radial Power Enterprises LLC:

Additional Participating Entity: 

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Juneau, Alaska

NTSB Identification: GAA17CA200 
Scheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Wednesday, March 22, 2017 in Ketchikan, AK
Probable Cause Approval Date: 06/07/2017
Aircraft: DEHAVILLAND DHC-2, registration: N264P
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.

NTSB investigators used data provided by various entities, including, but not limited to, the Federal Aviation Administration and/or the operator and did not travel in support of this investigation to prepare this aircraft accident report.

The pilot of the float-equipped airplane reported that, before the takeoff, he taxied “out a little farther than normal” due to another airplane taxiing in the waterway. He added that, as he advanced the throttle, his forward view changed as the airplane came onto step position and that he subsequently saw a buoy in the takeoff path. The pilot immediately aborted the takeoff, but the right wing impacted the buoy. The pilot taxied back to the dock without further incident. 
The right wing sustained substantial damage.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The floatplane pilot's failure to avoid a buoy during takeoff.

The pilot of the float-equipped airplane reported that before the takeoff he taxied "out a little farther than normal" due to another airplane taxiing in the waterway. He added that as he advanced the throttle, his forward view changed as the airplane came onto step position and he subsequently observed a buoy in the takeoff path. The pilot immediately aborted the takeoff, but the right wing impacted the buoy. The pilot taxied back to the dock without further incident. 

The right wing sustained substantial damage.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Cessna A185F Skywagon 185, N8750Z: Incident occurred March 22, 2017 at Perry-Houston County Airport (KPXE), Georgia

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Atlanta, Georgia 

Upon landing, aircraft landed gear up on amphibious floats. 

Date: 22-MAR-17
Time: 20:40:00Z
Regis#: N8750Z
Aircraft Make: CESSNA
Aircraft Model: 185
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: UNKNOWN
Aircraft Missing: No
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91

STOL King, N268CR: Accident occurred March 22, 2017 at Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport (KBZN), Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana

The National Transportation Safety Board did not travel to the scene of this accident.

Additional Participating Entity:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Helena, Montana

Aviation Accident Preliminary Report - National Transportation Safety Board:

NTSB Identification: WPR17LA080
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, March 22, 2017 in Bozeman, MT
Aircraft: MAXCY CHRISTOPHER L STOL KING, registration: N268CR
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.

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

On March 22, 2017, about 1130 mountain daylight time, an experimental, amateur-built, Maxcy Stol King airplane, N268CR, sustained substantial damage during the landing roll at the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport (BZN), Bozeman, MT, following a landing gear collapse. The airplane was registered and operated by the pilot under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The private pilot, the sole person aboard the airplane, was not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the personal, local flight which originated about 1040. 

The pilot reported that just after touchdown, the airplane veered left and the right main landing gear collapsed, resulting in the right wing striking the runway.

Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the right wing was bent upwards and was substantially damaged. The wreckage was transported to a secure location for further examination.

Piper PA-28-140, IPT 135, N7261F: Incident occurred March 22, 2017 at University Park Airport (KUNV), State College, Centre County, Pennsylvania

IPT 135:

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

Hard landing, damage to left wing flap.

Date: 22-MAR-17
Time: 18:15:00Z
Regis#: N7261F
Aircraft Make: PIPER
Aircraft Model: 28
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: UNKNOWN
Aircraft Missing: No
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91

Cessna 402C, Tropical Transport Services, N603AB: Accident occurred February 11, 2017 at Virgin Gorda Airport (TUPW), British Virgin Islands

Tropical Transport Services Ltd Inc:

NTSB Identification: CEN17WA107
Accident occurred Saturday, February 11, 2017 in Virgin Gorda, British Virgin Islands
Aircraft: CESSNA 402C, registration: N603AB
Injuries: 9 Uninjured.

The foreign authority was the source of this information.

On February 11, 2017, at 2004 UTC, a Cessna 402C, N603AB, experienced brake failure during landing roll and impacted terrain at the Virgin Gorda Airport (TUPW), British Virgin Islands. The two pilots and 7 passengers on board were not injured. The airplane sustained substantial damage. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the business flight whose destination was TUPW.

This investigation is under the jurisdiction and control of the British government. Any further information may be obtained from:

Air Accidents Investigations Branch
Farnborough House
Berkshire Copse Road
Aldershot, Hampshire
GU11 2HH, United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 1252 510300
Facsimile: +44 (0) 1252 376999

This report is for informational purposes only and contains only information released by, or obtained from, the Air Accidents Investigation Branch of England.

Hughes 369E, ZK-HRK: Accident occurred February 19, 2017 in Raetihi, New Zealand

NTSB Identification: WPR17WA069
Accident occurred Sunday, February 19, 2017 in Raetihi, New Zealand
Aircraft: Hughes 369E, registration:
Injuries: 1 Serious.

The foreign authority was the source of this information.

On February 19, 2017, at 0930 local time, a McDonnell Douglas Hughes 369E, ZK-HRK, operated by Precision Helicopters Ltd. collided with a ridgeline in the Waimarino Forest near Raetihi, New Zealand during an external load operation. The helicopter was being operated in accordance with the pertinent civil regulations of the government of New Zealand. The helicopter was substantially damaged and the pilot, the sole occupant, was seriously injured.

The investigation is under the jurisdiction of the Government of New Zealand. This report is for information purposes only and contains only information released by the Government of New Zealand. Further information pertaining to this accident may be obtained from:

Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand

Safety Investigations Unit
Level 15, Asteron Centre
55 Featherston St
Wellington 6011, New Zealand
Tel: (64) 04-560-9400 

A helicopter has gone down in a hilly area in the Ruapehu District on February 19th,  the pilot has survived, but was seriously injured in the crash.

He was the only person onboard when the chopper went down at about 9:30am into the forest near Raetihi.

Ruapehu District Council chief executive Clive Manley said the man was flying one of two helicopters that were transporting beehives in the area when the accident happened.

He said fortunately the man's injuries were not life-threatening and expressed his relief there were no fatalities in the crash.

Emergency services were called to the site of the crash in Waimarino Forest, near Raetihi, Ruapehu, shortly after this morning's accident.

Due to the remoteness of the area, fire, ambulance and police, took more than 40 minutes to reach the wreckage and the pilot.

Palmerston North rescue operator Lance Burns said the chopper couldn't land and the 29-year-old man had to be winched out.

"It was steep terrain and a lot of gorse bush, but we got him out as safely and quickly as we could."

He said it took the Palmerston North Rescue Helicopter about 22 minutes to get to where the man had crashed.

A rescue hoist was used to drop the onboard paramedic down to the injured man who was stabilised on site.

Once stable, together with the St John paramedic, the pilot was hoisted back up to the waiting helicopter, before being airlifted to Whanganui Hospital a little after midday.

The rescue chopper landed at the hospital at 12:45 and the injured pilot was transferred to its emergency department.

A Whanganui hospital spokesman said later in the afternoon the man was in a serious but stable condition.

Earlier today Rescue Coordination Centre New Zealand spokeswoman Tania Shingleton said the rescue helicopter had flown in from Palmerston North to the crash site.

"The pilot is conscious and breathing," she said.

St John's spokesman Mark Tregoweth confirmed ambulance staff had treated the pilot at the scene, before he was airlifted to Whanganui Hospital with serious injuries.

Police said in a statement the pilot was the only person on board. Staff are currently supporting his family.

An investigation into the cause of the crash would be handled by the Transport Accident Investigation Commission.


LATAM Airlines Brasil, Airbus A320-200, PT-MZY, Flight JJ-3264: Incident occurred February 23, 2017 at São Paulo–Congonhas Airport (CGH), Brazil

NTSB Identification: ENG17WA015
Incident occurred Thursday, February 23, 2017 in Sao Paulo, Brazil
Aircraft: AIRBUS A320, registration:
Injuries: 137 Uninjured.

The foreign authority was the source of this information.

On February 23, 2017, during takeoff from São Paulo airport, the right hand engine of a Brazilian registered Airbus 320, registration number PT–MZY, lost power, causing a rejected takeoff and a temporary excursion from the runway.

The Brazilian Centro de Investigaçáo e Prevençáo de Acidentes Aeronauticos (CENIPA) is investigating the incident. As the state of manufacture of the engines, the NTSB has designated a U.S. Accredited Representative under the provisions of ICAO Annex 13 to the Convention of Civil Aviation to assist the Brazilian CENIPA. 

All inquiries concerning this incident should be directed to the Brazilian Centro de Investigaçáo e Prevençáo de Acidentes Aeronauticos — CENIPA.

SÃO PAULO — A turbina de um avião da Latam pegou fogo na noite desta quarta-feira, no aeroporto de Congonhas, Zona Sul de São Paulo. O voo JJ3264 estava decolando com 134 passageiros e seis tripulantes em direção ao aeroporto de Confins, em Belo Horizonte, quando apresentou um princípio de incêndio. Nenhum passageiro ficou ferido. Segundo a Infraero, o aeroporto de Congonhas ficou fechado por 1h19m o que causou atrasos em toda a malha aérea. Apesar dos atrasos, os voos e decolagens já foram normalizados.

Os bombeiros de Congonhas fizeram a limpeza da pista e estão realizando inspeção do local para reabrir o aeroporto. Segundo a Latam, o voo decolaria às 17h40, mas teve um princípio de incêndio numa das turbinas durante a decolagem, que foi interrompido. Os passageiros e os tripulantes já foram desembarcados e receberão a assistência necessária. A empresa está oferecendo opções de reacomodação aos passageiros, e os que optaram por seguir para Belo Horizonte ainda esta noite poderão embarcar no aeroporto de Congonhas no voo JJ3226, com decolagem prevista para as 22h30 com destino a Belo Horizonte/Confins. A companhia informou, ainda, que já abriu um processo para investigar as causas do acidente.

Leia abaixo a nota da Latam na íntegra:

A LATAM Airlines Brasil informa que o voo JJ3264 (São Paulo/ Congonhas – Belo Horizonte/ Confins), que decolaria às 17h40 de hoje (22/02) do aeroporto paulista, teve um princípio de incêndio em uma das turbinas durante o procedimento de decolagem, que foi interrompido. Os bombeiros foram acionados e controlaram a situação. Não há registro de feridos. Os passageiros serão desembarcados em breve e receberão toda a assistência necessária. A companhia já abriu um processo para investigar as causas do incidente.


Not our pilot: Legal battle over Beechcraft B200 Super King Air, Corporate and Leisure Charters, VH-ZCR; fatal accident occurred February 21, 2017 near Melbourne-Essendon Airport, Australia

UPDATE 9.40am: The head of an aviation company seeking to distance itself from last month's DFO plane crash said on the day of the tragedy the destroyed aircraft had been registered with the company for “a week or so”. 

Fairfax Media is reporting the Australian Corporate Jet Centre CEO sent an email to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority at 1.27pm on February 21 saying the crashed plane had “nothing to do with our company” and that it would not be requiring the certificate. 

The company received an email from CASA confirming its ownership of the plane at 12.01pm. The email said the decision was actioned on February 16.  

Australian Corporate Jet Centre CEO Vas Nikolovski told the Bendigo Advertiser at approximately 1.19pm his company registered the plane “a week or so” ago. 

“My Jet is the owner, although it's on our certificate to charter and use for commercial purpose,” Mr Nikolovski said. 

“In order to be able to operate an aircraft for venue, for it to be chartered, it needs to be on air operator certificate.

“It's only just come across on our certificate a week or so ago.” 

Civil Aviation Safety Authority records show Australian Corporate Jet Centres became the registered operator of VH-ZCR on February 16, just five days before it went down.

EARLIER: The aviation company potentially facing a multimillion-dollar lawsuit over the Essendon DFO disaster was told three hours after the crash that the plane involved had been registered in its name.

As the wreckage smoldered at 12.01pm on February 21, and it was confirmed that five lives had been lost, Australian Corporate Jet Centres received an email from the aviation authority confirming it was the plane's registered operator.

The company's CEO replied at 1.27pm: "Unfortunately this aircraft was destroyed in an accident today which you may have seen in the media, the plane was flown by Max Quatermaine [sic] under his AOC – Corporate and Leisure Travel and had nothing to do with our company. Sad news all round but we won't be requiring the certificate."

With the threat of lawsuits and insurance payouts mounting over Victoria's worst aviation disaster in 30 years, the Essendon-based company has sought to have its registration overturned.

Australian Corporate Jet Centres claims it was not responsible for the plane due to an administrative bungle over a $65 application fee in December.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority records show Australian Corporate Jet Centres became the registered operator of VH-ZCR on February 16, just five days before it went down.

Emails published in a finding by the Commonwealth's Administrative Appeals Tribunal show the company did not find out its application to transfer registration had been approved until midday on February 21 – three hours after the crash at 8.58am.

"Your application was actioned ... it should be on its way in the mail," CASA wrote in the email sent at 12.01pm.

With the media spotlight intensifying and emergency services still on the scene, the company's CEO, Sam Iliades, replied to CASA telling it that the plane had gone down. The plane was being flown by pilot Max Quartermain under his air operator certificate, he wrote.

The company continues to maintain that position: "It was not our air operator's certificate, not our client, not our revenue, not our pilot," Australian Corporate Jet Centres said in a statement on Monday.

Fairfax Media understands just who was legally responsible for the flight is still being investigated.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has been sifting through the wreckage of the plane, trying to piece together what caused it to go down shortly after take-off.

A recent preliminary report found that both engines and propellers appeared to be in working order at the time of the flight and that there was no evidence of mechanical failure.

Australian Corporate Jet Centres recently applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to have the CASA registration decision overturned but the matter was dismissed due to a lack of jurisdiction.

The matter was taken to the tribunal after the company originally had its application to become the plane's operator cancelled in late December because incorrect credit card details were used to pay the $65 application fee.

According to emails published in the tribunal finding, the company was not informed its application had been cancelled.

On January 30 the company emailed the regulator to find out what the delay was, only to be told the transfer had not gone through.

A new application was submitted and approved just over two weeks later.

CASA updated its register on February 16, sending out a letter to Australian Corporate Jet Centres and the previous registered operator, MyJet Aviation, informing them of the change.

The letter also contained a reminder of the operator's obligations.

These included the display of nationality and registration marks, as well as responsibility for airworthiness and maintenance. 

When the letter hadn't arrived by February 20, Mr Iliades sent another email asking CASA about the "status of the registered operator application".

The response came a day later, when the plane had already crashed.

Any lawsuit could run into tens of millions of dollars, with the family of the passengers plus the hundreds of people who witnessed the crash all having a potential claim. At least three law firms have been retained, Fairfax understands.

"[The case] could generate a very large lawsuit for the entity that is found to be responsible under the law of negligence for the air crash by a court," Shine Lawyers aviation department manager Thomas Janson said.

Negligence is yet to be proved in the case, as investigators continue to work through the plane's wreckage. But if it could be proved, hundreds of bystanders who saw the flight go down might be able to claim for nervous shock, Mr Janson said.

Read more here:

Collision with terrain involving B200 King Air VH-ZCR at Essendon Airport, Victoria on February 21, 2017:

NTSB Identification: CEN17RA106
Accident occurred Monday, February 20, 2017 in Melbourne, Australia
Aircraft: RAYTHEON B200, registration:
Injuries: 5 Fatal.

The foreign authority was the source of this information.

On February 20, 2017, at 2159 hours universal coordinated time (0859 hours Australian eastern daylight time on February 21, 2017), a Raytheon model B200 (King Air) airplane, Australian registration VH-ZCR, impacted a building and roadway shortly after takeoff from runway 17 (4,934 feet by 148 feet, asphalt) at Melbourne/Essendon Airport (YMEN), Victoria, Australia. A post-impact fire ensued. The pilot and four passengers were fatally injured. The airplane was destroyed. The intended destination was the King Island Airport (YKII), Currie, Tasmania, Australia.

The accident investigation is under the jurisdiction of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. This report is for informational purposes only and contains information released by or obtained from the government Australia.

Further information pertaining to this accident may be obtained from:

Australian Transport Safety Bureau

PO Box 967
Civic Square ACT 2608
Tel: +61 2 6257 4150

 Max Quartermain

John Washburn

Pilot Max Quartermain, Russell Munsch, Glenn Garland and Greg De Haven.

Glenn Garland, Russell Munsch, Greg DeHaven and a fourth golfing partner (left) at Cape Kidnappers golf course in New Zealand.

Update: The fourth victim in a plane crash in Melbourne, Australia, has been identified for Statesman by family members as 67-year-old retiree John Washburn of Spicewood.

Washburn, was a next-door neighbor with another crash victim, Austin-based bankruptcy attorney Russell Munsch.

Washburn, Munsch, Greg De Haven, also of Spicewood, and former executive Glenn Garland had chartered a flight during a golfing vacation that was to take them from Melbourne to King Island, about 150 miles off the southern Australian coast.

The Beechcraft B200 Super King Air crashed shortly after takeoff into an outlet mall adjacent to the airport, killing the four men and their Australian pilot, Max Quartermain.

No one outside the plane was injured.

Washburn had been an executive and general counsel at Sammons Enterprises in Dallas until he retired several years ago.

Earlier: Four tourists, including three from the Austin area, and a pilot were killed when their small charter plane crashed into a shopping mall in Melbourne, Australia on Tuesday.

Greg De Haven of Spicewood, bankruptcy lawyer Russell Munsch, and retired Austin executive Glenn Garland have been identified by relatives on social media and Australian media reports as three of the victims.

De Haven’s sister, Denelle Wicht, posted on Facebook that her 70-year-old brother had been killed "on a once in a lifetime trip to Australia" with friends.

“It was a charter flight with 2 of his friends flying to another island to play golf,” she wrote.

The Australian pilot, Max Quartermain, who was ferrying the tourists on their golfing vacation, also was killed.

The U.S. Embassy in the Australian capital of Canberra confirmed that four victims were American citizens, but the fourth victim has not yet been identified.

The twin-propeller Beechcraft Super King Air was supposed to carry the four tourists from Melbourne, on Australia’s southern coast, about 150 miles offshore to King Island, just north of Tasmania.

But shortly after takeoff, the plane crashed into an outlet mall near the airport in suburban Essendon about 45 minutes before shops were to open, Melbourne Police Minister Lisa Neville told the Associated Press.

The pilot reported a "catastrophic engine failure" moments before the plane crashed into a storage area at the rear of the mall, police said.

No one outside the plane was injured, Police Assistant Commissioner Stephen Leane said.

Munsch, who received his undergraduate degree from the University of Texas, was a founding partner of the Texas commercial law firm Munsch, Hardt, Kopf and Harr, which has offices in Dallas, Houston and Austin.

Garland was a former CEO at Austin-based CLEAResult Consulting, which designs energy-efficiency programs and strategies for utilities and businesses.

CLEAResult expressed its condolences to Garland’s family and the company’s co-founder, Jim Stimmel, said Garland “was more than a colleague to me, he was a visionary and a close friend.”

“I am devastated to hear of his passing and my heart and thoughts are with his family,” Stimmel said in a statement. “We have all lost an incredible man.”

De Haven’s sister told the New York Daily News that De Haven had been a retired FBI agent and an Army veteran who was survived by his wife, Rosemary, three children and six grandchildren.

De Haven is listed as a professional golfer on a LinkedIn profile, with a skill in golf instruction.