Thursday, December 6, 2018

Boeing Omitted Safety-System Details, Minimized Training for Crashed Lion Air 737 Model: After the Flight 610 crash, some regulators and pilots are asking why details on the plane’s MCAS anti-stall system weren’t in the Boeing manual

An Indonesian transportation safety investigator with a Boeing 737 model at a November 28th news conference in Jakarta. 


The Wall Street Journal 
By Andrew Tangel and Andy Pasztor
Dec. 5, 2018 11:04 a.m. ET

An automated flight-control system on Boeing Co.'s 737 MAX aircraft, which investigators suspect played a central role in the fatal October 29th jetliner crash in Indonesia, was largely omitted from the plane’s operations manual and was the subject of debate inside Boeing, government and industry officials say.

Pilots of Lion Air Flight 610 battled systems on the Boeing 737 MAX for 11 minutes after the plane took off from Jakarta, until it crashed into the Java Sea, killing all 189 people on board. Boeing is devising a software fix and trying to re-instill confidence in the cockpit systems of the 737 MAX, which U.S. airlines have called safe.

Fatal Flight

Lion Air Flight 610 pilots battled systems on the Boeing 737 MAX for 11 minutes before the plane crashed into the Java Sea.

Debate inside Boeing on what the 737 MAX manuals should say about the automated system and how much training would be required before pilots could safely slide behind the controls was more intense than usual, industry officials recall.

The decision to omit the new control system from manuals has put a Boeing design principle at the center of a probe into a fatal airliner crash for the first time in more than two decades. It has sparked public scrutiny of a typically behind-the-scenes process and threatens to tarnish Boeing’s reputation for safety and its tradition of prioritizing pilot authority over automation.

Former Boeing and current airline and government officials said there was a strong push to keep 737 MAX training to a minimum—a common goal for the introduction of new models. One former Boeing official recalls a colleague expressing concern about keeping their job if regulators rejected the company’s proposed guidelines. The program was eventually approved.

Boeing said it didn’t intentionally keep relevant information from aviators and had discussed the new system—known by its acronym, MCAS—with airlines at conferences in recent years. A spokesman disputed the characterization of the debate as unusually heated, saying, “Discussions were consistent with our regular process.”

“When Boeing developed its training and materials, it followed a process that was absolutely consistent with introducing previous new airplanes” and new models, the spokesman said. The goal, he said, is to ensure that pilots have all the information they need and that maintenance crews understand how to service the aircraft.

Boeing arrived at the decision in a typical way, with internal discussions and dialogue with airlines and regulators, according to U.S. government and industry officials familiar with the details. From the start Boeing and its customers were keen to keep training to a few hours of self-instruction on computers to ease the burden on airlines, the officials said.

Engineering, training and other experts inside Boeing had differing views on the precise language to be used in manuals. People familiar with the process said there was a sharp focus on one point: avoiding added simulator training.

Some regulators and pilots are among those asking why Boeing decided against detailing how the new system worked and why pilots weren’t trained on its specific characteristics. Key aspects of the system differ markedly from systems on older versions of the 737.

“Airline pilots need to know everything they can know about how the airplane works,” said Gordon Bethune, a former Boeing executive who oversaw earlier 737 models and later was chief executive of Continental Airlines. “The ball was dropped,” he said.

Preliminary data released by crash investigators points to the MCAS system misfiring during the Lion Air flight, when a signal from a single malfunctioning sensor prompted the system to repeatedly push down the plane’s nose prior to its plunge into the Java Sea.

“It’s pretty surprising that there isn’t a cross check or redundancy” to prevent such a hazard, said Randy Babbitt, a former Federal Aviation Administration chief.

The Boeing spokesman said the system “was designed and certified using aerospace industry best practices.”

Boeing began developing the 737 MAX in 2011, a year after European rival Airbus SE introduced the A320neo single-aisle planes, which require minimal pilot training.

Regulators eventually approved the Boeing program, and the plane’s launch customer, Southwest Airlines Co. , embraced it. A Southwest spokeswoman said the airline developed its 737 MAX training based on Boeing’s information and “was a recipient of, not a driver of, the training” mandates.

That plane’s success surprised even Airbus, while Boeing was losing market share.

No airlines are challenging the basic safety of the 737 MAX, which went into commercial service about a year ago. Since the accident, three of Boeing’s biggest 737 MAX customers— American Airlines Group Inc., Southwest and United Continental Holdings Inc. —have said the plane is safe and their pilots are well-trained to fly it.

Investigators in the Lion Air crash are also delving into apparent maintenance lapses and pilot errors in what is expected to be a monthslong probe. Meanwhile, Lion Air co-founder Rusdi Kirana said the carrier may cancel orders for more than 200 Boeing planes, as relations with the plane maker sour. He has taken issue with a Boeing statement that he said cast aspersions on the airline, and claimed in an interview, “Boeing didn’t make a proper manual.” Boeing said Lion Air is “a valued customer.”

From the 737 MAX’s inception, Boeing teams sought to make the plane maneuver like its predecessor, the 737 NG, and thereby preclude the need for extra flight-simulator sessions. It proved tricky, however, to reduce handling differences between the two models.

Boeing engineers determined the MAX’s design required additional stall protections in extreme maneuvers, partly to gain essential FAA certification, according to people familiar with the matter. So Boeing developed MCAS, which automatically and repeatedly pushes down the nose of the plane under certain manual flying conditions.

Pilots said they weren’t explicitly informed until the Lion Air crash that the system could give such strong and persistent commands and ultimately push the nose down as far as possible. By contrast, the anti-stall system on the earlier 737 NG could be countered relatively easily, by pulling back the control yoke.

It is up to manufacturers and regulators to determine which information to include in manuals and how to train pilots. People familiar with the Boeing manual said MCAS was mentioned, but only in the glossary spelling out the acronym (for Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System). Details of the new system were included in early documents related to the manual, before Boeing decided they would be redundant, some of these people said. The FAA agreed and approved the final manual.

A Boeing spokesman said one section still “expressly advises flight crews to expect automatic nose-down” commands as the plane approaches stall speed. Boeing also has stressed that its manuals include the procedure for turning off stall-protection systems, which pilots are trained to follow whether in the MAX or older planes.

Boeing concluded pilots were unlikely to ever encounter situations where the new anti-stall system kicked in, according to a Southwest memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. “They would never see the system in action,” a person familiar with Boeing’s development of the system said.

Boeing in recent weeks has privately said it was a judgment call that details about the new system weren’t necessary in the manuals, according to people familiar with the company’s discussions with aviators and customers. Boeing has been meeting with airlines and pilot unions as it works on the software fix expected in coming weeks.

Boeing’s position has some support. A top executive at a 737 MAX customer agreed pilots didn’t need to know the system’s details. “They’re not engineers and their job is to fly the aircraft,” this executive said.

A United Airlines union official said in a note to pilots that despite the omission from the Boeing manual, aviators have been instructed to stop nose-down commands in older and newer 737s the same way: turn off the system. “Regardless of the source or cause,” the note said, “you will do exactly as you have been trained.”

The Lion Air aircraft that crashed had experienced various flight-control malfunctions on all of its four previous flights. The preliminary crash report makes clear technicians failed to solve the problem, because the same malfunctions reoccurred just before the crash.

In the ill-fated flight, according to the preliminary report, the plane’s flight-control alerts malfunctioned again, providing erroneous stall warnings from the instant the aircraft lifted off the runway. Cockpit instruments displayed a barrage of fault warnings, including unreliable airspeed and altitude, according to the report. The crew battled more than two dozen repeated automated nose-down commands by manually commanding nose-up maneuvers, until they lost control some 11 minutes after takeoff.

The FAA confirmed it is reviewing its decision to accept Boeing’s initial risk analyses of the automated system and other approved systems on the new plane. The FAA and Boeing also are developing a test of the entire MCAS system, which wasn’t previously required.

Southwest’s pilot union president, Jon Weaks, said he was encouraged by Boeing’s commitment to pilot feedback, telling members in a note that he was assured “there will be no more surprises.”

—Robert Wall, Elisa Cho, 
Jim Oberman and Ben Otto contributed to this article.

Original article can be found here: https://www.wsj.com

Beech A36TC Bonanza, N361TC: Accident occurred December 06, 2018 at Los Banos Municipal Airport (KLSN), Merced County, California

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Fresno, California

Hit airport fence.

https://registry.faa.gov/N361TC

Date: 06-DEC-18
Time: 20:36:00Z
Regis#: N361TC
Aircraft Make: BEECH
Aircraft Model: A36TC
Event Type: ACCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: SUBSTANTIAL
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: LOS BANOS
State: CALIFORNIA








A San Jose man escaped injury after his plane crash-landed at Los Banos Airport in Merced County on Thursday, according to authorities.

Los Banos Police and fire responded the airport around 12:36 p.m., after a licensed pilot out of San Jose experienced a power failure and crash-landed a single-engine airplane, according to Cmdr. Ray Reyna.

Reyna said the pilot narrowly missed trees located south of Highway 152 as he approached the runway.

The airplane’s front landing gear collided with a fence bordering the south side of the airport and crash-landed in a grass area sliding several hundred feet before coming to a rest short of the runway, Reyna said.

Authorities said no other aircraft were involved in the crash and there were no other passengers on board the plane.

Los Banos Police have been in contact with the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board following the crash. 

Reyna said police received authorization from the National Transportation Safety Board to move the aircraft and store it until National Transportation Safety Board personnel can inspect the plane and speak with the pilot.

The airport and runway closed for about one to two hours while police and fire responded to the scene. 

Neither drugs nor alcohol appear to be a factor in the crash, according to police.

Original article can be found here ➤ https://www.mercedsunstar.com

Cessna 182Q Skylane, N95677: Incident occurred December 06, 2018 near Airlake Airport (KLVN), Lakeville, Dakota County, Minnesota

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Minneapolis, Minnesota

Landed in a field.

Katmai LLC

https://registry.faa.gov/N95677

Date: 06-DEC-18
Time: 17:05:00Z
Regis#: N95677
Aircraft Make: CESSNA
Aircraft Model: 182Q
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: MINNEAPOLIS
State: MINNESOTA


Farmington and Lakeville fire crews were paged to assist with a single-engine aircraft down in a field east of the Airlake Airport this morning.

Crews located the plane in a Castle Rock Township field.


The plane landed safely after engine troubles, and the pilot and occupants were uninjured. 


The Dakota County Sheriff's Office and the Federal Aviation Administration are investigating the incident.





LAKEVILLE, Minn. - First responders are on the scene of an unplanned landing between Lakeville and Farmington.

Aerials from SKY 11 show a single-engine, fixed-wing plane in the middle of a corn field near Castle Rock Township. Fortunately, it appears the aircraft is mostly intact.

Dakota County Sheriff Captain Rick Schroeder says dispatchers received a call at 11:06 a.m. of a plane down short of the Holman Field in Lakeville. Pilot Francis Andrew Myers reported the plane suffered engine failure, but that he was able to put the aircraft down safely about four miles east of the airport in a corn field.

Myers told KARE's Karla Hult that he was going hunting in South Dakota when the engine failed.

"I'm nervous now," he said. "You don’t really have a whole lot of time to think about it. You analyze the situation and make decisions. Once you make the decision, you go with it."

Myers said the plan was to land at Mitchell, South Dakota. He said he's been a pilot for 37 years and never had something like this happen.

Myers and his passenger Lance Lemieux walked away with no injuries.

Myers' hunting dog was also on the plane but was not injured.

And the plane only suffered a few scratches.

An investigation team from the Federal Aviation Administration is enroute to take over the case.

Story and video: https://www.kare11.com

Beechcraft C99 Commuter, registered to UAS Transervices Inc and operated by Ameriflight, N81820: Incident occurred December 06, 2018 at Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport (KMFR), Medford, Jackson County, Oregon

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Portland, Oregon

Gear up landing.

https://registry.faa.gov/N81820

Date: 06-DEC-18
Time: 17:07:00Z
Regis#: UNK
Aircraft Make: BEECHCRAFT
Aircraft Model: BE99
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: MEDFORD
State: OREGON


MEDFORD, Oregon — 

UPDATE (11:50 a.m.) -

According to Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport Security Deputy Director Debbie Smith, the plane has now been removed and the runway reopened as of 11:13 this morning.

ORIGINAL -

An emergency landing by a cargo plane at Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport Thursday morning forced the closure of a runway as emergency personnel responded.

Federal Aviation Administration spokesperson Allen Kenitzer said the AMF flight 1908, a Beech BE99 type aircraft, landed gear up on runway 14 and is currently disabled on the runway.

Initial reports indicate the plane had a landing gear malfunction. The cause is now under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration.

Medford Fire-Rescue responded, but there were no injuries reported.

The cargo plane which was coming from Portland had one pilot and one other person, according to Federal Aviation Administration.

At least two flights have already been diverted to Eugene with the runway closure.

Right now officials are seeking approval to move the aircraft which has prevented all air traffic from landing or taking off from the airport.

Original article can be found here ➤ https://ktvl.com

Stewart S51 Mustang, N551P: Incident occurred December 04, 2018 at Ernest A. Love Field Airport (KPRC), Prescott, Arizona


Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Scottsdale, Arizona

Gear up landing.

https://registry.faa.gov/N551P

Date: 04-DEC-18
Time: 19:50:00Z
Regis#: N551P
Aircraft Make: EXPERIMENTAL
Aircraft Model: S 51
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: PRESCOTT
State: ARIZONA

Rans S-4 Coyote 1, N3156D: Incident occurred November 26, 2018 in Chula Vista, California

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; San Diego, California

Crashed due to unknown circumstances.

https://registry.faa.gov/N3156D

Date: 26-NOV-18
Time: 22:00:00Z
Regis#: N3156D
Aircraft Make: RANS
Aircraft Model: S 4 COYOTE 1
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: MINOR
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: UNKNOWN (UNK)
Operation: 91
City: CHULA VISTA
State: CALIFORNIA

Piper PA-23-250, N6867Y: Incident occurred December 05, 2018 at Chino Airport (KCNO), San Bernardino County, California

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Riverside, California

Gear up landing.

Arnold and Arnold Inc

https://registry.faa.gov/N6867Y

Date: 05-DEC-18
Time: 17:55:00Z
Regis#: N6867Y
Aircraft Make: PIPER
Aircraft Model: PA 23 250
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: CHINO
State: CALIFORNIA

Diamond DA-20C-1 Eclipse, N941DA: Incident occurred December 04, 2018 in Ellicott, El Paso County, Colorado

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Denver, Colorado

Made a hard landing.

Doss Aviation Inc

https://registry.faa.gov/N941DA

Date: 04-DEC-18
Time: 17:10:00Z
Regis#: N941DA
Aircraft Make: DIAMOND
Aircraft Model: DA20 C1
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: INSTRUCTION
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: ELLICOTT
State: COLORADO

Mooney M20J, N3876H: Incident occurred December 05, 2018 at Lakeland Linder Regional Airport (KLAL), Polk County, Florida

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Orlando, Florida

Veered off runway.

https://registry.faa.gov/N3876H

Date: 05-DEC-18
Time: 19:39:00Z
Regis#: N3876H
Aircraft Make: MOONEY
Aircraft Model: M20J
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: INSTRUCTION
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: LAKELAND
State: FLORIDA

Cessna 172B, N8205X: Incident occurred December 04, 2018 in Glen St. Mary, Baker County, Florida

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Orlando, Florida

Landed on a road.

https://registry.faa.gov/N8205X

Date: 04-DEC-18
Time: 14:30:00Z
Regis#: N8205X
Aircraft Make: CESSNA
Aircraft Model: 172B
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: GLEN ST MARY
State: FLORIDA

Piper PA-28-181 Archer III, N839AL: Accident occurred December 05, 2018 at Habersham County Airport (KAJR), Cornelia, Georgia; Cessna 172N Skyhawk, N444WM: Accident occurred June 08, 2016 in Cornelia, Habersham County, Georgia

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

Horizon Dreams LLC


https://registry.faa.gov/N839AL

NTSB Identification: GAA19CA088
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, December 05, 2018 in Cornelia, GA
Aircraft: Piper PA28, registration: N839AL

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.

Crash landed in a ditch.


Date: 05-DEC-18

Time: 20:34:00Z
Regis#: N839AL
Aircraft Make: PIPER
Aircraft Model: PA 28 181
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: INSTRUCTION
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: CORNELIA
State: GEORGIA

Additional Participating Entity:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Atlanta, Georgia 

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

Aviation Accident Final Report -  National Transportation Safety Board:  Investigation Docket  https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms

https://registry.faa.gov/N444WM

Location: Cornelia, GA
Accident Number: GAA16CA316
Date & Time: 06/08/2016, 1330 EDT
Registration: N444WM
Aircraft: CESSNA 172
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Loss of control on ground
Injuries: 2 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Instructional

Analysis 

The flight instructor reported that this was her fifth instructional flight with the student and that they were practicing takeoffs and landings in the pattern. She recalled that the previous landing accomplished by the student was "squirrelly." She reported that she reminded the student pilot "how/why not to use the pedals during the landing roll, and to stay off of the brakes." She recalled that the student completed the next approach and landing and both were stable. However, during the landing roll the airplane made an abrupt right turn, and exited the right side of the runway about the midpoint of the 5500 foot long by 100 foot wide runway. The flight instructor reported that she did not believe that she would be able to bring the airplane back to the left and aborted the landing. However, the airplane struck rising terrain, entered a 360 degree turn and struck an embankment. The flight instructor asked the student if he had his feet on the pedals during the landing roll, and he replied "I think so." The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings, horizontal stabilizer and elevator.

The flight instructor reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or anomalies with any portion of the airplane during the flight that would have prevented normal flight operations. 

Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The student pilot's unnecessary pedal application and the flight instructor's delayed remedial action resulting in a loss of directional control, runway excursion and ground impact during the aborted landing.

Findings

Aircraft
Directional control - Not attained/maintained (Cause)

Personnel issues
Aircraft control - Student pilot (Cause)
Delayed action - Instructor/check pilot (Cause)
Unnecessary action - Student pilot (Cause)
Use of equip/system - Student pilot (Cause)

Environmental issues
Sloped/uneven terrain - Effect on equipment

Factual Information

History of Flight

Landing-landing roll
Loss of control on ground (Defining event)

Landing-aborted after touchdown
Attempted remediation/recovery

Landing-landing roll
Collision with terr/obj (non-CFIT) 

Pilot Information

Certificate: Flight Instructor; Commercial
Age: 42, Female
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine Land
Seat Occupied: Right
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: Yes
Instructor Rating(s): Airplane Multi-engine; Airplane Single-engine; Instrument Airplane
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 2 Without Waivers/Limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: 02/02/2015
Occupational Pilot: Yes
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 12/12/2014
Flight Time: (Estimated) 2376 hours (Total, all aircraft), 700 hours (Total, this make and model), 2310 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 57 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 20 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 4 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft)

Student Pilot Information

Certificate: None
Age: 18, Male
Airplane Rating(s): None
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): None
Second Pilot Present: Yes
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed:
Medical Certification: None
Last FAA Medical Exam:
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 
Flight Time:  (Estimated) 6 hours (Total, all aircraft), 1 hours (Total, this make and model), 6 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 6 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft) 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Make: CESSNA
Registration: N444WM
Model/Series: 172 N
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 1977
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate: Normal
Serial Number: 172-68249
Landing Gear Type: Tricycle
Seats: 4
Date/Type of Last Inspection: 05/04/2016, Annual
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 2300 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time: 1729 Hours as of last inspection
Engine Manufacturer: LYCOMING
ELT: Installed, not activated
Engine Model/Series: O-320-H2AD
Registered Owner: Allen, Max R.
Rated Power: 160 hp
Operator: Ray and Brenda Reed
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None
Operator Does Business As: Blue Sky Aviation
Operator Designator Code:

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KTOC, 994 ft msl
Distance from Accident Site: 14 Nautical Miles
Observation Time: 1715 UTC
Direction from Accident Site: 66°
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Visibility:  10 Miles
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility (RVR): 
Wind Speed/Gusts: 4 knots /
Turbulence Type Forecast/Actual: / None
Wind Direction: 270°
Turbulence Severity Forecast/Actual: / N/A
Altimeter Setting: 29.94 inches Hg
Temperature/Dew Point: 28°C / 13°C
Precipitation and Obscuration: No Obscuration; No Precipitation
Departure Point: Cornelia, GA (AJR)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Destination: Cornelia, GA (AJR)
Type of Clearance: None
Departure Time: 1230 EDT
Type of Airspace: Class G

Airport Information

Airport: HABERSHAM COUNTY (AJR)
Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 1448 ft
Runway Surface Condition: Dry
Runway Used: 24
IFR Approach: None
Runway Length/Width: 5506 ft / 100 ft
VFR Approach/Landing: Touch and Go; Traffic Pattern

Wreckage and Impact Information

Crew Injuries: 2 None
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 2 None
Latitude, Longitude: 34.499722, -83.556667 (est)

Bellanca 17-30A Viking, N9610E: Incident occurred November 26, 2018 in Mayfield, Idaho and Incident occurred June 04, 2017 at Magic Valley Regional Airport (KTWF), Twin Falls County, Idaho

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Boise, Idaho

November 26, 2018: Veered off the runway.

https://registry.faa.gov/N9610E

Date: 26-NOV-18
Time: 22:00:00Z
Regis#: N9610E
Aircraft Make: BELLANCA
Aircraft Model: 17 30A
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: MAYFIELD
State: IDAHO

June 04, 2017: Aircraft landed gear up and struck the propeller.

Date: 05-JUN-17
Time: 00:17:00Z
Regis#: N9610E
Aircraft Make: BELLANCA
Aircraft Model: 1730
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
City: TWIN FALLS
State: IDAHO

Cessna 182P, N9003M: Accident occurred December 04, 2018 - Reno/Stead Airport (KRTS ), Washoe County, Nevada

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Reno, Nevada

Comstock Aviation Inc

https://registry.faa.gov/N9003M

NTSB Identification: GAA19CA086
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, December 04, 2018 in Reno, NV
Aircraft: Cessna 182, registration: N9003M

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.

Struck a bird.

Date: 03-DEC-18
Time: 21:30:00Z
Regis#: N9003M
Aircraft Make: CESSNA
Aircraft Model: 182P
Event Type: ACCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: SUBSTANTIAL
Activity: INSTRUCTION
Flight Phase: UNKNOWN (UNK)
Operation: 91
City: RENO
State: NEVADA

Stoddard-Hamilton Glasair III, N148DH: Incident occurred December 05, 2018 at Bowerman Airport (KHQM), Hoquiam, Grays Harbor County, Washington

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Seattle, Washington

Gear collapsed.

https://registry.faa.gov/N148DH

Date: 05-DEC-18
Time: 20:00:00Z
Regis#: N148DH
Aircraft Make: EXPERIMENTAL
Aircraft Model: GLASAIR III
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: TAKEOFF (TOF)
Operation: 91
City: HOQUIAM
State: WASHINGTON