can airbus fill the gap?

Transcription

airline safety
are accidents
becoming more
survivable?
analysis P26
sparks fly again
Dreamliner battery woes
back for Boeing, but this
time the fix may have
done its job 9
printing parts
Technology advances
as BAE experiments
with 3D components
on the Tornado 20
FLIGHT
INTERNATIONAL
flightglobal.com
21-27 January 2014
product strategy
can airbus
fill the gap?
Toulouse confronts its 250-seat conundrum
ISSN 0 0 1 5 - 3 7 1 0
£3.40
0 4
9
770015 371266
Rex Features
SAFETY
Asiana Airlines Flight 214 was only the second crash of a Boeing 777 since it began commercial operations in 1995, and the first to result in fatalities
matter of
survival
Accident numbers were up in 2013, but fatalities fell to a
new low as the improved survivability engineered into
modern hull designs brought casualty figures down
david learmount london
L
ast year, the world’s airlines proved
that they could not maintain safety at
the all-time high level they achieved in
2012. To put that in context, however,
the 2012 figures had broken safety records by
such a big margin that Flight International
predicted at the time the figures would probably be a one-year spike.
26 | Flight International | 21-27 January 2014
Maybe 2012 was a spike, but not a
ramatic one given that the results for 2013
d
are still good when looked at as part of a longer-term trend (see chart, below right). The
global total of airline fatal accidents in 2013
was 26, up by five from the previous year’s
record low of 21, but the number of fatalities
in those accidents e stablished a new record
low at 281 – less than two-thirds of the previous lowest figure of 425.
The figures quoted here include accidents
to cargo flights as well as passenger, and all
types of genuine airline operation whether
scheduled or chartered, including commuter
airline commercial operations using aircraft
like the single-turboprop Cessna Caravan.
visible risk levels
Meanwhile, among large commercial
passenger jets (5.5t and above), there were
only four fatal accidents worldwide last year,
killing 105 people. Nowadays, the majority of
fatal accidents involve smaller commuter
aircraft, usually powered by turboprops.

However, two more big jets – a Boeing
747-400 and an Airbus A300-600 – suffered
fatal accidents last year flying as pure freighters (see accident listings).
The extremely low fatal casualty figure in
2013 makes it look as if there were no serious
accidents involving high capacity twin-aisles,
but this is not true. It could be argued that the
impressive survivability engineered into today’s hulls distorts visible risk levels when
only fatal accident figures are used as a safety
indicator. For e xample, in 2013, a Lion Air
flightglobal.com
analysis
fatal accident rate
The Lion Air aircraft, on a non-precision
instrument final approach to Denpasar in

stormy weather, crashed into the sea short of
the runway and broke up, but all 83 people on
board survived. The Asiana 777, also on a
non-precision final approach but in excellent
visibility, hit the sea wall short of San Francisco’s runway, broke up and cartwheeled
across the airfield, but only three of the 323
occupants died.
Hull loss – rather than fatal accident –
figures would paint a truer total risk picture,
but neither is a perfect indicator. To obtain the
precise risks from all angles, readers can consult the 2013 Safety and loss report from
Flightglobal’s consultancy business Ascend.
The Ascend 2013 report is slightly different
from this study in terms of which aircraft and
operational categories are included, and prepares its data to inform the aviation insurance
Rex Features
Boeing 737-800 and an Asiana 777-200 were
involved in the sort of serious accidents
calculated to give their passengers nightmares
for the rest of their lives, but there were no
fatalities in the first and only three in the
second.
The LAM E-190 crashed in Namibia
industry rather than the public.
Nevertheless, it comes up with an understandably similar verdict on last year’s safety
performance: “2013 was another good year for
safety with a fatal accident rate of one per 1.9
million flights. This was not as good as the
2012 rate of one per 2.3 million flights, but is
still considerably better than all other p
revious
years [see chart, below top]. The rate in 2011
was one per 1.4 million and the average over
the last five years is one per 1.6 million flights.”
Providing a longer-term context, the
Ascend report explains: “Although some

years have been better than others, the fatal
FLIGHTS PER FATAL ACCIDENT (WESTERN-BUILT JETS AND EXCLUDING ACTS OF
VIOLENCE)
Flights (millions)
10
Flights per fatal accident
Five-year average
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
2008
2011
SOURCE: Flightglobal’s Ascend
WORLD AIRLINE FATAL ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES 2004-13
Fatalities
Fatal accidents
1,400
40
34
1,200
1,000
800
1,050
28
34
863
28
25
749
744
26
583
SOURCE: Flightglobal
flightglobal.com
2005
2006
21
20
425
10
514
10-year average fatal accidents = 28
= 649
10-year average fatalities
Fatal accidents
Fatalities
2004
26
817
466
200
0
30
27
600
400
32
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
281
2013
0
accident rate has been improving for many
years. At the start of the 1990s, the rate was
about one per 0.6 or 0.7 million flights. Therefore, based on this metric, airline operations
are now almost three times safer than they
were 20 years ago.”
Ascend’s safety director Paul Hayes points
out that an obsessive concentration on the few
serious accidents each year can blind the
observer to the modern industry’s unprecedented safety levels. He adds that with so few
accidents now in each 12-month period, a year
is even less of a reliable indicator of general
standards than it used to be. The comparison
between the last two years is a good example of
the limitations of a one-year assessment: an
Over the last five years, pilot
failure to manage go-arounds
well has become a serious
worry at the airlines
e xceptional 2012 was followed by an apparently much worse 2013, but the latter is actually more representative of the present reality as
measured using a five-year rolling average.
In 2013, happily, there was only one example of the dramatic loss of control in-flight
(LOC-I) accidents that have become the single
biggest cause of aviation fatalities in recent
years: the Tatarstan Air 737-500 which
crashed at Kazan, Russia, during a mishandled go-around. In fact, it appears to be one of
those LOC-I accidents which the Flight Safety
Foundation has labelled “lack of control”, on
the basis that the aircraft was controllable, but
the pilot failed to exercise appropriate control
for some reason.
TRAINING SHORTFALL
Over the last five years or so, pilot failure to
manage go-arounds well – even if they do not
end in an accident – has become a serious
worry at the airlines and with both the major
big-jet manufacturers. In recurrent training,
pilots never face an all-engines go-around,
they only have to demonstrate competency in
an abandoned approach with an engine
failure. In the latter, the aircraft’s climb rate
and pitch-up tendency are both gentle, whereas if pilots apply take-off/go-around thrust to
terminate an approach, the pitch-up tendency
is strong and the climb rate dramatic – which
they are not accustomed to.
The crash of the National Air Cargo
747-400F at Bagram, Afghanistan, was a real
out-of-control accident in the sense that the aircraft was clearly outside its flight envelope
well b
efore it hit the ground, and pilot attempts
to recover were likely to have been futile.
Although no formal information has been ❯❯

21-27 January 2014 | Flight International | 27
SAFETY
❯❯ made available, the suspicion is that the
freight shifted aft during the take-off run or
after rotate, because video footage of the early
climb clearly shows that pitch-control was lost.
Among the other jet crashes, there have
been some more traditional accident scenarios, particularly the SCAT Bombardier CRJ200
crash in January 2013 on an instrument landing system (ILS) approach in fog at Almaty,
Kazakhstan. This appears to have been a classic poor visibility accident in which the crew
either failed to monitor glidepath and speed
or deliberately ignored the glidepath guidance in hope of making visual contact with
the runway lights.
The same appears to be true of the Lion Air
737-800 approach at Denpasar, except it was
on a non-precision approach using VOR/DME
guidance. The crew clearly elected to continue
the approach through their decision height
without having sight of the runway, and
eventually paid the price for it with a broken
aeroplane. Similarly, the UPS A300F crew at
Birmingham, Alabama, was carrying out a
non-precision localiser/DME approach at night
when the aircraft hit rising ground on short
final approach. It did not help that the runway
had only edge lighting and no approach lights.
human error
The Asiana accident – the first-ever fatal
accident for a 777 – was in a category that is
becoming more common: the pilots’ failure to
monitor or control the aircraft’s airspeed and
rate of descent on approach. It was disclosed
at the routine public hearing on the accident
that the National Transportation Safety
Board’s interview with the pilots revealed
another factor – the pilot’s admitted unhappi-
ness with carrying out an approach with the
ILS glideslope inactive, even in daylight and
good visibility.
It became clear in the interview that the
pilot flying, a new captain under instruction
by the examiner in the right-hand seat, did
not completely understand the autopilot and
autothrottle modes, but was also reluctant to
trip them out.
The Asiana accident involving
a 777 is not the first time the
autothrottle mode has
confused pilots
A manual selection of the throttle levers to
idle because the aircraft was too high on the
early approach did not disconnect the autothrottle, but put it in “hold” mode, so the
engines remained at idle and the aircraft gradually dipped below the approach path, simultaneously slowing the 777 to an airspeed far
less than the commanded 136kt (252km/h).
The pilots did not know about the “hold”
mode and assumed that the autothrottle
would work as normal. This is not the first
time the autothrottle mode has confused
pilots: it confused EASA test pilots when they
were testing the 777 and 787, but they were
monitoring the aircraft’s behaviour so no ill
came of it. The Asiana pilots failed to recognise that the power levers did not move again
and did not monitor the aircraft’s speed or
descent profile until it was too late.
It has taken around 1,300 deaths from LOC-I
accidents in the last 20 years for the ❯❯
Accident reports
Final accident reports published July-December 2013
These are summaries of accident
reports published since our review
of accidents in the first six months
of 2013 (Flight International 30 July5 August)
■ Yemenia: low-approach stall
After a four-year investigation, the
Comoros Islands investigation authority ANACM determined that pilots of a Yemenia Airbus A310-300
stalled the aircraft after getting too
low during a night circling approach
to Moroni’s coastal runway on 30
June 2009. The aircraft (7O-ADJ)
was to carry out an instrument landing system approach to runway 02,
then break left on short finals and
carry out a right hand visual circuit
for a landing on reciprocal runway
20. Runway 02 was not available
because there were gusting tailwinds of 25kt (46.3km/h) for that
approach.
The crew established on the runway 02 localiser at 3,000ft (914m),
but it was during the circling approach that things went wrong. The
aircraft hit the sea surface and 152
of the 153 occupants were killed. At
a height of 1,390ft, the aircraft – its
autopilot engaged – broke away
from the localiser to begin the
downwind leg of the circuit to 20.
The break was late, around 0.86nm
beyond the published point. The
crew started configuring the aircraft
for landing. However, the late break
and strong tailwind took the aircraft
further north on the downwind leg,
and the inquiry observes: “It is likely
that the captain [in the] left seat
could no longer see the runway during this phase of flight.”
The minimum descent altitude
for the circuit was listed as 1,230ft,
but the aircraft continued to lose
height. The inquiry says the crew
had a “lack of awareness” of the
altitude, while trying to keep sight of
the runway lights. It adds that there
is evidence that the crew was erroneously dialling the altitude selector
while attempting to select headings.
As the crew informed the controller that the flight was established
downwind, they received sink-rate
and “pull up” alarms as the aircraft
descended through 700ft and
reached a radio altimeter height of
just 161ft before climbing. The pilots
raised the landing-gear and, shortly
afterwards, retracted the slats and
flaps at an airspeed of just 179kt –
around 14kt below the 193kt threshold required for a clean configuration.
The aircraft’s pitch increased and
triggered the angle-of-attack protection, setting the engine thrust to
take-off power. Cockpit-voice recordings captured sounds similar to the
onset of buffeting, a sign of an approaching stall.
Over the next 40s, the aircraft
reached an altitude of 1,000ft, but
rolled right and left to nearly 40°
flightglobal.com
analysis
Reuters
In April a Lion Air 737 crashed into
the sea off Denpasar after the
crew attempted to land without
visual contact with the runway
bank. ANACM says the aircraft
stalled and rapidly lost height. It
failed to recover, striking the sea
15s later.
■ Cathay Pacific: engine malfunction
Fuel contamination has been
confirmed as the cause of a double
engine malfunction on a Cathay
Pacific Airbus A330-300 (B-HLL) on
approach to Hong Kong
International Airport (HKIA) on 13
April 2010. Hong Kong’s Civil
Aviation Department (CAD) says
that 24.4t of contaminated fuel was
uplifted at Surabaya’s Juanda
International Airport, Indonesia.
This caused “stiction” – static friction – in the fuel metering unit of
flightglobal.com
both engines, leading to the total
seizure of these components and
the loss of thrust control of the
aircraft during approach to HKIA.
It found that the proper grade of
fuel was loaded, but it was contaminated with super absorbent polymer
(SAP) spheres. During the flight,
some SAP spheres were trapped in
the fuel metering unit on both
engines, causing the stiction that
resulted in engine pressure ratio
fluctuations. The CAD found that the
hydrant refuelling circuit serving 10
stands at Surabaya airport had
undergone extension work as part
of an apron extension project. Fuel
samples taken after the accident
contained salt, and the recommis-
sioning process was not properly
co-ordinated, which led to the premature resumption of hydrant refuelling operations, says the CAD.
The affected aircraft was operating flight CX780 when both its RollsRoyce Trent 700 engines
malfunctioned. The crew issued a
mayday call and eventually landed
at a high ground speed of 231kt
(428km/h), causing the lower
cowling of one engine to contact the
runway, and surface and brake overheat that deflated five tyres after
the aircraft stopped.
■ Sichuan: decision failures
Chinese investigators have criticised the crew of a Sichuan Airlines
Airbus A319 (B-6054) for decision
failures, which led the aircraft to
stall after entering a thunderstorm
on approach to runway 03 at Wuxi
on 14 September 2010. The Civil
Aviation Administration of China
(CAAC) says that the crew persisted
with the approach, despite being
informed of severe weather conditions and describes the crew
resource management as “chaos”.
Although the crew had been informed of thunderstorms and diversion decisions by other crews, they
continued the approach.
At an altitude of 1,680ft, the
aircraft had been flying at 127kt
when – over the space of 30s – it
encountered a strongly variable ❯❯
Rex Features
SAFETY
The wreckage of the Associated Aviation Embraer EMB-120 which stalled on take-off from Lagos in October, probably following engine thrust issues
continued
Final accident reports published July-December 2013
❯❯ crosswind and tailwind, from
speeds of 25-50kt, as well as a
downdraft of 30kt. These rapid variations momentarily exceeded the
capabilities of the aircraft’s stall
protection system. The autopilot
attempted to keep the aircraft on
the glideslope by raising the nose.
Airspeed fell away but, instead
of adjusting the thrust lever, the
crew dialled in a new target speed
of 131kt. As the angle-of-attack
increased, reaching a peak of 33°,
the airspeed continued to fall to
83kt, the autopilot disconnected
and the stall-protection system
was activated. The aircraft powered
up to go-around thrust.
Investigators state that, during
the short upset period, the aircraft
rolled 44° right, while its airspeed
dropped to a minimum of just 74kt
– 5kt below the load-adjusted
stalling speed of 79kt. It also
experienced a sink-rate of more
than 3,900ft/min and descended
to a height of 884ft, generating
sink-rate, stall, and “pull up” warnings. Finally the aircraft recovered,
climbing under go-around power
and the crew opted to divert to
Ningbo. The CAAC’s inquiry found
that, as the aircraft stalled, the pilots acted out of “instinct” by pulling back on their side-sticks
instead of applying stall-recovery
procedures. Lack of co-ordination
during the recovery, it adds, was
also clear from dual side-stick
inputs lasting 12s.
■ Sita Air: lost thrust
Nepalese investigators have been
unable to determine why a Sita Air
Dornier 228 lost thrust while
climbing out of Kathmandu on 28
September 2012, leading the turboprop to stall and crash with the loss
of all 19 on board. Although the
aircraft hit a bird – a black kite
weighing around 0.7kg – while at
70kt on its take-off roll on runway
20, there was no evidence of
ingestion.
The aircraft lifted off at 86kt and
its landing gear was retracted.
However, audio analysis of cockpit-
voice recorder signatures indicates
that one of its engines ran down to
95% of nominal speed, and then
91% shortly afterwards.
Nepal’s air accident commission
says the crew selected a nose-up
attitude too high to maintain its
83kt climb-out speed. The aircraft
levelled off at a height of 100ft,
having decelerated to 77kt, and flew
level for 14s. The airspeed continued to bleed away and the aircraft
drifted to the left. The stall warning
sounded before the turboprop,
entering a left turn, pitched down
and struck the ground 420m southeast of departure runway’s far end.
Investigators pursued several
potential leads with the inquiry, but
flightglobal.com
analysis
❯❯ industry to recognise, formally, that highly automated cockpits are de-skilling pilots in
subtle but dangerous ways, and that they are
not taught properly how to make best use of
the sophisticated flight management systems.
Finally, however, the US Federal Aviation Administration has p
ublished its long-awaited
The Tatarstan crash that left no
survivors was the only dramatic
loss of control accident in 2013
The industry finally admits
that highly automated
cockpits are de-skilling pilots
in subtle but dangerous ways
study by the Commercial Aviation Safety Team
(CAST) Flight Deck Automation Working
Group (dubbed FltDAWG) entitled The operational use of flight path management systems.
This FAA-led work is a seminal report and
it is the first attempt by an aviation authority
anywhere in the world to define the problem
rather than treat the symptoms.
Yet the FltDAWG has not proposed solutions, it has just defined what needs to be
solved. The FAA has handed the task of deciding what should be done over to the Air
Carrier Training Steering Group. When
solutions have been agreed, airlines would
then be under pressure to adopt the recommendations voluntarily. The agency cannot
impose regulatory solutions because, with
safety in the USA as good as it is, new regulation would fail the cost-benefit analysis test
even if it would, one day, save lives. ■
still emerged with no definite cause
for the power reduction.
■ UPS: onboard fire
Analysis of the fatal UPS Boeing
747-400 Freighter fire on 3
September 2010 has been unable
to determine whether a diversion to
Doha, rather than the longer turnback to Dubai, would have altered
the outcome. United Arab Emirates
investigators looking into the onboard fire – caused by the combustion of lithium batteries carried as
freight – examined the captain’s
decision to pursue a return to
Dubai, a track of 185nm (340km),
after having been informed that
Doha was closer at 100nm.
flightglobal.com
Neither pilot survived the accident. The captain was incapacitated
by smoke and fumes and the first
officer’s attempt to land the crippled
aircraft single-handedly at Dubai
was unsuccessful, and it crashed
just outside of the city.
At the point of the diversion decision, the aircraft would have needed
20min to reach Doha’s runway 15,
says the UAE General Civil Aviation
Authority, which might have been up
to 7min earlier than the crash at
Dubai. The analysis notes that a
Doha diversion would not necessarily have been successful. It says
that the progressive failure of systems on the 747 – including elevator, speed-brake and oxygen supply
PA
David Learmount offers his views on aviation
operational and safety issues via his blog at
flightglobal.com/learmount
problems – would have generated a
similar level of control difficulties for
the crew.
■ Nusantara: high clouds
A lack of situational awareness by
the pilots of an Indonesian
Aerospace C212-200 (PK-TLF) operated by Nusantara Buana Air was
the main contributor to a fatal controlled flight into terrain accident on
29 September 2011. The aircraft
was operating a charter flight from
Medan to Kutacane in southeast
Aceh province, carrying two crew
and 16 passengers on board, says
the final report from Indonesia’s
National Transport Safety
Committee (NTSC).
During the 30min flight, which was
conducted under visual flight rules,
the pilots discussed high clouds surrounding the flight path. They reported to the Medan controller 21min
after take-off that the aircraft had
reached 8,000ft and they would contact Kutacane. However, the pilots’
three attempts to contact Kutacane
received no response. The pilots
decided to fly in cloud because a
suitable gap could not be found. This
was followed by another discussion
about whether the aircraft had
passed a waypoint. Shortly after that
the aircraft impacted a steep ridge.
The NTSC believes that the aircraft
flew into the terrain without the pilots
taking any recovery action. ■
SAFETY
Accidents and incidents 2013
notes on tables
Accident data comes from Flight International’s own research in association with Flightglobal Ascend, which compiles the World Aircraft
Accident Summary (WAAS) among other safety analysis products. Unlike the Ascend WAAS, the Flight International list does not contain
an exhaustive list of non-fatal hull loss events. Flight International lists known significant incidents in the interests of maximising the
availability of relevant information, while accepting that the non-fatal listing may be weighted against the airlines of those countries that
make safety information more readily available.
glossary of terms and abbreviations
AA airfield approach/early descent
AAIB UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch
AAL above airfield level
ADC air-data computer
ADF automatic direction finder
AF air force
AGL above ground level
AMSL above mean sea level
AOA angle of attack
ASI airspeed indicator
ATC air traffic control
C climb
C-B circuit breaker
CFIT controlled flight into terrain
CNK cause not known
CVR cockpit voice recorder
DFDR digital flight data recorder
DME distance measuring equipment
ECAM electronic centralised aircraft monitor
Date
EFIS electronic flight instrument system
EGPWS enhanced ground proximity
warning system
EGT exhaust gas temperature
EICAS engine indicating and
crew alerting system
ER en route
ETOPS extended twin-engine operations
FAA US Federal Aviation Administration
FDR flight data recorder
FL flight level = altitude, in hundreds of
feet, with international standard pressuresetting (ISA) of 1013.2mb set on altimeter
(eg FL100 – altimeter reading of 10,000ft
with ISA set)
FMS flight management system
G on ground
GPU ground power unit
GPWS ground proximity warning system
Carrier
Aircraft type/registration
HP high pressure
IFR instrument flight rules
IMC instrument meteorological conditions
ILS instrument landing system
ISA international standard atmosphere –
sea level pressure of 1013.2hPa and
standard temperature/pressure lapse rate
with altitude
L landing
LP low pressure
MEL minimum equipment list
MTOW maximum take-off weight
NDB non-directional beacon
NTSB US National Transportation
Safety Board
PAPI precision approach path indicator
PAX passengers
PF pilot flying
PNF pilot not flying
Location
RA runway/final approach
SID standard instrument departure
TAWS terrain awareness and warning
system
TO take-off
TOGA press-button selected take-off/goaround thrust
VASI visual approach slope indicator
VFR visual flight rules
VHF very high frequency
VMC visual meteorological conditions
VOR VHF omni-range navigation beacon
V1 take-off decision speed
Conversion factors
1nm = 1.85km
1ft = 0.3m
1kt = 1.85km/h
Fatalities
(crew/pax)
Total occupants Phase
(crew/pax)
5/16
5/16
Fatal accidents: scheduled passenger flights
29 January
SCAT
Bombardier CRJ200ER (UP-CJ006) Nr Almaty airport, Kazakhstan
RA
Crashed on final stage of an ILS/DME approach to runway 23R at Almaty, coming down on the extended centreline about 1,400m from the runway threshold. It was daylight but visibility was 100m in freezing fog;
runway visual range given as 150m.
6 July
Asiana
Boeing 777-200 (HL7742)
San Francisco int airport, USA
-/3
16/306
RA
Inbound from Incheon, Korea, speed was allowed to decay significantly during a localiser/DME approach to runway 28L in good weather, with the autopilot and autothrottle engaged. The aircraft descended below a
3˚ approach path on late final approach. About 7s before impact one of the pilots called for a speed increase, and 4s before impact the stick shaker operated. Some 1.5s before impact a pilot called for go-around,
the power levers were advanced and the engines responded. At an IAS of 103kt the tail hit the sea wall 115m short of the threshold and the tail broke off aft of the rear pressure bulkhead. The aircraft spun through
360˚ before coming to rest 500m from impact, and a fire started near the detached right engine. The fire quickly burned out the forward fuselage.
17 November
Tatarstan Air
Boeing 737 (VQ-BBN)
Kazan airport, Russia
6/44
6/44
RA
The crew decided to abandon an unstabilised approach, but they lost control during the go-around. The investigators issued an initial report saying the FDR did not indicate any technical problems, but the aircraft had
pitched up 25˚ and reached 700m height, with the speed decaying to 125kt. The controls were then employed to push the nose down, and the aircraft eventually hit the ground in a near-vertical dive.
29 November
Linhas Aereas de Mocambique
Embraer 190 (C9-EMC)
Bwabwata National Park,
Namibia
6/27
6/27
ER
The aircraft was carrying out a flight from Maputo, Mozambique to Luanda, Angola, when it was seen on radar to enter a high rate of descent (6,000ft/min). There was no report of trouble nor an emergency call.
Fatal accidents: non-scheduled passenger flights
13 February
South Airlines
Antonov An-24 (UR-WRA)
Donetsk airport, Ukraine
0/5
8/44
L
Aircraft crashed on the airfield following a night ILS approach in fog. Witnesses reported a wing drop just before touchdown.
6 March
Aero Transporte
Beech King Air
Nr Matibamba, Peru
2/7
2/7
ER
Rediske Air
DHC Turbo Otter (N93PC)
Soldotna, Alaska
1/9
1/9
TO
Lagos Int airport, Nigeria
4/11
4/16
TO
Hit high ground.
7 July
The aircraft was destroyed by post-impact fire when it crashed beside the runway during take-off.
3 October
Associated Aviation
Embraer Brasilia (5N-BJY)
Initial information from the Nigerian investigation indicates that there was a take-off configuration warning during the take-off run, but the captain (PF) appears to have chosen to ignore it, possibly having made a
decision to take off without flaps set. Despite other aural alerts, including warnings from the co-pilot – who was clearly unhappy with the situation – the captain persisted with getting airborne, but lost control soon
after unstick. The aircraft hit the ground with 90˚ bank and the right propeller was found to have been in the feathered position.
flightglobal.com
Rex Features
ACCIDENTS AND INCIDENTS
Asiana Airlines Flight 214 from Incheon, South Korea crashed on final approach to San Francisco in July with the loss of three lives
Date
Carrier
Location
Fatalities
(crew/pax)
(crew/pax)
Palbuna River, Papua New
Guinea
-/3
1/9
Fatal accidents: non-scheduled passenger flights
25 November
Tropicair
Cessna Caravan (P2-SAH)
ER
Just after reaching its 9,000ft cruising altitude, the aircraft’s engine made a loud “pop” noise and lost power. The aircraft was flying over heavily forested territory, so the pilot headed for a disused aerodrome at
Kilbeni, near the Palbuna River, and set up a left hand circuit. The aircraft was too fast on final approach, and as the runway end and trees loomed, the pilot tried to pull over them and go for the river. The aircraft hit
the top of a tall palm, but the pilot was able to set it down in the river, which is 60m below the airfield elevation, where it came to rest inverted. The pilot escaped and then attempted to help the passengers, but
three of them perished.
Fatal accidents: COMMUTER AND REGIONAL FLIGHTS
10 October
MASWings
DHC Twin Otter (9M-MDM)
Kudat airport, Malaysia
1/1
2/14
L
The accident occurred at the end of a scheduled flight from Kota Kinabalu during a go-around, after the pilots reportedly decided to abandon their second attempt to land. During the go-around in a gusting crosswind
the aircraft veered left and lost height, crashing into a house.
14 October
Aereo Servicio Guerrero
Cessna Caravan (XA-TXM)
Sierra de la Gigantica, Mexico
1/11
1/11
ER
The aircraft crashed in the mountains about 16nm northwest of its departure point at Loreto, headed for Ciudad Constitucion. It was daylight but the weather was poor because of the close proximity of tropical storm
Octave.
16 October
Lao Airlines
ATR 72-600 (RDPL-34233)
Mekong River Nr Pakse, Laos
5/44
5/44
RA
-/8
2/16
RA
Red Lake airport, Ontario,
Canada
2/3
2/5
RA
St Mary’s airport, Alaska
1/3
1/9
RA
-/1
1/8
C
Location
Fatalities
Pellston, Michigan, USA
1
1
C
Queen Alexandra Mts, Antarctica
3
3
ER
6
10
AA
Nr Dillingham, Alaska
2
2
AA
Bagram air base, Afghanistan
7
7
TO/C
The aircraft crashed in daylight and stormy weather while positioning for its second attempted approach to runway 15 at Pakse.
3 November
AeroCon
Fairchild Metro (CP-2754)
Riberalta airport, Bolivia
The aircraft came down on the night approach some 1,200m before the runway 32 threshold, and about 50m right of the extended centreline.
10 November
Bearskin Airlines
Fairchild Metro (C-FFZN)
The aircraft struck power lines and crashed amongst trees during a night approach in snow.
29 November
Hageland Aviation
Cessna Caravan (N12373)
The aircraft, inbound to St Mary’s from Bethel, crashed just over 4nm east of the airport. It was dark, with fog and freezing rain and a 300ft cloudbase.
11 December
Makani Kai
Cessna Caravan (N687MA)
Sea Nr Kalaupapa, Hawaii
The aircraft lost power shortly after take-off for a flight to Honolulu, and came down in the sea about 0.5nm from the coast.
Date
Carrier
Fatal accidents: non-passenger flights
15 January
Martinaire Aviation
Cessna 208B (N1120N)
Crashed in woods shortly after take-off in darkness at 19:45 local time.
23 January
Kenn Borek Air
DHC Twin Otter 300 (C-GKBC)
On a positioning flight from the Amundsen/Scott Station to the Zucchelli Station in Terra Nova Bay, the aircraft crashed into a mountainside at the 3,900m level.
4 March
Compagnie Africaine d’Aviation Fokker 50 (9Q-CBD)
Goma airport, DR Congo
The aircraft hit buildings as visibility was reduced by heavy rain during an NDB approach to the airport. It was expecting to land on runway 36.
8 March
Ace Air Cargo
Beech 1900C (N116AX)
Hit high ground in Muklung Hills while positioning for a GPS approach to runway 19 at Dillingham.
29 April
National Air Cargo
Boeing 747-400F (N949CA)
Very soon after take-off the aircraft adopted an extremely steep nose-up attitude, which must have affected the airspeed. Soon the left wing dropped, recovered, then the other dropped and the aircraft yawed
dramatically right. Control was lost and it crashed.
flightglobal.com
safety
Date
Carrier
Location
Fatalities
Fatal accidents: non-passenger flightS
29 June
Batair Cargo
Embraer Bandeirante (ZS-NVB)
Nr Francistown airport, Botswana 2
2
RA
The aircraft came down in scrub nearly 3nm short of the end of runway 11. Reports suggest visibility was affected by early morning mist, and that a previous attempt to land on the reciprocal runway 29 had been
abandoned. The aircraft was landing at Francistown to refuel during a positioning flight from Lanseria in South Africa to Lubumbashi in DR Congo.
14 August
UPS
Airbus A300-600 (N155UP)
Shuttlesworth airport,
Birmingham, USA
2
2
RA
On a localiser/DME approach inbound from Louisville, Kentucky at 04:47 local time, the aircraft hit rising ground about 0.5nm short of the runway threshold. It was night-time but the weather was good and visibility
at 10nm.
25 September Morningstar Air Express
Cessna Caravan (C-FEXB)
Hudson Bay, Canada
1
1
ER
The aircraft took off from Sault Ste Marie at 12:15 local time for a 30min flight, but failed to return. The aircraft’s emergency locator transmitter operated first at about 14:00, and it continued tracking northward until
17:00, when the Cessna was over Hudson Bay, but there was no communication from the pilot. Wreckage was found in the vicinity of the last ELT signal. It seems probable that the aircraft ran out of fuel.
2 December
IBC Airways
Fairchild Metro (N831BC)
Nr Arecibo, Puerto Rico
2
2
AA
The aircraft, carrying out a cargo flight from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, to Arecibo crashed at night but in good weather about 40nm short of its destination. The circumstances are unknown so far.
26 December
Irkutsk Aviation Plant
Antonov An-12 (RA12162)
Nr Irkutsk 2 airport, Russia
9
9
RA
Location
Injuries
(crew/pax)
(crew/pax)
-/-
3/28
The aircraft came down on final approach for Irkutsk 2 airport and crashed into buildings.
Date
Carrier
Significant non-fatal accidents (all operational categories)
2 January
Sol Líneas Aéreas
Saab 340 (LV-BMD)
Mendoza airport, Argentina
G
Nose undercarriage leg “fractured” while taxiing for take-off from runway 18. Directional control was lost and the aircraft ran off the taxiway on to soft ground, where the left propeller hit a post.
2 February
Alitalia
ATR 72-200 (YR-ATS)
Rome Fiumicino airport, Italy
1/1
4/46
L
Landed on runway 16L at night with a strong, gusting crosswind from the right (250˚/28kt gusting 41kt). Following a nosewheel touchdown the aircraft bounced three times before veering off the right-hand side of
the runway, where it came to rest. The nose gear collapsed about 50m clear of the runway, around 1,800m beyond the threshold. Runway 25 was unavailable because of work in progress.
6 February
Tunisair
Airbus A320 (TS-IMB)
Carthage International airport,
Tunis
-/-
8/75
L
N/A
L
After landing on runway 19 in a strong crosswind from the right, the aircraft veered off the right hand side of the runway and eventually came to a halt with its nose gear collapsed.
9 February
Pacific Coastal Airlines
Beech 1900C (C-FPCO)
Blue River airport, British
Columbia, Canada
-/-
The crew lost directional control after touchdown and the aircraft veered off the runway and hit a snow berm. The nose gear collapsed and both propellers were damaged.
11 February
Pakistan International Airlines
Boeing 737-300 (AP-BEH)
Seeb airport, Muscat, Oman
-/-
7/107
L
Boeing 737-800 (PK-LKS)
Ngurah Rai airport, Denpasar,
Indonesia
-/4
7/101
RA
The left main gear failed on landing.
13 April
Lion Air
On a VOR/DME approach to runway 09, the aircraft appears to have continued through the minimum descent height even though the pilots could not see the runway. The EGPWS called “minimum” when d escending
through 550ft, but the crew continued the descent. It hit the sea just short of the runway threshold and came to rest in shallow water, with the hull fractured but largely intact. Soon after descending through 500ft,
the aircraft was reported to have entered very heavy rain, possibly a downburst, and if the crew had had sight of the runway, they had lost it again. The aircraft’s rate of descent increased, and at 150ft AGL the
captain took control from the co-pilot, who had been PF, and began a go-around. The EGPWS called “20” (20ft height) as the go-around attempt began, but the aircraft hit the sea.
16 April
Aeromexico
Boeing 767-200ER (XA-TOJ)
Madrid Barajas, Spain
-/-
9/154
TO
A severe tail strike on take-off from runway 36L prevented the aircraft pressurising. This left debris on the runway that was not noticed for some time, and caused a nosewheel tyre failure subsequently after take-off.
The 767 returned to land on runway 18R.
17 April
Lao Air
DHC Twin Otter 300 (RDPL-34180) Sam Neua airport, Laos
-/-
2/16
TO
Jomsom airport, Nepal
3/4
3/19
L
Mong Hsat airport, Myanmar
-/2
4/51
L
Nr London Heathrow, UK
-/-
5/75
C
The aircraft hit trees at the edge of the airfield and came down 200m from the runway end.
16 May
Nepal Airlines
DHC Twin Otter (9N-ABO)
The aircraft landed with a tailwind, overran the end of runway 06 and fell down a steep embankment.
16 May
Myanma Airways
AVIC Xian MA60 (XY-AIQ)
The aircraft overran the end of runway 30 and the left main gear collapsed.
24 May
British Airways
Airbus A319 (G-EUOE)
The aircraft took off from runway 27L bound for Oslo, but the fan cowls on both engines broke away almost immediately, puncturing a fuel feed line on the right engine. The yellow hydraulic system also
depressurised. The crew made a Pan call stating the intention to return, and upgraded it to a Mayday when they got a fire warning on the right engine. The fire was reduced by the fire drill, but could not be
extinguished completely. The crew landed the aircraft safely using left engine power. Initial investigations indicate that the cowl fastenings were not operated correctly following routine line maintenance.
1 June
Sita Air
Dornier 228-200 (9N-AHB)
Simikot airport, Nepal
-/-
2/5
L
-/-
6/159
L
El Tari airport, Kupang, Indonesia -/-
4/46
L
AVIC Xian MA60 (XY-AIP)
Kawthaung airport, Myanmar
-/-
4/60
L
Saab 340 (C6-SBJ)
Marsh Harbour, Bahamas
-/-
3/18
L
The aircraft landed just short of the runway and sheared off the nose and left main gear, coming to rest beside the touchdown zone.
2 June
Cebu Pacific
Airbus A320 (RP-C3266)
Davao airport, the Philippines
The aircraft veered off the runway to the side and its nose gear collapsed.
10 June
Merpati Nusantara Airlines
AVIC Xian MA60 (PK-MZO)
Touched down just short of runway 07 threshold. The nose gear collapsed and a wing failed.
10 June
Myanma Airways
Ran off the runway during landing.
13 June
Sky Bahamas
The aircraft developed a high rate of descent on short final approach in daylight, touched down hard, bounced, then ran off the left side of the runway. It came to a halt with the right wing separated at the root.
flightglobal.com
Rex Features
accidents and incidents
None of the nine on board survived the crash in Irkutsk
Date
Carrier
An ATR-72 crashed into the Mekong River in Laos in October
Location
Injuries
(crew/pax)
(crew/pax)
-/-
-/-
Significant non-fatal accidents (all operational categories)
12 July
Ethiopian Airlines
Boeing 787-8 (ET-AOP)
London Heathrow airport, UK
G
The aircraft was parked and unattended. ATC staff in the tower noticed smoke coming from the aircraft and activated the alarm. Fire crews extinguished the fire, which damaged the upper aft fuselage in the vicinity of
the emergency locator transmitter, which is powered by a lithium-ion battery. The cause of the fire has not yet been established.
15 July
Air Services
Cessna Caravan (8R-AMS)
Nr Matthews Ridge, Guyana
1/8
1/11
L
Saab 340 (UR-ARO)
Lubumbashi int airport, DR
Congo
-/-
4/18
TO
Struck trees on approach and came down 2nm from the runway.
29 July
Air Urga
During the take-off run a vibration developed and the aircraft began to pull to the right. Directional control was lost, the aircraft left the runway and ran across drainage ditches, destroying the undercarriage. The
aircraft was written off.
12 August
EasyJet
Airbus A320 (G-EZTC)
Milan Malpensa airport, Italy
-/-
6/174
C
The port engine cowling panels opened and detached just after take-off and hit the left side of the fuselage and leading edge of the fin. The crew levelled the aircraft at 3,500ft and then returned to Malpensa.
16 August
Antrak Air
ATR ATR72 (EC-KUL)
Nr Tamale, Ghana
-/-
4/69
C
Fire broke out in the port engine during the climb on a flight to Accra. The crew levelled the aircraft at 9,000ft, shut down the engine, discharged both fire extinguisher bottles and returned safely to Tamale.
20 August
AeroCon
Fairchild Metro (CP-2655)
Sucre airport, Bolivia
-/-
2/8
L
Following an apparently normal approach in daylight VMC, the aircraft veered to the left shortly after touchdown on runway 05, ran off the runway and down a slope before stopping with its nose-gear collapsed.
25 August
Transom Airways
Antonov An-26 (EK26818)
Guriceel airstrip, Somalia
-/-
5/45
L
Bangkok Int airport
-/-
14/287
L
The aircraft landed long, overran the landing strip and the nose gear hit a rock and collapsed.
8 September
Thai Airways International
Airbus A330 (HS-TEF)
The right main undercarriage bogey beam broke during the landing roll on runway 19L. The gear leg dug into the surface, the right engine contacted the runway and directional control was lost. The aircraft swung off
the runway to the right. The 18-year-old aircraft was operating a flight from Guangzhou, China, and the landing took place at night but the weather was clear.
19 October
Skyjet Airlines
BAe Systems HS748 (RP-C5525)
Polillo airport, the Philippines
-/-
7/68
L
Madang airport, Papua New
Guinea
-
3
TO
The aircraft reportedly landed about halfway along the runway and overran the end, causing undercarriage damage.
19 October
Air Niugini
ATR 42-300 (P2-PXY)
The nosewheel would not lift off the ground when the captain tried to rotate. It was later discovered that the cargo, which had been loaded according to an assumed unit weight rather than actually weighed, was well
over the maximum allowable payload.
21 October
Mokulele Airlines
Cessna Caravan (N861MA)
Nr Kahului, Hawaii
-/-
1/8
C
The aircraft was climbing through 8,500ft when there was a loud bang and the engine lost power. The pilot turned back toward the island of Maui, and elected to land on the Pilani Highway (Route 31). The aircraft
landed safely but hit road signs causing damage.
25 October
Miniliner
Fokker F27 (I-MLVT)
Nr Charles de Gaulle airport,
Paris
2
-
C
Climbing through about 1,000ft after take-off the left propeller shed a blade, which passed through the fuselage and out the other side. The propeller and engine then detached. The crew maintained control and
returned for a safe landing.
1 November
Air Inuit
DHC Twin Otter (C-GMDC)
Sanikiluaq airport, Nunavut,
Canada
-
2
L
Airbus A319 (N504NK)
O’Hare airport, Chicago, USA
-/-
6/0
TO
Abuja Int airport, Nigeria
-
6
L
Ran off the runway after being hit by a gust of wind.
9 November
Spirit Airlines
Starboard engine fan cowl doors opened and separated. The aircraft returned to O’Hare and landed safely.
4 December
Saudia
Boeing 747-400F (EK-74798)
The aircraft ran off runway 04 and hit heavy construction equipment. The No 2 engine caught fire. A reduction in the landing distance available had been published because of work in progress.
flightglobal.com
SPONSORED UPDATE
Global Aviation Takes
Centre Stage in Singapore
Come next February, Singapore Airshow will once again be the convergent point for significant players
across the global aviation spectrum to
do business and forge partnerships,
as the show unveils its fourth edition.
According to
the Airbus Global
Market Forecast
2013, global aviation will be flying off to a good
start as the demand for air traffic is expected to
grow at 4.7% annually over the
next two decades. The Asia Pacific region is projected to take the lead in
this growth, surpassing Europe and
North America.
According to the forecast, the growth
in air traffic will also call for 29,200
new
passenger
and freight aircraft
orders valued at
nearly US$4.4TN.
With Singapore
strategically located in the heart of
the Asia Pacific region and optimism
high up in the air,
the show organis-
ers are expecting huge business deals
to be sealed at the 2014 event. To
date, already 99% of the exhibition
space has been booked with 21 country pavilions lined up.
ASIA
PACIFIC
LEADLEAD
IN WORLD
TRAFFIC TILL
2032
ASIA
PACIFIC
IN WORLD
TRAFFIC
TILL 2032
% of 2012
world RPK
20–year
growth
% of 2032
world RPK
Asia Pacific
29%
5.5%
34%
Europe
26%
3.8%
22%
North America
25%
3.0%
18%
Middle East
8%
7.1%
12%
Latin America
5%
6.0%
7%
CIS
4%
5.8%
4%
Africa
3%
5.1%
3%
2012 traffic
2012 – 2032 traffic
World annual
traffic growth
in next
20 years
4.7%
0
1,000
2,000
RPK traffic by airline domicile (BN)
SOURCE: Airbus Global Market Forecast 2013
3,000
4,000
5,000
Get insights on the Market Opportunities via the Business Forums
Echoing the positive outlook for
the Asia Pacific markets, the
Singapore Airshow will also return
at the 2014 show with its popular
Business Forums to provide
strategic business insights into
the aerospace and defence
growth markets. Presented by key
aerospace buyers, government
BUSINESS FORUMS
Date
Time
China Business Forum
12 Feb 2014 (Wed)
10:30am - 12:30pm
U.S. Business Forum
12 Feb 2014 (Wed)
2:00pm - 4:00pm
Asia Business Forum
13 Feb 2014 (Thu)
10:30am - 12:30pm
agencies and industry leaders, the
upcoming show will be featuring
three business forums namely;
the China Business Forum, U.S.
Business Forum and Asia
Business Forum.
Flightglobal is proud to support Singapore Airshow 2014.
Find us at stand no. P103
Ticket price is S$50 per person
per forum.
Register for the Business Forums
at www.singaporeairshow.
com/registration
or scan this code:
For more information on the event,
visit www.singaporeairshow.com
or scan here: