DOCSLIB.ORG

Broad Shoulders at Iran Air Flag-Carrier Raises the Standard in the Face of Adversity Page 18

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Broad Shoulders at Iran Air Flag-Carrier Raises the Standard in the Face of Adversity Page 18 ISSUE 3, VOLUME 5: AUGUST – OCTOBER 2013 THE MAGAZINE FOR AEROSPACE PROFESSIONALS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA AND TURKEY www.arabianaerospace.aero BROAD SHOULDERS AT IRAN AIR FLAG-CARRIER RAISES THE STANDARD IN THE FACE OF ADVERSITY PAGE 18 SPECIAL REPORT FOCUS ON SAUDI ARABIA AIRPORTS Supreme 56-page Dubai challenge special faces up to in on the resurfacing Afghanistan kingdom problems PAGE 61 PAGE 71 PAGE 144 V2_OFC_ARA AS i3_SP [email protected] 1 31/07/13 6:47 PM comment ISSUE 3 VOL 5 | AUGUST 2013 – OCTOBER 2013 Published by Leading the world… but still storms abound TIMES Aerospace Limited Regional Office 3-4 Rumsey House PO box: 371391 Locks Hill, Rochford Dubai Airport Free Zone Essex, SS4 1BB Building 6EA, Suite 222, UK Dubai Tel: +44 (0)1702 53 0000 United Arab Emirates Fax: +44 (0)1702 53 3088 Tel: +971 4 603 3364 Website: www.arabianaerospace.aero Directors: Mark Brown & Kevin Sammon Publisher: Mark Brown [email protected] Display Advertising: Nick Hutchins [email protected] Dave Winship-Evans [email protected] Production Coordinator: Afghanistan offers great opportunities for our region as Arabian Aerospace discovered on our tour. Claire Silva [email protected] he Middle East airlines were the main talking the EU blacklist, a move that IATA’s director general Circulation Dept: point at the IATA AGM in Cape Town in June. Tony Tyler described as “absurd”. Ryan Everitt [email protected] TOn stage, as members of various key panels, the Arabian Aerospace joined the airline to visit both leaders of the region’s main airlines were relaxed and bases in Kabul and Dubai. This is not a big airline like EDITORIAL confident. Emirates, Etihad and Qatar but it shares that same Editor: Alan Peaford What a change from two years ago. passion for quality, for operational excellence and for [email protected] Instead of being pilloried as unfair competitors, safety. It deserves so much more. Deputy Editor: Marcella Nethersole there is recognition that the relationship between In this issue we also look at supply chain operations [email protected] Defence: Jon Lake Governments and airlines can benefit nations – and in Afghanistan ahead of the military withdrawals by Air Transport: Alan Dron everyone wants a slice of the Arabian airline pie. the American and NATO countries and we also pay a Business Aviation: Liz Moscrop The carriers’ drive for safety and operational visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – the region’s Helicopters: Paul Derby standards, as well as top-level service, is the envy of largest market. General Aviation: Liz Moscrop airlines around the world. And Qatar Airways – the Again there are positive messages and ambitious Space: Steve Nichols first airline to achieve IOSA recognition – will have a plans. Aircraft Interiors: Marcella Nethersole MRO & Propulsion: Geoff Thomas chance to demonstrate its capabilities first hand when The whole aerospace industry in this region is Business: Ian Sheppard it hosts next year’s AGM. developing despite external pressures and sometimes Airports: Keith Mwanalushi But there is one Middle East airline that may rightly protectionism. The success of the MENA region is the Picture Editor: Ian Billinghurst question the value of the IOSA certification. That is envy of the world – and now is the time to build on that Photographers: Paul Merritt, the Dubai-based Afghan airline Safi. Tom Gordon, Mark Wagner success. Design: Chris Murray As you will see from our story on Page 66, Safi has Safe landings. Production Editor: Rick Haden achieved the highest safety standards and systems in Alan Peaford, editor-in-chief Sub-Editors: Steve Knight IATA and has the IOSA certification. But it is still on Arabian Aerospace Regional Editors: Jill Stockbridge (UAE), James Wynbrandt (USA) COVER: Iran Air chairman Farhad Parvaresh. Picture: Billypix. Contributors: Mohammed Ali Alia, Claire Apthorp, Kelly Clark, Rob Coppinger, Jeffrey Decker, Kelly Green, Champion Door Ltd 148 NEXUS 92 Ian Goold, Jamie Hunter, Martin Rivers, Terry Spruce. Advertisers Comlux Middle East 129 Pan Am International Flight Academy 143 Dassault Falcon 50 Ramco Systems Ltd. 150 Editorial head office: Airbus 2, 3 Donaldson 37 Sabeti Wain Aerospace 126 Aerocomm Ltd, The Gatehouse, 104 Lodge Lane Albihery Lawyers & Legal Advisors 121 Dubai Airshow 2013 154 Safewrap Saudi Arabia 121 Grays, Essex, RM16 2UL UK. Alpha Star Aviation Services 44, 45 EADS Sogerma 12 Samana Special Mission Al-Saudia 85 Tel: +44 (0)1375 427014 Fax + 44 (0)1375 404478 Alsalam Aircraft Company 77 Embraer Commercial Jets IFC Saudi Aerospace Engineering Alubat Middle East FZCO 107 Engine Alliance 78 Industries OBC Disclaimer ARABASCO 11 Eurofighter Typhoon 73 Saudi Airlines Catering 81 The views expressed in Arabian Aerospace magazine are not necessarily ARINC 17 First Emirates Aviation Group LLC 133 Saudi Aviation Flight Academy 95 shared by, nor should they be taken as the views of TIMES Aerospace Australian College of Kuwait 141 FlightSafety International 55 Saudia Ground Services Company 89 Limited (the publishers) or Aerocomm Ltd. Any views expressed are those of Aviall 60 Global Aviation Services (GAS) 138 Saudia Private Aviation 8 the individual contributors. No responsibility or liability is accepted by the editor or the publishers for Aviation Horizons Limited 110 Gulf Aviation Academy 69 Spectrum Aeromed 48 any loss occasioned to any person, legal or physical, acting or refraining Avtrade 140 Gulf Aviation Training Event 2013 156 Turkish Aviation Academy 16, 21 from action as a result of any statement, fact, figure, expression of opinion Bahrain International Airshow 2014 70 Gulfstream 15 World Food Programme 23 oror beliefbelief containedcontained inin ArabianArabian AerospaceAerospace.. TheThe publication publication of of advertisements advertisements does does not not in in any any way way imply imply endorsement endorsement BAS Aircraft Engineering Training Iberia Maintenance 4 byby thethe editoreditor oror thethe publisherspublishers ofof thethe productsproducts oror servicesservices referredreferred toto therein.therein. Centre 142 Jeppesen 25 ARABIANARABIAN AEROSPACE AEROSPACE ARABIANARABIAN AEROSPACE AEROSPACE TheThe entire entire contents contents of of this this publication publication are are protected protected by by copyright, copyright, full full details details of of Beechcraft 100 Jet Aviation 6 which are available on request. All rights reserved. No part of this publication magazine is a magazine is officially which are available on request. All rights reserved. No part of this publication Boeing Edge Information Services 29 Kennedys 149 magazine is a proud ‘Industry magazine is officially may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or proud ‘Industry supported by: byby any any means, means, electronic, electronic, mechanical, mechanical, photocopying, photocopying, recordingrecording oror otherwise,otherwise, Boeing 75 Lockheed Martin 43 Partner’ of: supported by: without prior permission from TIMES Aerospace Limited. Bombardier IBC Merlin RAMCo, Inc. 40Partner’ of: Printed in the UAE by Emirates Printing Press. Printed in the UAE by Emirates Printing Press. CAE 30 Middle East Business Aviation CFM International 33 Association (MEBAA) 65 1 SPECIAL REPORT FROM AFGHANISTAN The old adage says that an army marches on its stomach. That is as true today as in the days of the Charge of the Light Brigade. And one freight and logistics company is making sure that the armed forces in Afghanistan are getting their daily rations. Marcelle Nethersole reports from Afghanistan. MY SUPREME CHALLENGE he Supreme Group has been providing critical, life- sustaining services to defence, government, and Tcommercial sectors across the globe in challenging environments since its beginning in 1957. Its current clients include the United Nations (UN), the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and leading military forces, including the US Department of Defense (DoD) and the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD). Since 2005 the company, which has its Middle East operations hub in Dubai, has been operating in Afghanistan delivering food, water and other supplies to around 250 forward operating bases (FOBs) for up to 130,000 troops. It is the only company to do so. Its expertise extends to fuel supply and full life-support services for military clients in the country. Its facilities within Afghanistan include 21 bulk fuel installations; nine food, chilled, frozen and dry goods warehouses with an area of 801,705sqm, 27 dining facilities (DFACs) that serve around 3 million meals per month; and a state-of-the-art water bottling plant with the capacity to produce 8,000 litres of drinking water Continued on Page 62 per hour. 61 SPECIAL REPORT FROM AFGHANISTAN CONTINUED FROM PAGE 61 Aviation plays a vital role in its missions and it was with a certain trepidation, matched by a fascination about how this logistical challenge is achieved, that I joined Supreme on a two-day trip from its warehouse hub in Sharjah to Camp Bastion and Kandahar in Helmand Province to see how the operation worked. I was flying to Camp Bastion on a 747-200 loaded with food. Before the 10am departure, work had already been going on throughout the night. The company operates two warehouses, one of which is a chilled store, alongside the UAE’s fourth largest airport. “We get goods in from all over the world with most of it being fresh fruit and vegetables,” said Stuart Peacock, Supreme’s Sharjah Airport operations manager. “It’s a huge supply chain that is purely for the military. We also fly dry cargo, which literally can be anything from cans of drink, sheets of cling-film, pillows, and piping, but the food produce always takes priority. Any room left over on the aircraft we load with dry cargo to make sure we utilise all the space.” As a lot of the food is chilled or frozen, the importance of keeping it to the right temperature is paramount. The whole process starts with food companies putting temperature loggers on a sample of the tri-wall boxes of packed food.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MIDRMA Board/13-WP/6 3/03/2014 International Civil Aviation
    MIDRMA Board/13-WP/6 3/03/2014 International Civil Aviation Organization Middle East Regional Monitoring Agency Board Thirteenth Meeting (MIDRMA Board/13) (Bahrain, 9 –12 March 2014) Agenda Item 4: RVSM Monitoring and Related Technical Issues MID STATES MINIMUM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Presented by MIDRMA) SUMMARY The aim of this working paper is to address the RVSM Minimum Monitoring Requirements (MMR) applicable for each MIDRMA Member State. Action by the meeting is at paragraph 3. REFERENCES − ATM/AIM/SAR SG/13 Report − ICAO Doc 9547 − ICAO doc 9937 − ICAO Annex 6 Part I − MIDANPIRG/14 Report − MID RVSM SMR 2012-2013 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The height-keeping performance of aircraft is a key element in ensuring the safe operations of RVSM airspace. The RVSM height monitoring standards are considered the minimum requirement needed to maintain the safety of operations in the RVSM designated airspace. 1.2 Upon changes to ICAO Annex 6, Operation of Aircraft, Parts I & II, applicable on 18 November 2010, the following standard was adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO): 7.2.7 The State of the Operator that has issued an RVSM approval to an operator shall establish a requirement which ensures that a minimum of two aeroplanes of each aircraft type grouping of the operator have their height-keeping performance monitored, at least once every two years or within intervals of 1000 flight hours per aeroplane, whichever period is longer. If an operator aircraft type grouping consists of a single aeroplane, monitoring of that aeroplane shall be accomplished within the specified period.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran Is Still Using Pseudo-Civilian Airlines to Resupply Assad by Farzin Nadimi
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 2785 Iran Is Still Using Pseudo-Civilian Airlines to Resupply Assad by Farzin Nadimi Apr 13, 2017 Also available in Arabic ABOUT THE AUTHORS Farzin Nadimi Farzin Nadimi, an associate fellow with The Washington Institute, is a Washington-based analyst specializing in the security and defense affairs of Iran and the Persian Gulf region. Brief Analysis While some international sanctions against Iranian civil aviation have been lifted, Tehran's insistence on using Mahan Air and other companies to send personnel and weapons to Syria may jeopardize the industry's future. s the aviation community and international media fixate on recent Boeing and Airbus orders by Iranian A airlines, Tehran continues to quietly purchase secondhand aircraft and parts through smaller companies, actively circumventing terrorism-related sanctions against certain airlines and individuals. By combining military and civil aviation components, Iran seeks to bolster its regional airlift capability, but any companies associated with such activity -- even indirectly -- are putting themselves in the crosshairs of U.S. sanctions policy. THE 'SYRIAN EXPRESS' AIR BRIDGE T he Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force has long used pseudo-civilian resources to help Iran's allies in Syria. In addition to close support from Mahan Air (see next section), the IRGC has set up its own cover airlines and service companies to provide logistical assistance and boost revenue. The main airline operated by the IRGC and its Pars Aviation Company is Pouya Air. Its predecessors, Pars Air and Yas Air, were designated as terrorist entities in 2012 by the United States, which accused them of transporting weapons to the Syrian regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Overwhelmed by Technology: How Did User Interface Failures on Board the USS Vincennes Lead to 290 Dead?
    Overwhelmed by Technology: How did user interface failures on board the USS Vincennes lead to 290 dead? Luke Swartz Background On July 3, 1988, the 290 passengers and crew of Iran Air Flight 655 were seemingly distant from the bitter and prolonged Iran-Iraq war. Many of the passengers were ultimately bound for Mecca, making their sacred pilgrimage as prescribed in the Koran. However, at 10:24 AM, seven minutes after the Airbus took off from Bandar Abbas Airport for Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, the United States Navy guided missile cruiser Vincennes fired two missiles at the plane, destroying the hapless target and its civilian occupants with horrific precision. What Went Wrong? Immediately after the tragedy, the US quickly blamed Iran for letting the plane fly over the combat situation below; then-Vice President Bush explained to the UN Security Council that the Vincennes “acted in self-defense,” thinking that Flight 655, after failing to respond to seven warnings, was “an Iranian military aircraft…approaching with hostile intentions.” Iran’s foreign minister charged the US with intentionally downing the plane, adding, “This was a premeditated act of aggression against the integrity of Tehran…a massacre.” While few objective observers think that the Vincennes’ action was intentional, and fewer still believe that its shooting down the civilian airliner was correct, numerous experts have debated what went wrong that fateful day. Many theories deal with aspects of the situation and the key players both on the Vincennes and in the cockpit of Flight 655. Failure to Respond? We may never know why Flight 655 failed to respond to the Vincennes’ repeated warnings, as its “black box” flight recorder could not be recovered.
    [Show full text]
  • Monthly OTP November 2019
    Monthly OTP November 2019 ON-TIME PERFORMANCE AIRLINES Contents On-Time is percentage of flights that depart or arrive within 15 minutes of schedule. Global OTP rankings are only assigned to all Airlines/Airports where OAG has status coverage for at least 80% of the scheduled flights. Regional Airlines Status coverage will only be based on actual gate times rather than estimated times. This may result in some airlines / airports being excluded from this report. If you would like to review your flight status feed with OAG, please email [email protected] MAKE SMARTER MOVES Airline Monthly OTP – November 2019 Page 1 of 1 Home GLOBAL AIRLINES – TOP 50 AND BOTTOM 50 TOP AIRLINE ON-TIME FLIGHTS On-time performance BOTTOM AIRLINE ON-TIME FLIGHTS On-time performance Airline Arrivals Rank No. flights Size Airline Arrivals Rank No. flights Size JH Fuji Dream Airlines 96.5% 1 2,340 155 3H Air Inuit 37.2% 162 1,465 196 GA Garuda Indonesia 95.8% 2 12,736 48 AI Air India 40.1% 161 16,509 38 RC Atlantic Airways Faroe Islands 95.0% 3 210 295 WG Sunwing Airlines Inc. 50.3% 160 905 225 7G Star Flyer 94.0% 4 2,160 164 WO Swoop 53.4% 159 919 222 EW Eurowings 93.4% 5 15,608 40 SG SpiceJet 54.3% 158 18,288 33 SATA International-Azores 6J Solaseed 93.3% 6 2,226 161 S4 54.5% 157 448 260 Airlines S.A. XQ SunExpress 93.3% 7 3,115 135 IW Wings Air 54.7% 156 11,242 55 TA TACA International Airlines 92.8% 8 374 272 JY Intercaribbean Airways Ltd 56.1% 155 1,760 184 FA Safair 92.6% 9 2,250 159 JT Lion Air 58.0% 154 17,320 34 B7 Uni Airways 92.5% 10 4,132 123 BJ Nouvelair
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Transfers in Commercial Aircraft Support Systems Contents
    CHAPTER 7 Technology Transfers in Commercial Aircraft Support Systems Contents Page INTRODUCTION . 247 COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN THE MIDDLE EAST. 249 Commercial Aircraft Support Systems . 249 Commercial Aircraft Support Systems in the Middle East: Current Status . 251 Perspectives of Recipient Countries and Firms . 261 Perspectives of Supplier Countries and Firms . 275 Future Prospects . 291 IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. POLICY.. 292 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . 293 APPENDIX 7A: COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT SUPPORT SYSTEMS: SELECTED RECENT CONTRACTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST . 296 Tables Table No. Page 62. operating and Performance Statistics of Selected Airlines for 1982 . 253 63. Employee Totals for Representative Airlines, 1982 . 253 64. Airport Traffic Statistics for Representative Airports . 254 65. Commercial Airline Fleets in the Middle East in Servicers of March 1984 . 256 66. U.S. Exports of Commercial Transport Aircraft . 277 67. Typical Configurations and Purchase Prices of Various Competing Aircraft . 278 68. Ten Leading U.S. Exporting Companies. 280 69. Export-Import Bank Total Authorizations of Loans and Guarantees and Authorizations in Support of Aircraft Exports . 282 70. Export-Import Bank Summary of Commercial Jet Aircraft Authorizations for Loans and Guarantees . 283 7A-1. Selected Recent Commercial Aircraft Support Systems Contracts in Saudi Arabia . 296 7A-2. Major Projects and Sources of Investment, 1971-81: Commercial Aircraft Support in Egypt. 297 7A-3. Major Projects: Civil Aviation in Algeria, 1979-82 . 297 7A-4. Selected Recent Commercial Aircraft Support Systems Contracts in Iraq . 298 7A-5. Selected Commercial Aircraft Support Systems Contracts in Iran ....,... 299 Figure Figure No. Page 14. Aerospace Industry Funds for Research and Development .
    [Show full text]
  • Aviation Regulatory Update Digest
    January 2018 AVIATION REGULATORY UPDATE DELTA PREVAILS OVER DOT ENFORCEMENT OFFICE IN DISPUTED CONSENT ORDER CASE A DOT Administrative Law Judge recently issued an order in favor of Delta’s challenge of a DOT Notice of Enforcement Proceeding and Proposed Assessment of Civil Penalties for the carrier’s alleged violation of DOT’s codeshare disclosure rule (14 C.F.R. 257.5(b)), the prohibition against unfair and deceptive trade practices (49 U.S.C. § 41712(c)), and the violation of a prior cease and desist order that prohibited Delta from failing to comply with the Department’s codeshare disclosure requirements. The proposed civil penalty was for $660,000. Delta refused to pay the penalty, and DOT filed a formal enforcement complaint under 14 C.F.R. Part 302. This is quite unusual as most carriers choose to follow the consent order process rather than risk formal litigation with DOT. The penalty resulted from a lengthy investigation by DOT’s enforcement office, during which DOT analysts called the Delta reservations line, pretending to be passengers interested in booking one‐way flights on a codeshare partner. If the DL reservation agent failed to disclose that the flight was operated by a codeshare partner, DOT noted a violation even though no tickets were purchased. Delta argued, and the ALJ agreed, that the applicable statute and regulation specify ticket purchase or booking as the triggering event for codeshare disclosure. Because there were no tickets purchased during DOT’s investigation, the ALJ determined that Delta’s actions could not have violated the codeshare disclosure rule and thus the penalty was improper.
    [Show full text]
  • Airlines at Frankfurt Airport Valid from October 25Th, 2020
    Terminal-Information: Airlines at Frankfurt Airport Valid from October 25th, 2020 Airline Code Terminal Hall Night-before Check-in A Aegean Airlines A3 B Aer Lingus EI Aeroflot SU B Air Algérie AH C Air Astana KC B Air Cairo SM C Air Canada AC B Air China CA B Air Dolomiti EN A Air Europa UX C Air France AF B Air India AI B Air Malta KM C Air Moldova MLD C Air Namibia SW Air Serbia JU C airBaltic BT B Alitalia AZ C American Airlines AA B ANA NH B Asiana Airlines OZ C Austrian Airlines OS A B Bamboo Airways QH Belavia B2 B British Airways BA B Bulgaria Air FB C 1 Airline Code Terminal Hall Night-before Check-in C Cathay Pacific CX B China Airlines CI C China Eastern Airlines MU C China Southern Airlines CZ Condor DE C Corendon Airlines XC C Croatia Airlines OU A CSA Czech Airlines OK B D Delta DL B E Egypt Air MS A EL AL LY C Emirates EK C Ethiopian Airlines ET B Etihad Airways EY B Eurowings (außer Pristina) EW A Eurowings (nur Pristina) EW C F Finnair AY B G Gulf Air GF B H Holiday Europe 5Q C I Iberia IB C Icelandair FI C Iran Air IR C 2 Airline Code Terminal Hall Night-before Check-in Iraqi Airways IA B J JAL Japan Airlines JL B K KLM Royal Dutch Airlines KL B Korean Air KE B Kuwait Airways KU L LATAM Airlines LA C LOT Polish Airlines LO A Lufthansa LH A M MEA Middle East Airlines ME B MIAT Mongolian Airlines OM B Montenegro Airlines YM B N Nouvelair LBT C O Oman Air WY C P Pegasus Airlines PC C Q Qatar Airways QR C R Royal Air Maroc AT C Royal Jordanien Airlines RJ C Ryanair RJ C 3 Airline Code Terminal Hall Night-before Check-in S SAS Scandinavian Airlines SK A Saudia SV B Singapore Airlines SQ C Somon Air SZ B South African Airways SA B Sri Lankan Airlines UL SunExpress XQ C SWISS LX A T TAP Air Portugal TP B TAROM RO C Thai Airways International TG C TUI Fly X3 B Tunis Air TU B Turkish Airlines TK B Turkmenistan Airlines TUA U United Airlines UA B Uzbekistan Airways HY C V Vietnam Airlines VN 4 .
    [Show full text]
  • Iran-Related Civil Aviation Industry Advisory Issued
    Iran-Related Civil Aviation Industry Advisory Issued: July 23, 2019 Subject: Deceptive Practices by Iran with respect to the Civil Aviation Industry The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is issuing this Advisory to highlight for the civil aviation industry, including parties providing services to the industry, Iran’s deceptive practices with respect to aviation matters. Industry parties who engage in or support unauthorized transfers of U.S.-origin aircraft or related goods, technology, or services to Iran, or who conduct business with designated Iranian airlines, risk OFAC enforcement or sanctions actions. In particular, both U.S. and non-U.S. persons1 operating in the civil aviation industry face potential civil and criminal consequences for violating OFAC’s sanctions programs, including by engaging in unauthorized transfers of U.S.-origin aircraft or related goods, technology, or services to Iran. Additionally, non-U.S. persons could be designated or made subject to other sanctions actions for engaging in unauthorized activities with persons designated in connection with Iran’s proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, support for international terrorism, or human rights abuses (collectively, “designated Iran-related persons”)—including, as of the date of this Advisory: Mahan Air, Caspian Air, Meraj Air, Pouya Air, Dena Airways, Al-Naser Airlines, Syrian Air, Dart Airlines, Khors Aircompany, Kyrgyz Trans Avia, Qeshm Fars Air, and UM Air—as well as any Iranian individual or entity on OFAC’s
    [Show full text]
  • Should Boeing and Airbus Sell Planes to Iran Air?
    MEMORANDUM Should Boeing and Airbus sell planes to Iran Air? Iran Air and Mahan Air still ferrying militants and weapons to support Syria’s Bashar Assad At least 242 flights from Iran to Syria since the JCPOA commenced November 23, 2016 Executive Summary Earlier this year, Boeing and Iran Air announced a deal for the sale of 100 Boeing planes to the Iranian airline. In addition, Airbus had inked a deal for an additional 118 planes. On November 22, Airbus reported that it had received U.S. government backing for the export of these planes. The export license was granted by the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control, and allows Airbus to deliver more than $20 billion worth of jets to Iran Air. This follows initial licenses in September by the U.S. government to Boeing and Airbus to deliver jetliners to Iran Air. Iran Air was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department on June 23, 2011 for “providing material support and services to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL).” MODAFL is designated under Executive Order 13382 for its proliferation activities.” Treasury stated that “commercial Iran Air flights have been used to transport missile or rocket components to Syria.” Treasury stated that “Iran Air has shipped military-related equipment on behalf of the IRGC since 2006 … Iran Air shipped aircraft-related raw materials to a MODAFL-associated company, including titanium sheets, which have dual-use military applications and can be used in support of advanced weapons programs.” It also stated that “rockets or missiles have been transported via Iran Air passenger aircraft, and IRGC officers occasionally take control over Iran Air flights carrying special IRGC-related cargo.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Boeing and Airbus Sell Planes to Iran Air?
    Research Memo Should Boeing and Airbus sell planes to Iran Air? Iran Air and Mahan Air still ferrying militants and weapons to support Syria’s Bashar al-Assad At least 404 flights from Iran to Syria since the JCPOA commenced By Emanuele Ottolenghi January 17, 2017 In January 2016, Airbus inked a deal to sell 118 planes to Iran Air, the Islamic Republic’s flag carrier, and in June of that year, Boeing announced it had reached a deal for the sale of 100 aircraft as well. In September, the U.S. Department of the Treasury issued initial export licenses for both companies to deliver the jetliners. In November, Airbus received the official export license and just this week delivered its first plane to Iran Air. Treasury designated Iran Air on June 23, 2011 for “providing material support and services to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL).” MODAFL is itself designated under Executive Order 13382 for its proliferation activities. Treasury also stated that “commercial Iran Air flights have been used to transport missile or rocket components to Syria.”1 “Iran Air has shipped military-related equipment on behalf of the IRGC since 2006,” the Treasury statement said, adding, that it has “shipped aircraft-related raw materials to a MODAFL-associated company, including titanium sheets, which have dual-use military applications and can be used in support of advanced weapons programs.” It also stated that “rockets or missiles have been transported via Iran Air passenger aircraft, and IRGC officers occasionally take control over Iran Air flights carrying special IRGC-related cargo.
    [Show full text]
  • Quality Management System Assigned Flight Numbers Fi 13-03/00
    QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ASSIGNED FLIGHT NUMBERS FI 13-03/00 THREE LETTER DESIGNATOR NR FLT NR AIRCRAFT OPERATING AGENCY TYPE OF FLT ACCORDING DOC 8585 1 1900-1949 ATR ATRAK AIRLINES DOM 2 2902-2903 ATR ATRAK AIRLINES INTL 3 012-049 CPN CASPIAN AIRLINES DOM 4 4900-4939 CPN CASPIAN AIRLINES DOM 5 6900-6999 CPN CASPIAN AIRLINES DOM 6 7900-7969 CPN CASPIAN AIRLINES INTL 7 7970-7981 CPN CASPIAN AIRLINES INTL 8 9070-9073 CPN CASPIAN AIRLINES POSITIONING * 9 3200-3239 DAI DENA AIRWAYS DOM 10 7400-7425 FPI FLY PERSIA (PERSIA) DOM 11 6400-6403 FPI FLY PERSIA (PERSIA) INTL 12 9170-9173 FPI FLY PERSIA (PERSIA) POSITIONING * 13 8500-8599 IHC IRAN HELICOPTER CO. (HELIRAN) DOM 14 200-499 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) DOM 15 3300-3599 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) DOM 16 650-799 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) INTL 17 800-815 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) INTL 18 870-899 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) INTL 19 5300-5399 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) INTL 20 1500-1609 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) INTL(HAJJ) 21 9000-9003 IRA IRAN NATIONAL AIRLINES CORP.(IRAN AIR) POSITIONING * 22 900-999 IRB IRAN AIR TOURS CO. DOM 23 8000-8099 IRB IRAN AIR TOURS CO. DOM 24 9700-9719 IRB IRAN AIR TOURS CO. INTL 25 9080-9083 IRB IRAN AIR TOURS CO. POSITIONING * 26 600-649 IRC IRAN ASEMAN AIRLINE DOM 27 816-869 IRC IRAN ASEMAN AIRLINE DOM 28 3700-3999 IRC IRAN ASEMAN AIRLINE DOM 29 500-599 IRC IRAN ASEMAN AIRLINE INTL 30 6500-6599 IRC IRAN ASEMAN AIRLINE INTL 31 9010-9019 IRC IRAN ASEMAN
    [Show full text]
  • Why Iran Will Never Proceed with the Proposed Plane Purchases by Patrick Clawson
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 2664 Why Iran Will Never Proceed with the Proposed Plane Purchases by Patrick Clawson Jul 27, 2016 Also available in Arabic ABOUT THE AUTHORS Patrick Clawson Patrick Clawson is Morningstar senior fellow and director of research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Brief Analysis In deciding whether to formally prohibit plane sales that already seem commercially infeasible, Washington should consider one question: if the Islamic Republic is going to shoot itself in the foot, why refuse it the gun? n the continuing debate about the proposed Boeing and Airbus plane sales to Iran, the focus has been on whether I the United States will license the deals. Yet a more important question is whether Iran would ever proceed with the purchases if approved. THE DEALS MAKE LITTLE SENSE FOR IRAN AIR C urrently, Iran's airlines have a total of about 150 large planes, with more than two-thirds of them in the hands of private airlines rather than the state-run Iran Air. Earlier this year, Iran Air signed three agreements to purchase about 260 planes: a firm contract with ATR for 20 turboprops, a preliminary agreement with Airbus for 118 planes, and a preliminary agreement with Boeing for about the same number. The airline currently has 22 Airbus planes, all of which were certified by the EU's Air Safety Committee for flights to Europe as of June 16. Assuming it retires its two Boeing 747s and fifteen Fokker-100s not certified for European flight, Iran Air would have about 280 planes if the agreements go through as announced.
    [Show full text]