Flight Safety Information

Quarterly Journal Third Quarter 2003

Inside

ASRS

ASAP

The NTSB

Major Incidents

Major Accidents

Reporting Methods: ASRS / ASAP

Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

FSI Journal Contents Third Quarter 2003 Reporting Methods: ASRS / ASAP

Page Flight Safety Information Journal 3 ASRS Published by www.FSInfo.org 5 ASAP Managing Editor Curt Lewis, PE, CSP 7 The NTSB [email protected]

11 Major Incidents Associate Editor Steven Alcala 13 Major Accidents [email protected]

Webmaster Randy Engberg [email protected]

About the Picture: The Boeing 747 rolled into a drainage ditch and toppled for- ward causing severe damage to the nose section.

2 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Reporting Systems Aviation Safety Reporting Systems (ASRS)

What is ASRS? Each report is read, analyzed, and hazards or haz- ardous situations are identified. Once the hazards The Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) was are identified, information is then forward to the established in 1975 in a joint effort between NASA, respective organizations who may then review the who would administer the program, and the FAA, information and take any necessary corrective ac- the original financial supporters of the program. The tions. main purpose of the ASRS is to collect, analyze, and respond to voluntarily submitted aviation safety in- At the same time, analysts will classify the incident cident reports in order to lessen the likelihood of report by the type of hazard presented, and any aviation accidents. According to the NASA ASRS causes, recommendations, or other observations website, the data is used to: will be noted. The de-identified incident report will then be incorporated into the ASRS database. • Identify deficiencies and discrepancies in the National Aviation System (NAS) so that these What about confidentiality? can be remedied by appropriate authorities. • Support policy formulation and planning for, and All ASRS reports are held in strict confidence and improvements to, the NAS. will be de-identified provided there the incident did • Strengthen the foundation of aviation human not involve criminal actions or meets the NTSB’s factors safety research. This is particularly im- definition of an accident. As long as an incident is portant since it is generally conceded that over reported within 10 days of occurrence, the ASRS two-thirds of all aviation accidents and incidents will not be used against a reporter in regards to en- have their roots in human performance errors. forcement actions. The reporter will also be pro- vided with protection against any civil penalties as How does it work? well as any license suspension or revocations. The only exception to this exists when there is an inten- Pilots, air traffic controllers, flight attendants, me- tional violation of the FARs; in this case a person chanics, ground personnel, and others involved in will not be immune from a civil penalty or certificate aviation operations submit reports to the ASRS suspension if the FAA learns of the violation from when they are involved in, or observe, an incident or another source. situation in which aviation safety was compromised; all submissions are voluntary.

3 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

ASRS - Continued How does ASRS release its findings? ASRS Links

NASA releases generalized information regarding NASA’s ASRS homepage: ASRS reports as well as other research studies in http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov several different forms. ASRS reporting forms: • Callback is a monthly safety bulletin that sum- http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/forms_nf.htm marizes ASRS research studies and related safety information. Additional ASRS reports are FAA policies regarding ASRS can be found via released along with any supporting information Advisory Circular (AC) 00-46C, FAR 91.25, and in • ASRS Directline is a safety bulletin that is peri- the Facility Operations and Administration Hand- odically published for major organizations who book (7210.3M). tend to operate more complex aircraft. - or - visit the FAA webpage at: • When ASRS analysts note any hazardous situa- http://www.faa.gov tions resulting from a report, the analyst may send an alerting message directly to an operator of authority so that corrective actions may be taken. • NASA also keeps a database of all ASRS reports; the reports are classified into certain subject areas for easier searches. Database searches may be requested by persons wanting to obtain information on certain areas of study relating to aviation safety.

ASRS Today

NASA’s ASRS has become a foundation and inspira- tion to a wide variety of anonymous safety reporting systems including the UK’s Confidential Human Factors Incident Reporting System Programme (CHIRP). The ASRS has received over 300,000 re- ports over the years and has acted on every one. As long as reports submitted, ASRS will continue to be effective in pointing out deficiencies within our na- tional aviation program as well as proposing any new actions that will remediate these deficiencies.

4 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Aviation Safety Action Programs (ASAP) What is ASAP? • the event involves criminal actions, substance abuse, controlled substance abuse, or falsifica- The Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) is a pro- tion of data. gram designed to give those involved in flight op- • the submitter does not send in the report within erations a method of reporting actual or potential 24 hours of becoming aware of the incident risks within daily operations without fear of legal, • the event involves an intentional disregard for regulatory, or disciplinary action. ASAP aims at en- safety. couraging air carrier and repair station employees • a consensus is not reached concerning the inci- to voluntarily report safety information that may be dent report. critical in identifying potential precursors to acci- dents. Under ASAP, safety issues are resolved If an event is excluded from ASAP, the event will be through corrective actions rather than through pun- referred to the FAA for possible enforcement action, ishment or discipline. Currently, only FAR Part 121 but the content of the report will not be used to ini- air carriers and FAR Part 145 domestic repair sta- tiate / support company discipline or as evidence tions are eligible to participate in ASAP. for FAA enforcement action.

How does it work? ASAP vs. ASRS

An employee involved in flight operations, such as a According to the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), pilot or mechanic, submits an event report concern- less than half of the reports included in NASA’s ing a possible violation of the FARs or any other Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) involved flight safety concern; the report must be filed events where an airmen’s certification might be within 24 hours of the time the employee became placed on the line. Although ASRS provides protec- aware of the situation. tion against civil penalties and license suspension or revocation, it did not provide protection from the The event report is then sent to an Event Review legally binding fact that the reporter might be guilty Committee (ERC) who will then determine whether of a violation of the FARs. Under ASAP, accepted or not to accept the report into ASAP. The three reports are usually closed administratively without a members of the ERC (management representative, finding of guilt. FAA representative, and another third party) must reach a consensus on actions to be taken concern- ASAP is an important addition to NASA’s ASRS pro- ing the ASAP incident report. gram, but it is not meant to serve as a replacement for the ASRS program. Although some programs will If a report is accepted into ASAP, then the ERC will automatically forward events covered under ASAP see that corrective actions are taken in order to pre- to ASRS, it is probably a good idea to file a separate vent the same situation from occurring in the fu- ASRS report. This way the incident reporter will also ture; the employee must also comply with the ERC be covered against any fines or threats of license / recommendations. Additionally, the FAA may re- certificate suspension. Just remember that ASRS spond with a letter of administrative action or a let- reports need to be filed within 10 days of the inci- ter of no action. Basically, all a letter of administra- dent while ASAP reports need to be filed within 24 tive action will either contain a warning or corrective hour s of becoming aware of the incident. action notice, but this record will not become a part of the employee’s permanent record.

A report will not be accepted into ASAP if:

• the submitter was not an acting employee for the organization.

5 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

ASAP Report Process Chart

This chart illustrates the process that an event filled to ASAP will go through. For more information on ASAP, see the links below.

ASAP Links:

Advisory Circular (AC) 120-66B

FAA ASAP website: http://www1.faa.gov/avr/afs/afs200/afs230/asap/index.cfm

6 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

The NTSB

An Introduction to the NTSB By: Curt Lewis, PE, CSP

The Overview: gate based on current emphasis issues or height- The National Transportation Safety Board ened public interest. Regardless of who does the (NTSB) is an independent government agency char- investigation, the NTSB retains the final authority tered with the responsibility to thoroughly investi- on reporting, classification, and determination of gate transportation incidents and accidents. Its pri- the probable cause. mary purpose is to determine the “Probable Cause” In the event of a major or high public inter- of these mishaps and to issue recommendations to est accident, a “Go Team” from Washington, D.C. help prevent further accidents. More specifically, will assemble and arrive at the site as soon as pos- the NTSB has the authority to investigate all avia- sible – usually within six hours. The closest NTSB tion, highway, rail, marine, and pipeline events. In field office representative will take charge of the our case, we will focus on their role in aviation. sight (after local fire fighters have declared it safe) The NTSB’s five senior managers or “Board until the Go Team arrives. The Go Team is made of Members” (See the NTSB organizational chart on specialists in the areas of Powerplants, Systems, page 10). are appointed by the President and con- Structures, Operations, Air Traffic Control, Weather, firmed by Congress. They serve for a specified term Survival Factors, and Human Performance. Cockpit and represent the people to ensure the NTSB fulfills Voice Recorders (CVR) and Digital Flight Data Re- its mandate. They oversee the agency’s efforts and corders (DFDR) groups are usually formed at the are the final authority in determining an accident’s NTSB laboratory in Washington, D.C. An investigator facts, conditions, circumstances, and probable in charge (IIC) will be appointed to coordinate all cause. Unlike the FAA, the NTSB has no regulatory aspects of the investigation. Typically a Board Mem- authority, and its recommendations focus on pro- ber or NTSB public affairs person will accompany moting transportation safety, not punitive certificate the Go Team to deal with the news media. action. The Board reports to Congress for funding and oversight. The Board’s headquarters is in Washington, D.C. with nine other regional offices in Chicago, Dal- las / Ft. Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, Seattle, Atlanta, Denver, Anchorage and Parsippany, NJ. Again, it has jurisdiction over all accidents and incidents. The NTSB investigates over 2,000 accidents annu- ally, including air carrier, air-taxi, in-flight collisions, general aviation, and certain government “public use” aircraft accidents. The Board also participates in major airline accidents overseas involving US car- riers or aircraft manufactured in the United States. Since the FAA has more agents in more lo- cations, the NTSB assigns, by standing letter of A Go Team was dispatched for the crash of USAir Flight 1016, agreement, up to 80% of all mishap investigations a Douglas DC-9-32 to the FAA. The local FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) generally investigates smaller Gen- Part of the investigation process include eral Aviation mishaps, but the NTSB field office gathering statements from witnesses and Crew- might write and process the report for database members. “Each crewmember, if physically able… purposes. The NTSB uses its own criteria to select shall attach a statement setting forth the facts, con- which accidents or incidents it chooses to investi- ditions, and circumstances relating to the accident

7 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

The NTSB (Continued) or incident as they appear to [him/her]. If the crew- and may last three to four days. The transcripts of member is incapacitated, [she/he] shall submit the the public hearing become part of the public record. statement as soon as [he/she] is physically able” Once the fact-finding phase of the investiga- (NTSB Part 830.15). Employees are assisted by the tion is complete, the accident investigation enters company and their union in producing these state- its final phase – analysis of the factual findings. The ments. analysis of the investigation results in what is Not only can a crew member expect to pro- termed “the probable cause of the accident.” A vide a written account of what transpired, but inter- draft accident report for major investigations is then views are routinely conducted as part of the fact- presented to the full five-member Board for discus- finding mission. If an employee is involved in an sion and approval at a public meeting in Washing- event that the NTSB investigates, that employee ton. The entire process from accident to final report may be required to remain at the scene. Similar to takes anywhere from nine to twelve months. the written statements, the company and the union would help the employee through this process. Definitions: Although the purpose of the investigation process is to uncover the facts surrounding the ac- Aircraft Accident - an occurrence associated with cident and not to place blame, any crewmember the operation of an aircraft which takes place be- has the right to representation under NTSB Part tween the time any person boards the aircraft with 831.7 “any person interviewed by an authorized the intention of flight and all such persons have dis- representative of the Board during the field investi- embarked and in which any person suffers death or gation, regardless of the form of interview, has the serious injury, or in which the aircraft receives sub- right to be accompanied, represented, or advised stantial damage. by an attorney or non-attorney representative. The information collected is for use in the investigation and is not used by the Board to estab- lish liability. “Accident investigations are fact-finding proceedings with no formal issues and no adverse parties… and are not conducted for the purpose of determining the rights or liabilities of any person.” (NTSB Part 831.4). The most important product of the Safety Board is the recommendation. The NTSB issues safety recommendations as soon as a problem is Although no passengers or crew were injured, this picture identified, without necessarily waiting for an investi- illustrates an accident because the aircraft sustained sub- gation to be completed. In each recommendation, stantial damage due to the failure of the nose gear to extend. the Board designates the person or party expected Aircraft Incident - an occurrence other than an acci- to take action, describes the action the Board rec- dent, associated with the operation of an aircraft, ommends, and clearly states the safety needs to be which affects or could affect the safety of opera- satisfied. Although the Board’s recommendations tions. are not mandatory, Congress has required that the Department of Transportation (DOT) respond to Fatal Injury - any injury which results in death within each NTSB recommendation within 90 days. 30 days of the accident. The Board may decide to hold a public hear- ing to clarify accident information and to air in a public forum significant new safety information. An NTSB member presides over he hearing and wit- nesses provide testimony under oath. Hearings nor- mally convene for high public interest accidents

8 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

The NTSB (Continued)

Serious Injury - any injury which: Miscellaneous

1. Requires hospitalization for more than 48 Immediate NTSB notification is required for: hours A) Any aircraft accident as defined above. 2. Fracture of any bone (except fingers, toes, or B) Any of the following incidents: nose) 1. Flight control system malfunction 3. Causes severe hemorrhages, nerve, muscle, 2. Flight crew members injury / illness pro- or tendon damage hibiting performance of duties 4. Involves any internal organ 3. Failure of structural components of tur- 5. 2nd or 3rd degree burns or any burn affect- bine engine excluding compressor and ing more than 5% of the body surface turbine blades and vanes. 4. Inflight fire 5. Aircraft collision in flight 6. Damage to property (other than aircraft) estimated at more than $25,000 (material and labor). 7. Inflight failure of electrical system, or hy- draulic system (requiring reliance on sole system for flight controls) 8. Sustained loss of thrust by two or more This Airbus A319 was involved in an incident damaging the engines wingtip (and was subsequently removed). The event was writ- 9. An evacuation of an aircraft in which an ten up as an “Aircraft incident” because the damage did not emergency egress system is used fit into the category of “substantial damage.” C) An aircraft is overdue and believed to have Substantial Damage – damage or failure which ad- been involved in an accident. versely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and which Aviation Issues: would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component. Single engine failure or damage limited to that engine, damage to landing gear, wheels , tires, flaps, brakes, or wingtips are not considered “substantial damage.” AIRPORT RUNWAY INCURSIONS Provide safer control for aircraft on the ground

AIRFRAME STRUCTURAL ICING Revise icing criteria and certification testing re- quirements; research and develop onboard ice pro- tection and detection systems

EXPLOSIVES MIXTURES IN FUEL TANKS ON TRANS- The damage to this MD-80 is considered substantial because PORT CATEGORY AIRCRAFT of the effects the damage had on the structural strength, per- Require preclusion of operation of transport cate- formance, and flight characteristics. The damage to this par- gory aircraft with explosive fuel-air mixture in fuel ticular aircraft was considered beyond economic repair. tanks.

9 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

The NTSB (Continued)

NTSB Organizational Chart

Conclusion / Links:

The mission of the NTSB is to prevent accidents from happening. To achieve this fundamental goal, each investigation must be conducted with orderly thoroughness so that a proper assessment of prob- able cause can be made.

For more information, please visit the NTSB’s web- site at: http://www.ntsb.gov

10 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Major Incidents

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

08/02 Buffalo Airways DC-4 Ulu mine strip, Canada 0 - 0 - 2

The DC-4 crash-landed short of the Ulu min landing strip while delivering a load of fuel. Neither of the oc- cupants were injured.

08/13 Comair CRJ-600 Raleigh Durham, NC 0 - 0 - 23

On August 13, 2003, at 1505 eastern daylight time, a CRJ-600 operating as Comair flight 5374 (N451CA), had smoke in the cockpit shortly after takeoff from the Charleston International Airport. The airplane sustained minor dam- age. About 1450 enroute to LaGuardia, the crew reported hearing a loud thump, the airplane yawed, the autopilot disengaged, and all six flight instru- ment and navigational screens went blank. The crew stated power was re- stored almost immediately, and all six screens illuminated. The first officer reported seeing smoke in the cabin. Both flight crewmembers immediately donned their oxygen masks and declared an emergency. The flight diverted to Raleigh Durham International Airport, in Raleigh, North Carolina, and landed without further incident.

08/17 Air Canada Airbus A340-300 Honolulu, Hawaii 0 - 0 - 185

On August 17, 2003, at 0316 Hawaiian standard time, an Airbus Industrie A340-300 transport category airplane, Canadian registration CFYKX, sus- tained minor damage when its center landing gear tires shredded on takeoff roll from the Honolulu International Airport, Honolulu, Hawaii. The interna- tional flight departed Honolulu and was destined for Sydney, Australia. The flight crew contacted their dispatch, informed them of the problem, and elected to return to Honolulu. The center landing gear sustained damage to its left and right wheels, the left aft door retraction arm, and the aft center door retraction arms. Numerous belly panels were punctured and numerous panel supports were bent.

08/19 Air Algerie Boeing 737 Oran, Algeria 0 - 0 - ?

The 737, on a flight from Algiers to Lille via Oran, was hijacked by a 55-year old man after takeoff from Algiers. He threatened the crew with what he claimed was a grenade and demanded to be flown to Ge- neva. The crew convinced him that a stop at Oran was necessary to refuel. At Oran the hijacker surren- dered to security services.

11 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

08/23 Great Lakes Aviation Beech 1900D Denver, CO 0 - 0 - 16

On August 23, 2003, at 1919 mountain daylight time, a Beech 1900D, N192GL, operated as Great Lakes Air Flight 7079 and piloted by an airline transport pilot, sustained substantial damage when during initial climb to cruise altitude, the air- plane's main cabin air stair door opened in flight. The regularly scheduled domes- tic air passenger flight was being conducted on an instrument flight rules flight plan from Denver, Colorado, to Santa Fe, New Mexico. Cabin pressure was subse- quently lost. The crew declared an emergency, and returned to and made an un- eventful landing at Denver, Colorado. The pilot, first officer, and 14 passengers on board reported no injuries.

08/24 American Airlines Boeing 757-223 Miami, FL 0 - 0 - 169

On August 24, 2003, about 1110 eastern daylight time, a Boeing 757-223, N609AA, operated by American Airlines Inc. as flight 1163, had a failure of the left main landing gear truck beam, while taxiing for takeoff at Miami Interna- tional Airport, Miami, Florida. The airplane received minor damage. The flight was en route to Chicago, Illinois.

12 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Major Accidents

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

07/06 Cielos del Peru DC-10-30 Curitiba-Afonso 0 - 0 - 4 Pena Airport, Brazil The DC-10 freighter skidded off Runway 33, which was extremely wet, on landing and came to rest 300m past the end of the runway. The airplane sustained damage to the number 1 engine and main landing gear after colliding with ILS antennas.

07/08 Sudan Airways Boeing 737-2J8C(A) Port Sudan, Sudan 1 - 116 - 117

The Boeing 737-200, on a scheduled passenger flight from Port Sudan to the capital city of Khartoum, crashed several minutes after takeoff following a report of trouble from the Captain to Air Traffic Control. One passenger, a two-year-old boy, survived the accident and is now listed in good condition.

07/11 Air Memphis Boeing 707 Dhaka-Zia 0 - 0 - 5 Intl Airport, Bangladesh

The Boeing 707, operating on a flight for Air Memphis, started it's takeoff roll on runway 14 until an unre- ported source forced the crew to abort the takeoff. The airplane overran the 3200m long runway by approx 450m. The nose gear collapsed and the 707 came to rest in a marsh.

07/13 Rubian and Duran C.A. Let 410-UVP-E San Cristobal, Venezuela ? - 4 - 8

The Let 410 departed La Carlota at 11.41 for a flight to San Cristobal. Near San Cristobal, the airplane crashed into a mountain in the Parque Nacional del "Chorro del Indio", close to La Gama.

07/13 Air Sunshine Cessna 402C Treasure Cay, Bahamas 8 - 2 - 10

On July 13, 2003, about 1530 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 402C, N314AB, registered to Tropical In- ternational Airlines Inc., and operated by Air Sunshine Inc., as Air Sunshine flight 502, impacted with the water 6 miles west of Treasure Cay, Bahamas. The airplane received substantial damage, and sank in 15 to 30 feet of water. The flight had departed Fort Lauderdale, Florida, the same day about 1425. All the passengers evacuated the airplane before it sank. They were in the water about 2 hours before a United States Coast Guard helicopter rescued them.

13 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

07/16 Air Spray Lockheed ElectraCranbrook Airport, BC 0 - 2 - 2 L-188A

Several small forest fires had erupted near Cranbrook and the Air Spray Electra was called in to fight the fires. Just after dumping its load of flame-retardant materials, the aircraft crashed into the forest. The aircraft involved was Tanker 86 - C-GFQA.

07/17 United Airlines Boeing 777-200 Chicago, IL 1 - 0 - 270

On July 17, 2003, about 1545 central daylight time a Boeing 777-222, N779UA, operated as United Airlines flight 958 from Denver to Chicago, pi- loted by an airline transport rated captain and copilot, sustained a serious in- flight injury to one passenger when the flight encountered turbulence near Janesville, Illinois. The flight originated from Denver International Airport, Den- ver, Colorado, at 1246 mountain daylight time and was enroute to Chicago O'Hare International Airport (ORD), Chicago, Illinois at the time of the accident. The flight landed at ORD at 1556.

07/19 Ryan Blake Swearingen SA.226TC Mount Kenya, Kenya 0 - 14 - 14 Air Charter Metro II

The Swearingen Metro plane, carrying 12 American tourists and two South Afri- can crew members, departed Nairobi-Wilson Airport at 15.58h for a flight to the Samburu national park. The flight plan was to allow the crew to fly round Mount Kenya before landing at a private airstrip in the game park. The air- plane crashed into the eastern slope of Point Lenana (16,450 feet), which is the third highest peak of Mount Kenya. The crash site was located approx. 450ft below the snow-capped top. Debris scattered into the adjacent valleys of the peak, and then burnt throughout the night.

07/22 Northwest Airlines Boeing 757-200 Norfolk, Virginia 3 - 0 - 113

On July 22, 2003, about 1400 eastern daylight time, a Boeing 757-251, N504US, operated by Northwest Airlines Inc. as flight 1142, was not damaged during an encounter with turbulence, while climbing near Wadsworth, Ohio. Two certificated airline transport pilots, one flight attendant, and 107 passen- gers were not injured. Two flight attendants sustained minor injuries, and one flight attendant sustained a serious injury. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight that departed Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Air- port (DTW), Detroit, Michigan; destined for Baltimore-Washington International Airport (BWI), Baltimore, Maryland. An instrument flight rules flight plan was filed for the scheduled air carrier flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 121.

14 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

07/22 Tango Corp. Cessna 525 Citation Jet Oak Harbor, WA 0 - 0 - 2

About 15 minutes after takeoff from Victoria B.C., while at FL330, the pilot declared an emergency and wanted to divert to the closest airfield. The airplane did not make it and the pilot ditched the plane in the water at Penns Cove, WA, 200 yards from shore. Both occupants swam ashore and were reportedly unin- jured.

07/23 Petroforte Bras. Cessna 551 Sorocaba, Brazil ? - 1 - 3 Petroleo Ltda Citation II/SP

The Citation crashed into a street in the Vila Helena quarter, while approaching Sorocaba Airport. The air- plane collided with four houses and three vehicles and ended up in a small field.

08/01 Air Tran Boeing 717-200 Atlanta, GA 0 - 0 - 118

On August 1, 2003, at 1510 eastern daylight time, a Boeing 717-200, N970AT, registered to Airtran Airways Inc., operating as flight 460, collided with a baggage cart during powerback at Hartsfield International Airport, At- lanta, Georgia. The airplane sustained substantial damage. The flight was originating from Hartsfield International Airport, Atlanta, Georgia at the time of the accident. During a power-back maneuver, a baggage cart driver drove into the path of the airplane. The last container on the baggage cart collided with the left aft section of the wing. Examination of the left wing revealed, the tail- ing edge of the aileron and wingtip was buckled.

08/03 American Airlines MD-82 Charlotte, NC 1 - 0 - 132

On August 3, 2003, about 2207 eastern daylight time, a McDonnell Doug- las MD-82, N7527A operated by American Airlines, Inc., encountered tur- bulence in the vicinity of Charlotte, North Carolina. One passenger received serious injuries. The flight originated out of New York LaGuardia and was enroute to Tampa. While at an altitude of 31,000 feet, turbulence was en- countered and one passenger in a lavatory was injured. The flight landed at Tampa International Airport, Tampa, Florida, about 2230, and after exami- nation the passenger was determined to have suffered a serious injury.

08/04 JetPro Learjet 35A Groton, CT 0 - 2 - 2

The Learjet was approaching runway 23 when it struck a couple of houses, cart wheeled into the board- walk and crashed into a river, 0,5 mile short of the runway.

15 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

08/06 Lufthansa Airbus A340-300 Houston, TX 45 - 0 - 256

On August 6, 2003, approximately 2057 universal time coordinated (UTC), an Airbus A340-300 transport airplane, German registration D-AIGK, operating as Lufthansa Flight 440, encountered severe turbulence during cruise flight at flight level 310. Three cabin crew members and 40 passengers received minor injures, and 2 passengers received serious injuries. The 3 flight crew members, 8 cabin crew members, and 202 passengers were not injured. The flight origi- nated at Frankfurt, Germany, at 1218 UTC. The airplane sustained minor dam- age. The airplane landed at KIAH and proceeded without delay to terminal D gate 12. Immediate medical assistance was received by the injured, and they were transported to area hospitals. The FAA inspectors and Lufthansa mainte- nance team, who responded to the accident site, found ceiling panel damage throughout the cabin. The integrity of the pressure vessel was not found compro- mised.

08/07 Midwest Airlines Douglas DC-9-81 Greeley, CO 5 - 0 - 118

On August 7, 2003, at 1449 mountain daylight time, a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-81, N814ME, encountered severe turbulence 5 miles north of Gill VOR, Greeley, Colorado. Two flight attendants were seriously injured and 3 passengers received minor injuries. The flight originated from San Francisco, California, at approximately 1255. According to the pilot, during cruise flight at 33,000 feet, the aircraft encountered moderate to severe turbulence. The flight was deviating to the south of course to avoid weather ob- served on radar.

08/08 SASCA Cessna 208B Caravan Tacomita, Venezuela ? - 0 - 16

The Cessna was flying tourists to Canaima, when it developed engine problems en route. The pilot decided to divert to Tocomita. The Grand Caravan crashed in trees, just 100 metres short of the Tocomita runway.

08/14 EasyJet Boeing 737-300 Geneva, Switzerland 0 - 0 - ?

On August 14, 2003, a Boeing 737-300, registered HB-III, operating as EasyJet Flight 903 service to London, sustained substantial damage due to hail. The aircraft quickly returned to Geneva where passengers where unloaded via stairs. Hail damage was visible to various parts of the aircraft including the nose, cockpit windows, engines, leading edges of the main wings as well as horizontal stabilizer as well as tail.

16 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

08/16 American Trans Air Boeing 737-800 Wooster, Ohio 1 - 0 - 135

On August 16, 2003, about 1340 eastern daylight time, a Boeing 737-800, N329TZ, operated by American Trans Air Inc., as flight 820, was not damaged after it encountered turbulence during decent over Wooster, Ohio. There were no injuries to the 2 certificated airline transport pilots, 3 flight attendants, and 129 passengers; however, 1 flight attendant was seriously injured. The flight, originat- ing from Cancun, Mexico, continued as scheduled to the Cleveland-Hopkins Inter- national Airport.

08/19 Midwest Connect Beech 1900D Muskegon, Michigan 0 - 0 - 12

On August 19, 2003, at 2315 eastern daylight time, a Beech 1900D, N79SK, operated by Skyway Air- lines as flight 1411, sustained substantial damage during an on-ground collision with a deer while land- ing on runway 06 (6,501 feet by 150 feet, asphalt) at the Muskegon County Airport (MKG). The flight de- parted from General Mitchell International Airport (MKE), Milwaukee, Wisconsin, at 2240. According to a written statement provided by Skyway Airlines (Midwest Connect), during the landing rollout two deer crossed the runway and the airplane impacted one of the deer. The deer collided with the left propeller, causing substantial damage to the left engine nacelle firewall and supporting structure.

08/24 Tropical Airways Let 410UVP-E Cap Haitien, Haiti 0 - 21 - 21

The aircraft departed Cap Haitien for a flight to Port de Paix. Shortly after takeoff, eyewitnesses reported seeing smoke coming from the aircraft's forward door. The aircraft then crashed and burned in a sugar cane field.

08/26 Colgan Air Beechcraft B1900D Hayannis, Massachusetts 0 - 2 - 2

The aircraft, operating for US Airways Express, and with only the Captain and First Officer aboard, departed Hyannis for a repositioning flight to Albany, New York. Shortly after takeoff, witnesses reported seeing the plane flying low and erratically over the Atlantic Ocean. The Beechcraft impacted the water in an extreme nose- down attitude at 3:38pm local time.

09/02 American Airlines MD-82 Jamaica, NY 0 - 0 - 138

On September 2, 2003, about 1139 eastern daylight time, a McDonnell Douglas DC-9-82 (MD-82), N454AA, operated by American Airlines as flight 1048, was substantially damaged during an emergency landing at the John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), Jamaica, New York, after the flightcrew was unable to extend the nose landing gear. The 2 flightcrew members, 3 flight attendants, and 133 passen- gers were not injured. (EWR), Newark, New Jersey.

17 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

Date Operator Aircraft Type Location Injured-Fatal-Onboard

09/04 American Airlines Fokker F100 Flushing, NY 0 - 0 - 38

On September 4, 2003, at 0624 eastern daylight time, a Fokker F.28 Mk 0100, N1450A, operated by American Airlines as flight 549, was substan- tially damaged by a flock of birds during the initial climb after takeoff from La Guardia Airport (LGA), Flushing, New York. There were no injuries to the 2 certificated airline transport pilots, 2 flight attendants, or 34 passengers. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the scheduled, domestic pas- senger flight, destined for Midway Airport (MDW), Chicago, Illinois.

09/12 Northwest Airlines DC-9-51 Norfolk, Virginia 0 - 0 (1) - 41

On September 12, 2003, about 1930 eastern daylight time, a McDonnell Doug- las DC-9-51, N776NC, operated by Northwest Airlines as flight 1569, received minor damage when it was struck by a tug while standing, at the Norfolk Inter- national Airport (ORF), Norfolk, Virginia. The 2 flightcrew members, 3 flight at- tendants, and 36 passengers were not injured; however, the tug driver was fa- tally injured. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and an instru- ment flight rules flight plan had been filed for the flight that was destined for the Memphis International Airport (MEM), Memphis, Tennessee.

18 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

19 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003

20 Flight Safety Information Journal Third Quarter 2003