Silkair Flight MI 185 Crash Victim Identification
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Usair Flight 427
SUBMISSION OF THE AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION TO THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD REGARDING THE ACCIDENT INVOLVING USAIR FLIGHT 427 NEAR PITTSBURGH, PA ON SEPTEMBER 8, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY II. B737 FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN a. Rudder Blowdown b. B737 Rudder Control System Certification c. B737 Flight Control Incidents d. FAA Critical Design Review Team e. NTSB Safety Recommendations and FAA Actions III. AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE a. Simulator Validation Testing b. Flight Kinematics Study IV. B737 LATERAL VS. DIRECTIONAL CONTROL AUTHORITY V. HUMAN PERFORMANCE a. Flightcrew General: Health and Background b. Flightcrew Psychological and Psychosocial Factual Information c. Crew Communications - Intra-cockpit d. Task-Related Speech e. Procedural Speech f. Non-Task-Related Speech g. Crew Communications - ATC h. Crew Interactions I. Observance of Sterile Cockpit Procedures j. Spatial Disorientation Studies k. Biomechanics Associated with Attempting to Move Blocked or Jammed Rudder Pedals l. Analysis of CVR - Speech and Physiological Aspects m. Speech Analysis Background n. Breathing Patterns and Muscular Exertion Background o. Crew Psychological Stress During the Upset Event p. Crew Physical Activity During the Upset Event q. In-depth Examination of Attempted Flight Control Manipulations r. Pilot Responses to Uncommanded Upsets s. Unintended Acceleration t. Rudder Pedal Damage u. Seat Track Damage VI. CONCLUSIONS VII. RECOMMENDATIONS Back to Top I. Executive Summary On September 8, 1994, USAir Flight 427, a Boeing 737-300, crashed while maneuvering to land at Pittsburgh International Airport. The airplane was being operated on an instrument flight plan under 14 CFR Part 121 on a regularly scheduled flight from Chicago, Illinois. -
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 -
National Transportation Safety Board Washington, Dc 20594 Aircraft
PB99-910401 ‘I NTSB/AAR-99/01 DCA94MA076 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT UNCONTROLLED DESCENT AND COLLISION WITH TERRAIN USAIR FLIGHT 427 BOEING 737-300, N513AU NEAR ALIQUIPPA, PENNSYLVANIA SEPTEMBER 8, 1994 6472A Abstract: This report explains the accident involving USAir flight 427, a Boeing 737-300, which entered an uncontrolled descent and impacted terrain near Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, on September 8, 1994. Safety issues in the report focused on Boeing 737 rudder malfunctions, including rudder reversals; the adequacy of the 737 rudder system design; unusual attitude training for air carrier pilots; and flight data recorder parameters. Safety recommendations concerning these issues were addressed to the Federal Aviation Administration. The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal Agency dedicated to promoting aviation, raiload, highway, marine, pipeline, and hazardous materials safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate transportation accidents, study transportation safety issues, and evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation. The Safety Board makes public its actions and decisions through accident reports, safety studies, special investigation reports, safety recommendations, and statistical reviews. Recent publications are available in their entirety at http://www.ntsb.gov/. Other information about available publications may also be obtained from the Web site or by contacting: National Transportation Safety Board Public Inquiries Section, RE-51 490 L’Enfant Plaza, East, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20594 Safety Board publications may be purchased, by individual copy or by subscription, from the National Technical Information Service. -
Optimal Aircraft Control Upset Recovery with and Without Component Failures
Proceedings of the American Control Conference Anchorage, AK May 8-10.2002 Optimal Aircraft Control Upset Recovery With and Without Component Failures Dean W. Sparks Daniel D. Moerder Guidance and Control Branch NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 2368 1-2 199 1 Introduction 2 Vehicle Model The aircraft on which this study closely adapted from a 6- degree-of-freedom simulation of Langley Research Center’s This paper treats the problem of recovering sustainable non- now-retired 737-100 research aircraft, documented in [ 1,2]. descending (safe) flight in a transport aircraft after one or more of its control effectors fail. Such recovery can be a The model assumes constant mass, rotating spherical Earth, challenging goal for many transport aircraft currently in the and U.S 1976 standard atmosphere [3] with no winds. The operational fleet for two reasons. First, they have very little airframe dynamics are expressed in body axes, and vehicle redundancy in their means of generating control forces and attitude is propagated using quaternions. moments. These aircraft have, as primary control surfaces, The vehicle’s control effectors are rudder, flaps, horizon- a single rudder and pairwise elevators and ailerodspoiler tal stabilizer, elevator, ailerodspoiler, and right and left en- units that provide yaw, pitch, and roll moments with suffi- gines. The aerodynamic and thrust forces are represented cient bandwidth to be used in stabilizing and maneuvering as tabular functions of these variables, along with aerody- the airframe. Beyond this, throttling the engines can pro- namic angles and airspeed or Mach number and altitude. vide additional moments, but on a much slower time scale. -
Approved DH Carrier List
Approved DH Carrier List Airline Country Class Aer Lingus Ireland Class 1 (Good) airberlin Germany Class 1 (Good) British Airways United Kingdom Class 1 (Good) Brussels Airlines Belgium Class 1 (Good) Cyprus Airways Cyprus Class 1 (Good) Delta Air Lines United States Class 1 (Good) Dragonair China Class 1 (Good) Etihad Airways United Arab Emirates Class 1 (Good) Eurowings (Lufthansa Regional) Germany Class 1 (Good) EVA Air Taiwan Class 1 (Good) Finnair Finland Class 1 (Good) Frontier Airlines United States Class 1 (Good) Germanwings Germany Class 1 (Good) Hawaiian Airlines United States Class 1 (Good) Horizon Air (Alaska Horizon) United States Class 1 (Good) Iberia Spain Class 1 (Good) Icelandair Iceland Class 1 (Good) Japan Airlines (JAL) Japan Class 1 (Good) JetBlue Airways United States Class 1 (Good) Jetstar Asia Singapore Class 1 (Good) Lufthansa Germany Class 1 (Good) SAS (Scandinavian Airlines System) Sweden Class 1 (Good) SilkAir - MI Singapore Class 1 (Good) Singapore Airlines Singapore Class 1 (Good) SkyWest Airlines United States Class 1 (Good) Southwest Airlines (AirTran Airways) United States Class 1 (Good) Swiss Switzerland Class 1 (Good) TAP Portugal Portugal Class 1 (Good) United Airlines United States Class 1 (Good) Virgin America United States Class 1 (Good) Virgin Atlantic Airways United Kingdom Class 1 (Good) Virgin Australia Australia Class 1 (Good) Air Canada Canada Class 2 (Adequate) Air China China Class 2 (Adequate) Air France France Class 2 (Adequate) Air Jamaica Jamaica Class 2 (Adequate) Air New Zealand New -
Before the U.S. Department of Transportation Washington, D.C
BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, D.C. Application of AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC OPENSKIES SAS IBERIA LÍNEAS AÉREAS DE ESPAÑA, S.A. Docket DOT-OST-2008-0252- FINNAIR OYJ AER LINGUS GROUP DAC under 49 U.S.C. §§ 41308 and 41309 for approval of and antitrust immunity for proposed joint business agreement JOINT MOTION TO AMEND ORDER 2010-7-8 FOR APPROVAL OF AND ANTITRUST IMMUNITY FOR AMENDED JOINT BUSINESS AGREEMENT Communications about this document should be addressed to: For American Airlines: For Aer Lingus, British Airways, and Stephen L. Johnson Iberia: Executive Vice President – Corporate Kenneth P. Quinn Affairs Jennifer E. Trock R. Bruce Wark Graham C. Keithley Vice President and Deputy General BAKER MCKENZIE LLP Counsel 815 Connecticut Ave. NW Robert A. Wirick Washington, DC 20006 Managing Director – Regulatory and [email protected] International Affairs [email protected] James K. Kaleigh [email protected] Senior Antitrust Attorney AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. Laurence Gourley 4333 Amon Carter Blvd. General Counsel Fort Worth, Texas 76155 AER LINGUS GROUP DESIGNATED [email protected] ACTIVITY COMPANY (DAC) [email protected] Dublin Airport [email protected] P.O. Box 180 Dublin, Ireland Daniel M. Wall Richard Mendles Michael G. Egge General Counsel, Americas Farrell J. Malone James B. Blaney LATHAM & WATKINS LLP Senior Counsel, Americas 555 11th St., NW BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC Washington, D.C. 20004 2 Park Avenue, Suite 1100 [email protected] New York, NY 10016 [email protected] [email protected] Antonio Pimentel Alliances Director For Finnair: IBERIA LÍNEAS AÉREAS DE ESPAÑA, Sami Sareleius S.A. -
Mental Health Services Provided in the Aftermath of Aviation Disasters
MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES PROVIDED IN THE AFTERMATH OF AVIATION DISASTERS A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Human Service Professions Widener University In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Psychology By William Christopher Rizzo Institute for Graduate Clinical Psychology June, 2003 2 COPYRIGHT BY WILLIAM CHRISTOPHER RIZZO JUNE 2003 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND DEDICATION I would like to acknowledge the support and assistance of my dissertation committee in completing this project: Dr. Beth Howlett (Chair), Dr. Clifford DeCato, Dr. Dennis Debiak, and Dr. Virginia Brabender (Reader). Without their guidance and careful editing, the quality of this work would not have been able to shine as brightly. I also want to acknowledge the support I received from Gail Dunham, president of the National Air Disaster Alliance/Foundation and friend, who showed her generosity by creating a space within NADA/F for this research to take place. Her tireless efforts to improve air safety have been recognized by many. To Beverly, my beautiful wife, I cannot say how grateful I am to have you and Nathan in my life. Your love and understanding during this seemingly endless process has at times been the sole driving force that helped me see it through. To many more happy days for all of us. To my family, you have always been there for me and encouraged me to do my best. Your support during this time has been invaluable, and you gave it freely even when this process interfered with us having time together. 4 This dissertation is dedicated to those whose lives have been forever changed by the tragedy of an aviation disaster. -
Aviation Accidents Aetiology from Catastrophe Theory Point of View
27TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE AERONAUTICAL SCIENCES AVIATION ACCIDENTS A ETIOLOGY FROM CATASTROPHE THEORY POINT OF VIEW Maciej Lasek *, Krzysztof Sibilski **,! , Józef Żurek ** *The State Commission of Aircraft Accidents Investigation, Warsaw, Poland, ** Air Force Institute of Technology, Warsaw, Poland !Faculty of Power and Mechanical Engineering, Wroclaw University of Technology, Wroclaw Poland Keywords : Theory of Catastrophe, Aircraft Accidents Reconstruction, Aviation Safety, Flight Dynamics Modeling and Simulation and simulations of specific occurrences. A very interesting work is treatise [15] containing Abstract reconstruction of a crash of Boeing 737-300 Human error is often cited as a major airliner no. N513AU belonging to USAir contributing factor or case of incidents and airlines (flight 427). The crash took place near accidents. Reason proposes a view that many Pittsburgh (the aeroplane fell near the town of th accidents are catalyzed by persons not present Aliquippa, Pennsylvania) on September 8 1994 at the time of the event. In fact, it is this source [79]. Official statement of the commission of of latent conditions that pose a most significant investigating aircraft crashes said that the direct threat to the safety of complex system. Another cause of the crash was uncontrolled descents 1 dimension to human error in aviation are the which lead to hitting the ground . Calkins active errors that can precipitate the alignment showed that the loss of control over the aircraft or trigger the latent conditions. The risk could have been caused by a vortex flowing off associated with aviation is a dynamic element the wings of a Boeing 747 airliner flying in that is affected by both latent conditions and front of N513AU aeroplane. -
Egyptair Transforms Operations and Mi- Grates Successfully to Amadeus
Amadeus Iran Newsletter Issue 28 > November 2006 Bulletin Travel Agents Newsletter EgyptAir transforms operations and mi- grates successfully to Amadeus Altea Customer Manage- ment Solution EgyptAir adopts the new generation IT platform to remove constraints of legacy systems and become fully e-ticket compliant PAGE 2 PAGE 3 Etihad Airways kicks off in Iran Amadeus helps its airline customers to generate billion euros in online revenues PAGE 4 Amadeus Non Air Products in Iran Amadeus,Europe’s number one travel company in R&D investment Readers’ Competition Amadeus Iran e-Newsletter EgyptAir transforms operations and migrates suc- cessfully to Amadeus Alt�é��������������������������������������a Customer Management Solution EgyptAir adopts the new generation IT platform to Frédéric Spagnou, Vice-President, Airline Business Group, Amadeus, remove constraints of legacy systems and become suggested that: “EgyptAir’s approach to IT modernisation should be regarded as a blueprint for other airlines that want to stay ahead. fully e-ticket compliant As one of the most successful mid-size carriers in the market today, EgyptAir has shown real leadership and vision in underpinning its Amadeus has announced that it has successfully migrated the commercial strategy on next generation technology.” complete reservation, inventory and departure control systems for EgyptAir, a pioneer founder of the International Air Transport Amadeus has a track record of on-time delivery of major airline IT Association and a leading carrier in the Middle East, to the Amadeus projects for over 150 airlines and seamless migration of customers Altéa Customer Management System (CMS). to Altéa CMS. Spagnou continued: “Delivering the complete Altéa CMS, in a short space of time, means EgyptAir is now very quickly The transition to Amadeus Altéa, completed in only nine months, able to handle the increased passenger numbers that will flow from is a major milestone in EgyptAir’s significant IT Modernisation its ambitious growth targets.” Program. -
Determination
Determination Application for minor variation of authorisations A91542 & A91543 lodged by Singapore Airlines Limited & Deutsche Lufthansa AG to include Scoot Tigerair Pte Ltd, a low cost carrier which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Singapore Airlines, in the alliance Authorisation number: AA60295-3 (formerly A91542 & A91543) Date: 27 September 2018 Commissioners: Sims Featherston Summary The ACCC has decided to vary authorisations A91542 & A91543 granted to Singapore Airlines Limited and Deutsche Lufthansa AG in relation to their alliance. The variation (Authorisation AA60295-3) is to include Scoot Tigerair Pte Ltd, a low cost carrier which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Singapore Airlines, in the alliance. Authorisation AA60295-3 will remain in effect until 10 December 2021. 1. The application for minor variation 1.1. On 16 August 2018, Singapore Airlines Limited and Deutsche Lufthansa AG (the Applicants) applied for a minor variation to authorisations A91542 & A91543 granted by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (the ACCC). 1.2. The ACCC granted authorisations A91542 & A91543 on 18 November 2016 until 10 December 2021. The authorisations enable Singapore Airlines Limited and Deutsche Lufthansa AG and some of their respective passenger airline subsidiaries, to coordinate their operations between Germany, Austria, Belgium and Switzerland (the Lufthansa home markets) and Singapore, Australia, Indonesia and Malaysia (the Singapore home markets), pursuant to a Joint Venture Framework Agreement (the JVF Agreement) and related agreements contemplated by the JVF Agreement (the alliance).1 1.3. The Applicants are seeking a variation to the authorisations to include Scoot Tigerair Pte Ltd (Scoot) in the alliance (Authorisation AA60295-3). At the time authorisation was granted Scoot was not operating any flights between the Lufthansa home markets and the Singapore home markets and therefore, was not included in the alliance. -
Network Planning Exclusive Insight, Powered by Data from the Flightglobal Portfolio 2015
NETWORK PLANNING Exclusive insight, powered by data from the Flightglobal portfolio 2015 Top 100 airlines African aviation focus World’s leading airports Infographics and analysis Visit us on booth N229 flightglobal.com NETWORK PLANNING 2015 CONTENTS ABOUT US 3 AIRLINES Airlines keep steady traffic pace 5 Top 100 passenger operations 6 Focus on African airlines 8 AIRPORTS The world’s top airports (traffic) 12 Top 10 African airports 14 Building African capacity 15 Airport analysis: focus on growth 16 The world’s top 20 airport groups (revenue) 17 Find out more at: flightglobal.com ABOUT US Flightglobal connects professionals to intelligence and data across aerospace, aircraft finance and air transport. Powered by the world’s most comprehensive fleets data, aircraft values and airline schedules, Flightglobal delivers intelligence, analysis and insight to drive the strategies of leading aviation companies, enabling them to generate growth, find new opportunities and make informed investment decisions. Flightglobal now includes Innovata, a leading source of airline schedules data covering more than 800 carriers worldwide, providing our customers with unparalleled schedules data. Visit us on booth N229 to find out more about us and to pick up a copy of Airline Business magazine, the leading journal for senior airline executives Flightglobal provides insight and analysis to drive growth: Analysis tools Flexible data feeds Mapping solutions New and ceased routes Schedule data Airline intelligence flightglobal.com Flightglobal | 3 FG-Dashboard.qxp_AmerAirlines-Advert-197x267-FINAL 08/09/2014 15:38 Page 1 NETWORK PLANNING 2015 From industry trends to detailed routes and airline data, Flightglobal can help you to build your growth strategy DASHBOARD AD Illustration shows conceptual data only Professionals in aviation and aerospace rely on Flightglobal to inform business opportunities in route development and market growth through its unique combination of fleets, aircraft schedules data, airline and traffic data, together with news, analysis and insights. -
Plating Carrier
Plating Carrier (one segment of the plating carrier Interline Carrier(s) Apollo Galileo Effective required unless otherwise noted) Core Core Date CO Continental Airlines 9W et Airways Yes Yes 11/3/06 NW Northwest Airlines UL Si Lankan Airlines Yes Yes 11/2/06 9W Jet Airways UA United Airlines Yes Yes 11/1/06 SK Scandinavian Airlines LX Swiss and/or SN Brussels Air Yes Yes 11/7/06 JK Spanair OZ Asiana Airlines Yes Yes 11/9/06 PG Bangkok Airways LY l Al Israel Airlines Yes Yes 11/9/06 FT Siem Reap Airways LY l Al Israel Airlines N/A Yes 11/9/06 NW Northwest Airlines SG Singapore Airlines Yes Yes 11/9/06 LA LAN Airlines RJ Royal Jordanian Yes Yes 11/9/06 MI Silkair PG Bangkok Airways and/or UA United Yes Yes 11/9/06 Airlines OZ Asiana Airlines AS Alaska Airlines Yes Yes 11/13/06 LY El Al Airlines BA British Airways Yes Yes 11/13/06 FT Siem Reap Airways NW Northwest Airlines PG Bangkok Airways SQ Singapore Airlines NW Northwest Airlines LY El Al Airlines Yes Yes 11/14/06 9W Jet Airways CO Continental Airlines Yes Yes 11/14/06 QF Qantas Airways OZ Asiana Airlines AA American Airlines Yes Yes 11/14/06 AC Air Canada AS Alaska Airlines AY Finnair BA British Airways BD British Midland BMI BR Eva Airways EK Emirates Airlines JK Spanair JL Japan Airlines KE Korean Air Lines KF Blue 1 LA Lan Airlines LH Lufthansa LO LOT Polish Airlines LP Lan Peru MI Silk Air NH All Nippon Airways NW Northwest Airlines NZ Air New Zealand OS Austrian Airlines SK Scandinavian Airline SQ Singapore Airlines TG Thai Airways TP TAP Air Portugal UA United Airlines UL Sri