DOCSLIB.ORG

Colliding with a Glider: Ifr in Uncontrolled Airspace

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Colliding with a Glider: Ifr in Uncontrolled Airspace 80-82 SAFETY SENSE.qxp 26/11/2019 15:08 Page 80 SAFETY SENSE COLLIDING WITH A GLIDER: IFR IN UNCONTROLLED AIRSPACE While uncommon, mid-air collisions are disastrous and often fatal when they occur. Michael R. Grüninger and Capt. Andreas Grauer analyze contributory factors and key strategies for avoiding such collision riday, 12th February 1999, was a glider was enjoying the steady lami- Descending through FL 85, the chilly day in the south of France. nar flow. Still at Flight Level (FL) 290 commander took control of the air- F Strong northerly winds were and preparing for the approach, the craft, disconnected the autopilot and blowing and generating waves. Glider pilot monitoring of the AF flight lis- executed an immediate escape pilots love such waves as they provide tened to Montpellier ATIS “Hotel”, maneuver to the right. One minute them with a constant and reliable which warned of glider activity in the later the A320 was cleared to updraft to reach height and stay in approach sector. descend to altitude 5000 ft. The com- the air for many hours. At 15:31, ACC Marseille authorized mander notified ATC about the air- Using this opportunity, the pilots of the A320 to descend to FL 120. prox. a Grob 103 glider, F-CGXB, let them- At 15:36, Montpellier Approach At this stage, the crew of the A320 selves be towed out of Saint Martin cleared the A320 to further descend was not sure whether they had collid- de Londres airfield towards the Pic to FL 80 on course to the Very High ed with the glider or not. Saint Loup. From there, the G103 Frequency (VHF) Omni-Directional At the same time the pilots of the G continued to the lee-side of the Range (VOR) Montpellier 103 felt a hard hit. Alerted and wor- Seranne Mountain where the laminar Méditerranée (FJR) on a magnetic ried about the hit, they looked around flow was strong above 6000 ft. The heading of 136°. The A320 and saw an A320 in descent perform- glider entered the flow and slowly approached FL 80 three minutes later ing a right turn. The situation was progressed in the direction of North- at 15:39. clear to them immediately. Northeast. The A320 now flew in Airspace The sailplane pilots considered FATAL Just 7 minutes later, at 14:59, Air Class G. The Airway G6 was located 7 abandoning the glider and jumping to One of the most France flight number AF 755x0, an nm to the east of the position of AF safety by using their parachutes. hazardous Air France Airbus 320 registered as 7550. However, they carefully tested the consequences F-GJVG, took off from Paris Orly One minute later, at 15:40, the remaining functionality of the glider of a loss of Airport with destination Montpellier. A320 commander observed a glider and found that with due care a safe separation The first officer was pilot flying and flying below them on the left. Soon return to the airfield might be possi- between aircraft the commander pilot monitoring. after, the copilot, announces that he ble. By avoiding abrupt maneuvers is mid-air Montpellier Méditerranée Airport is has another glider in sight right in and high aerodynamic stress, the collision. located south of the area where the front. pilots landed the G 103 safely. 80 - BART: DECEMBER - 2019 since 102year005s Safety and compliance training & auditing IS-BAO preparation and audit Management SMS implementation support Process Development MELs and technical publishing Your Swiss Partner for Aviation Safety and Compliance... Now celebrating 100 years of combined aviation experience safety solutions sli.ch sli.ch · · Rigiblick 19a19 · ·CH-6024 CH-6024 Hildisrieden Hildisrieden · ·phone phone + + 41-41 41-41 460 460 46 46 60 60 · ·[email protected] [email protected] · ·www.gcs-safety.com www.gcs-safety.com · ·Great Great Circle Circle Services Services AG AG 191817 130025 80-82 SAFETY SENSE.qxp 26/11/2019 15:08 Page 82 SAFETY SENSE Once on the ground, the pilots saw The glider was in wave flight at FL 80 classes they are going to cross on their that the upper left horizontal stabiliz- and the A320 on arrival to Montpellier routes and identify the implications for er was severely damaged. Airport. The Airspace Class at the collision avoidance. The A320 also landed safely. But the moment of the mid-air collision was In the unmanned aircraft world, see pilots had doubts whether they had in Class G. and avoid is replaced by detect and fact collided with the glider or just The A320 successively crossed vari- avoid. This is an automated system, barely missed it. During taxi to the ous Airspace Classes in fast sequence: where airborne sensors detect obsta- gate, the commander informed ATC ❍ From cruise to initial descent: cles and other flying objects and auto- about his doubts. ATC confirmed the Class A controlled airspace matically initiate an escape maneuver. collision and informed the comman- ❍ Descending below FL 195: Class D Of course, this is not possible in der that the glider had landed safely controlled airspace manned aircraft operation. and that no personal injuries were ❍ Passing FL 115: Class G uncon- Detection is also provided in manned reported. trolled airspace aircraft, by a Traffic Alert and Collision Once the Airbus was parked, an ❍ The mid-air collision occurred at Avoidance System (TCAS). TCAS inspection of the wings revealed that FL 80 in this class G airspace. Class G detection would have worked at least the leading edge of the left wing was airspace is Uncontrolled Airspace. In in those cases, where conflicting air- damaged. class G airspace, operations may be craft are all equipped with a TCAS or conducted under IFR or VFR. ATC another compatible collision avoidance Separation by ATC has no authority, but VFR minima are system. Separation of air traffic, and the to be known by pilots. Traffic At the time of this serious incident, methods of separation, is the key to Information may be given by ATC as commercial aircraft were not yet the organization of the airspace sys- far as is practical in respect of other required to be equipped with Airborne tem. Understanding these separation flights. Collision Avoidance Systems. concepts is crucial for pilots. Pilots ❍ Minutes after the collision: Class D “See and Avoid” is rarely described in should never feel to be protected by controlled airspace detail in the Operating Procedures of ATC separation, when in fact they are ❍ Descending through 5700 ft: Class most operators since they operate not. E controlled airspace mainly in controlled airspace. In 1990, ICAO adopted the current ❍ At about 4900 ft: Class D, destina- Air Traffic Control (ATC), Automatic airspace classification scheme. It tion airport Terminal Information Service (ATIS) introduced seven airspace classes. ❍ Then the A320 flew until landing in broadcasts and/or Notices to Airmen Classes A to E are so-called con- this Class D controlled airspace. (NOTAMS) often provide information trolled airspaces. Classes F and G are Problems with separation between about VFR traffic in the vicinity. uncontrolled airspaces. VFR and IFR traffic often occur on It is important that the pilots are However, controlled airspace does- charter flights and scheduled services aware of their responsibility for colli- n’t necessarily imply that ATC is to smaller airports. sion avoidance, when flying in uncon- responsible for or ensures separation The problem is even bigger in trolled airspace and in Class E con- between aircraft. Business Aviation where passengers trolled airspace, where ATC does not In general, the classes are defined in charter a business jet specifically separate IFR from VFR traffic. terms of flight rules and interactions because it enables them to fly directly Fortunately, this particular mid-air between aircraft and ATC. For ICAO to small airfields, as close as possible collision between such unequal aircraft airspaces the responsibility for avoid- to their destination, which sometimes did not result in harm to persons. ing other aircraft is either assigned to does not even have any instrument ✈ ATC or to the aircraft commander, facilities. Due to the great difference in depending on the airspace class. speeds and the fact that gliders and In Class E airspace, ATC separates very light aircraft are sometimes diffi- Michael R. Grüninger is Managing IFR from IFR traffic, but not from cult to spot in the air, maintaining visu- Director of Great Circle Services VFR traffic. In Class G airspace, no al separation is a challenge. (GCS) Safety Solutions and Capt. separation is provided by ATC. Andreas Grauer is the Deputy See and Avoid Managing Director of GCS. GCS Flying IFR through “See and Avoid” is recognized as a assists in the whole range of planning Various Classes of Airspace method for avoiding collision when and management issues, offering cus- It is difficult for a pilot to constantly weather conditions permit and require tomized solutions to strengthen the be aware of the classes of airspace that pilots should actively search for position of a business in the aviation crossed while preparing for an potentially conflicting traffic, especially market. Its services include interim approach and looking outside in when operating in airspace where all and start-up management, training compliance with the “see and avoid” traffic is not operating under the and auditing (IS-BAO, IOSA, EASA), rule. instructions of ATC. consultancy, manual development and The mid-air collision between the The operator could include aware- process engineering. GCS can be Grob 103 glider and the Air France ness training of airspace classes in reached at www.gcs-safety.com and A320 is a good example for the diffi- their route and aerodrome competence +41-41 460 46 60.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Runway Safety Spring 2021 Report
    Graphical NOTAM Interface For Improving Efficiency of Reporting NOTAM Information April 2021 Design Challenge: Runway Safety/Runway Incursions/Runway Excursions Challenge E: Optimizing application of NextGen technology to improve runway safety in particular and airport safety in general. Team Members: Undergraduate Students: Matthew Bacon, Gregory Porcaro, Andrew Vega Advisor’s Name: Dr. Audra Morse Michigan Technological University Table of Contents | 1 02 Executive Summary Runway excursions are a type of aviation incident where an aircraft makes an unsafe exit from the runway. According to the Ascend World Aircraft Accident Summary (WAAS), 141 runway excursion accidents involving the Western-built commercial aircraft fleet occurred globally from 1998 to 2007, resulting in 550 fatalities; 74% of landing phase excursions were caused by either weather-related factors or decision-making factors (Ascend, 2007). One mitigation strategy is training pilots how to interpret Runway Condition Codes (RWYCCs) to understand runway conditions. Recent developments such as NextGen and Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs) have improved the quality of weather condition reporting. However, Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs), the primary source of runway condition information and any other irregularities in airspace, are still presented to pilots in an inefficient format contributing to runway excursions and safety concerns NOTAMs consist of confusing abbreviations and do not effectively convey the relative importance of information. The team developed an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) user interface that provides a graphical representation of NOTAM and weather information to improve how pilots receive condition changes at airports. The graphical NOTAM interface utilizes Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) to receive real time NOTAM updates.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Concept of the National Airspace System of 2015: Human Factors Considerations For
    Advanced Concept of the National Airspace System of 2015: Human Factors Considerations for Air Traffic Control Ben Willems, Human Factors Team – Atlantic City, ATO-P Anton Koros, Northrop Grumman Information Technology June 2007 DOT/FAA/TC-TN-07/21 This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161. A copy is retained for reference at the William J. Hughes Technical Center Library. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405 ote technical note NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. This document does not constitute Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification policy. Consult your local FAA aircraft certification office as to its use. This report is available at the FAA, William J. Hughes Technical Center’s full-text Technical Reports Web site: http://actlibrary.tc.faa.gov in Adobe® Acrobat® portable document format (PDF). Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. DOT/FAA/TC-TN-07/21 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Advanced Concept of the National Airspace System of 2015: Human Factors June 2007 Considerations for Air Traffic Control 6. Performing Organization Code AJP-6110 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the Light of Public International Law
    Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the light of Public International Law Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the light of Public International Law ZOLTÁN PAPP Phd Student, Pázmány Péter Catholic University, In-house legal counsel, HungaroControl Pte Ltd. Co.* The Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is established to serve the national security interests of the state. Maintaining ADIZ becomes fundamentally relevant from the perspective of international law when such a zone extends into airspace suprajacent to international waters. Materially, two considerations are most relevant in terms of ADIZ conforming to international law, both potentially creating a conflict with ADIZ rules: Contracting Parties to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation have delegated rule-making powers to enact rules of the air with a view to safeguarding the safety of air traffic in international airspace to the ICAO Council. Furthermore, in international airspace the state of registry generally enjoys exclusive jurisdiction with respect to the aircraft carrying its national mark. In this paper ADIZ will be deemed as exercising jurisdiction over extraterritorial acts by the state maintaining ADIZ; hence, the prescriptive and enforcement distinction adds an additional layer to the analysis of the international legal context of ADIZ. The response to as to how ADIZ fits in the international legal framework may differ depending on whether one seeks to identify permissive rules of international law related to the maintenance of ADIZ in international airspace or the non-existence of prohibitive rules sufficient to justify conformance with international law. Keywords: ADIZ, air law, law of the sea, Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, jurisdiction, use of force, international customary law, civil aircraft, state of registry 1.
    [Show full text]
  • General Aviation Activity and Airport Facilities
    New Hampshire State Airport System Plan Update CHAPTER 2 - AIRPORT SYSTEM INVENTORY 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the existing airport system in New Hampshire as of the end of 2001 and early 2002 and served as the database for the overall System Plan. As such, it was updated throughout the course of the study. This Chapter focuses on the aviation infrastructure that makes up the system of airports in the State, as well as aviation activity, airport facilities, airport financing, airspace and air traffic services, as well as airport access. Chapter 3 discusses the general economic conditions within the regions and municipalities that are served by the airport system. The primary purpose of this data collection and analysis was to provide a comprehensive overview of the aviation system and its key elements. These elements also served as the basis for the subsequent recommendations presented for the airport system. The specific topics covered in this Chapter include: S Data Collection Process S Airport Descriptions S Airport Financing S Airport System Structure S Airspace and Navigational Aids S Capital Improvement Program S Definitions S Scheduled Air Service Summary S Environmental Factors 2.2 DATA COLLECTION PROCESS The data collection was accomplished through a multi-step process that included cataloging existing relevant literature and data, and conducting individual airport surveys and site visits. Division of Aeronautics provided information from their files that included existing airport master plans, FAA Form 5010 Airport Master Records, financial information, and other pertinent data. Two important element of the data collection process included visits to each of the system airports, as well as surveys of airport managers and users.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation Into Unmanned Aircraft System Incidents in the National Airspace System
    International Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and Aerospace Volume 3 Issue 4 Article 2 11-2-2016 Investigation into Unmanned Aircraft System Incidents in the National Airspace System Rohan S. Sharma Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/ijaaa Part of the Aviation Safety and Security Commons, and the Management and Operations Commons Scholarly Commons Citation Sharma, R. S. (2016). Investigation into Unmanned Aircraft System Incidents in the National Airspace System. International Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and Aerospace, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.15394/ ijaaa.2016.1146 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and Aerospace by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sharma: Investigation Into Unmanned Aircraft Incidents The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) forecasts the sale of commercial and hobbyist Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) to rise from 2.5 million to 7 million USD in the timeframe of 2016 – 2020 (Federal Aviation Administration, 2016). A status report in March from the FAA revealed that more than 4,000 exemptions were issued to insurers, individuals, or commercial organizations in order to operate commercially registered UASs’ in the National Airspace System (NAS) under Section 333 authority of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. Additionally, over 408,000 UASs’ have been registered (Federal Aviation Administration, 2016). The UAS market will continue to be the most dynamic growth sector within aviation (Federal Aviation Administration, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter: 2. En Route Operations
    Chapter 2 En Route Operations Introduction The en route phase of flight is defined as that segment of flight from the termination point of a departure procedure to the origination point of an arrival procedure. The procedures employed in the en route phase of flight are governed by a set of specific flight standards established by 14 CFR [Figure 2-1], FAA Order 8260.3, and related publications. These standards establish courses to be flown, obstacle clearance criteria, minimum altitudes, navigation performance, and communications requirements. 2-1 fly along the centerline when on a Federal airway or, on routes other than Federal airways, along the direct course between NAVAIDs or fixes defining the route. The regulation allows maneuvering to pass well clear of other air traffic or, if in visual meteorogical conditions (VMC), to clear the flightpath both before and during climb or descent. Airways Airway routing occurs along pre-defined pathways called airways. [Figure 2-2] Airways can be thought of as three- dimensional highways for aircraft. In most land areas of the world, aircraft are required to fly airways between the departure and destination airports. The rules governing airway routing, Standard Instrument Departures (SID) and Standard Terminal Arrival (STAR), are published flight procedures that cover altitude, airspeed, and requirements for entering and leaving the airway. Most airways are eight nautical miles (14 kilometers) wide, and the airway Figure 2-1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14 Aeronautics and Space. flight levels keep aircraft separated by at least 500 vertical En Route Navigation feet from aircraft on the flight level above and below when operating under VFR.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 EAA Airventure NOTAM
    NOTAM Preflight Planning ............................ 1-3 Changes for 2021 VFR Arrival ..................................... 4-13 □ Transitions added to Fisk Arrival Oshkosh Airport Notes .................... 14 □ Numerous editorial changes IFR/VFR Departure ....................... 15-16 □ FAH VOR decommissioned Turbine/Warbird Arrival ................... 17 Seaplane Base .................................. 18 □ IKK VOR decommissioned Helicopter Arrival/Departure ............ 19 □ RWY 18L/36R now 60' wide Ultralight Arrival/Departure ............. 20 Fond du Lac. ................................ 21-22 This notice does not Appleton ....................................... 23-24 supersede restrictions IFR Arrival/Departure .................. 25-28 contained in other FDC Canadian and NORDO ...................... 29 Flight Service Info ............................ 30 NOTAMs. Special Flight Procedures effective Noon CDT July 22 to 8:00 PM CDT August 1, 2021 Preflight Planning For one week each year, EAA AirVenture OSH Aircraft Parking Oshkosh has the highest concentration of • Separate aircraft parking areas are used at aircraft in the world. Your careful reading and OSH for different types of aircraft. Parking adherence to the procedures in this NOTAM for show planes (experimental, warbird, are essential to maintaining the safety record rotorcraft, amphibian, and production of this event. Flight planning should include aircraft manufactured prior to 1971) has thorough familiarity with NOTAM procedures, generally been available throughout EAA
    [Show full text]
  • Tc Aim Rac 1.1.2.2
    TP 14371E Transport Canada Aeronautical Information Manual (TC AIM) RAC—RULES OF THE AIR AND AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES MARCH 26, 2020 TC AIM March 26, 2020 TRANSPORT CANADA AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION MANUAL (TC AIM) EXPLANATION OF CHANGES EFFECTIVE—MARCH 26, 2020 NOTES: 1. Editorial and format changes were made throughout the TC AIM where necessary and those that were deemed insignificant in nature were not included in the “Explanation of Changes”. 2. Effective March 31, 2016, licence differences with ICAO Annex 1 standards and recommended practices, previously located in LRA 1.8 of the TC AIM, have been removed and can now be found in AIP Canada (ICAO) GEN 1.7. RAC (1) RAC 1.1.2.1 Flight Information Centres (FICs) In (b) FISE, fireball reporting procedures were removed. The reporting of fireball occurrences is no longer required by the government or military. (2) RAC 1.1.2.2 Flight Service Stations (FSSs) (a) AAS As NAV CANADA moves ahead with runway determination at FSSs with direct wind reading instruments, the phraseology will be changing from “preferred runway” to “runway”. (3) RAC 9.2.1 Minimum Sector Altitude (MSA) A note was added regarding the flight validation of MSA. (4) RAC 9.6.2 Visual Approach Additional text was added to clarify information about ATC visual approach clearance and missed approach procedures for aircraft on an IFR flight plan. (5) RAC 9.17.1 Corrections for Temperature Information was added to clarify some temperature correction procedures. (6) RAC 9.17.2 Remote Altimeter Setting The information was updated to specify the instrument approach procedure segments to which the RASS adjustments are applied.
    [Show full text]
  • IFR PROCEDURES at UNCONTROLLED AERODROMES Approach
    IFR PROCEDURES AT UNCONTROLLED AERODROMES Approach CLEARANCE FREQUENCIES When cleared for “an approach” to an aerodrome, the pilot has the option of conducting any Whether or not the aircraft is operating under published approach to that aerodrome. (Transport Canada Aeronautical Information Manual ATC control, it remains the pilot’s responsibility [TC AIM] RAC 9.3) ATC must be advised of the intended instrument approach procedure (IAP) to notify the ground station at the destination being conducted. No deviations should be made from the stated IAP without consent from aerodrome (or to broadcast, where no ground ATC. Such an act could cause dangerous conflict with another aircraft or a vehicle on the station exists) and report in accordance with runway. Descent to the appropriate IFR altitude (minimum en route altitude [MEA], transition Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 602.104. altitude, safe altitude 100 NM, or minimum sector altitude [MSA]) is at the pilot’s discretion. Note: See the Canada Flight Supplement (CFS) Caution: Descent to the safe altitude 100 NM or the MSA may take the aircraft out of or Canada Air Pilot (CAP) for the appropriate controlled airspace. ATC provides IFR separation only within controlled airspace. aerodrome frequency, or, when no frequency Note: Approach clearance is for a published IAP. Visual approaches are authorized at is designated, broadcast on 123.2 MHz. 2 uncontrolled aerodromes. A contact approach can be authorized at the pilot’s request. COMMUNICATIONS (See TC AIM RAC 9.12 for reporting procedures) 1 1 Report 5 min prior to the estimated time of commencing the approach; include the intended approach procedure and estimated time of landing (ETL).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7. Airspace
    Guam and CNMI Military Relocation Final EIS (July 2010) CHAPTER 7. AIRSPACE 7.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 7.1.1 Definition of Resource 7.1.1.1 Airspace Management Airspace management is defined as directing, controlling, and handling flight operations in the volume of air that overlies the geopolitical borders of the United States (U.S.) and its territories. In the U.S., airspace is a resource that is managed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) with established policies, designations, and flight rules to protect aircraft on the airfield, en route, in Special Use Airspace (SUA) identified for military and other governmental activities, in other military training airspace, and for ground training activities that require the use of airspace over ground firing areas or other hazardous activities on the ground that impact the airspace overlying the activity. The FAA Western Service Area (Renton, Washington) provides guidance and control of U.S. territory airspace in the Pacific that includes Guam and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). Guam Air Traffic Control, Guam Approach Control and Guam Departure Control manage air traffic in Guam. Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) also has tower controllers. For airspace outside of the U.S. and its territories, rules are agreed to by members of the International Civil Aviation Organization, an agency of the United Nations, that codifies the principles and techniques of international air navigation and fosters the coordination, planning and development of international air transport to ensure safe and orderly growth. The practices used to manage airspace consider how the airspace is designated, used, and administered to best accommodate the individual and common needs of the military, commercial organizations, and private aviation enthusiasts.
    [Show full text]
  • Hudson River Airspace and Management of Uncontrolled
    Testimony of Edward Kragh, Certified Professional Controller Adjunct to FAA NY VFR Airspace Task Force National Air Traffic Controllers Association Before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security Tuesday, September 15, 2009 Hudson River Airspace and Management of Uncontrolled Airspace Corridors National Air Traffic Controllers Association The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) is the exclusive representative of more than 15,000 air traffic controllers serving the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of Defense and the private sector. In addition, NATCA represents approximately 1,200 FAA engineers, 600 traffic management coordinators, 500 aircraft certification professionals, agency operational support staff, regional personnel from FAA logistics, budget, finance and computer specialist divisions, and agency occupational health specialists, nurses and medical program specialists. NATCA’s mission is to preserve, promote and improve the safety of air travel within the United States, and to serve as an advocate for air traffic controllers and other aviation safety professionals. NATCA has a long history of working together with the NTSB, other government agencies and aviation industry experts to make the National Airspace System (NAS) the safest in the world. August 8, 2009: Aftermath On August 8, 2009, a Eurocopter AS350 helicopter collided with a Piper PA-32R over the Hudson River. Nine people died in the collision. This accident and loss of life has caused many aviation safety experts, including NATCA, to examine the circumstances surrounding the incident and search for ways to prevent the situation from repeating itself in the future. To this end, NATCA was an active participant in the New York Airspace Task Force which was chartered by the FAA in response to this incident in order to recommend safety enhancements for the affected airspace.
    [Show full text]
  • MH17 Crash Notification from Ukraine That Flight MH17 Had Crashed and That an Investigation Into the Causes of the Crash Was Already Underway
    Crash 2 Operational facts and background 7 Recovery of the wreckage 10 Reconstruction 12 MH17 Investigation into flight routes 14 About the investigation 19 About the Dutch Safety Board 20 Credits 20 Introduction The crash of flight MH17 on 17 July 2014 shocked the world and caused hundreds of families much grief. In the first few days after the crash the first expla­ nations for the cause of the crash began to appear. The question was also raised as to why the aircraft flew over the conflict zone in the eastern part of Ukraine. On board flight MH17 there were 298 occupants, of which 193 passengers with the Dutch nationality. On Friday 18 July 2014, the Dutch Safety Board received a formal MH17 Crash notification from Ukraine that flight MH17 had crashed and that an investigation into the causes of the crash was already underway. The same Investigation into the Main conclusions Passenger information day, the Board sent three investigators crash of flight MH17 Causes of the crash - The crash A second, independent who arrived in Kyiv in the evening. The Dutch Safety Board has of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing investigation was conducted into extensively investigated the 777-200 was caused by the the gathering and verification of A few days later, the investigation was delegated to the Dutch Safety Board. crash of flight MH17. The first detonation of a model 9N314M passenger information and The Dutch Safety Board was determined part of the investigation focused warhead, fitted to a 9M38-series informing the relatives of the to answer the questions of how this on the causes of the crash.
    [Show full text]