B851 Vs 2.3 Spreadsheet 1
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
General Information Summary
The purpose of the Dutch Safety Board’s work is to prevent future accidents and incidents or to limit their after-effects. It is no part of the Board’s remit to try to establish the blame, responsibility or liability attaching to any party. Information gathered during the course of an investigation – including statements given to the Board, information that the Board has compiled, results of technical research and analyses and drafted documents (including the published report) – cannot be used as evidence in criminal, disciplinary or civil law proceedings. GENERAL INFORMATION Identification number: 2007044 Classification: Serious incident Date, time1 of occurrence: 18 May 2007, 20.53 hours Location of occurrence: Groningen Airport Eelde (EHGG) Aircraft registration: OO-VLI Aircraft model: Fokker F27 MK50 (Fokker 50) Type of aircraft: Passenger Aircraft Type of flight: Scheduled passenger transport Phase of operation: Landing Damage to aircraft: Minor Cockpit crew: Two Cabin crew: One Passengers: Eleven Injuries: None Other damage: One runway edge light and a runway end light destroyed Light conditions: Daylight (sunset at 21.32 hours) SUMMARY A Fokker 50 made a flight from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport to Groningen Airport Eelde. After executing a visual approach to runway 05, the aircraft landed long (approximately halfway along the runway) and at high speed. The crew was unable to stop the aircraft within the remaining runway length. Subsequently, it ran off the end of the runway and came to a halt in the grass. None of the fourteen persons on board was injured. The aircraft sustained minor damage. This report is mainly based on information from the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder and interviews with the flight crew members. -
Runway Analysis
CHAPTER 5 RUNWAY ANALYSIS 5 5 RUNWAY ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The primary issue to be addressed in the William R. Fairchild International Airport (CLM) Master Plan involves the ultimate length and configuration of the runway system. At present there are two runways; primary Runway 8/26 and crosswind Runway 13/31. Runway 8/26 is 6,347 feet long and 150-feet wide with a displaced threshold of 1,354 feet on the approach end to Runway 26. The threshold was displaced to provide for an unobstructed visual approach slope of 20:1. Runway 13/31 is designated as the crosswind runway and is 3,250-feet long by 50-feet wide. In the 1997 ALP Update, the FAA determined that this runway was not required to provide adequate wind coverage and would not be eligible for FAA funding of any improvements in the future. The Port of Port Angeles has committed to keeping this runway functional without FAA support for as long as it is feasible. Subsequent sections of this analysis will reexamine the need for the runway. Both runways are supported by parallel taxiway systems with Taxiway A serving Runway 8/26 and Taxiway J for Runway 13/31. Taxiway A is 40 feet wide and Taxiway J is 50 feet wide. AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS In determining airfield requirements, FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13, Airport Design (Change 14), has been consulted. This circular requires that future classification of the airport be defined as the basis for airfield planning criteria. As shown in the forecast chapter, the critical aircraft at CLM is expected to be the small business jet represented by the Cessna Citation within 5-years. -
Electronic Flight Bag (EFB): 2010 Industry Survey
Electronic Flight Bag (EFB): 2010 Industry Survey Scott Gabree Michelle Yeh Young Jin Jo U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration John A. Volpe National DOT-VNTSC-FAA-10-14 Transportation Systems Center Cambridge, MA 02142 Air Traffic Organization Operations Planning Human Factors Research and Engineering Group September 2010 Washington, DC 20591 This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia, 22161 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Notice 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. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES September 2010 COVERED Final Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. -
Cessna 172 in Flight 1964 Cessna 172E 1965 Cessna F172G
Cessna 172 in flight 1964 Cessna 172E 1965 Cessna F172G 1971 Cessna 172 The 1957 model Cessna 172 Skyhawk had no rear window and featured a "square" fin design Airplane Cessna 172 single engine aircraft, flies overhead after becoming airborne. Catalina Island airport, California (KAVX) 1964 Cessna 172E (G- ASSS) at Kemble airfield, Gloucestershire, England. The Cessna 172 Skyhawk is a four-seat, single-engine, high-wing airplane. Probably the most popular flight training aircraft in the world, the first production models were delivered in 1957, and it is still in production in 2005; more than 35,000 have been built. The Skyhawk's main competitors have been the popular Piper Cherokee, the rarer Beechcraft Musketeer (no longer in production), and, more recently, the Cirrus SR22. The Skyhawk is ubiquitous throughout the Americas, Europe and parts of Asia; it is the aircraft most people visualize when they hear the words "small plane." More people probably know the name Piper Cub, but the Skyhawk's shape is far more familiar. The 172 was a direct descendant of the Cessna 170, which used conventional (taildragger) landing gear instead of tricycle gear. Early 172s looked almost identical to the 170, with the same straight aft fuselage and tall gear legs, but later versions incorporated revised landing gear, a lowered rear deck, and an aft window. Cessna advertised this added rear visibility as "Omnivision". The final structural development, in the mid-1960s, was the sweptback tail still used today. The airframe has remained almost unchanged since then, with updates to avionics and engines including (most recently) the Garmin G1000 glass cockpit. -
COMPANY BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET PAX EACH BAR S WEBSITE E-MAIL Pel-Air Aviation Adelaide Brisbane Melbourne Sydney Saab 340 16 34 Y
PAX BAR COMPANY BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET WEBSITE E-MAIL EACH S Adelaide Saab 340 16 34 Pel-Air Brisbane Additional access Yes www.pelair.com.au [email protected] Aviation Melbourne to REX Airline’s 50 n/a Sydney Saab aircraft Adelaide Citation CJ2 n/a 8 Brisbane Beechcraft n/a 10 Cairns Kingair B200 The Light Darwin Jet Aviation Melbourne n/a www.lightjets.com.au [email protected] Group Sydney Beechcraft Baron n/a 5 *Regional centres on request Broome Metro II n/a 12 Complete Darwin Merlin IIIC n/a 6 n/a www.casair.com.au [email protected] Aviation Jandakot Piper Navajo n/a 7 Network Fokker 100 17 100 Perth n/a www.networkaviation.com.au [email protected] Aviation A320-200 4 180 Challenger 604 1 9 Embraer Legacy n/a 13 Australian Essendon Bombardier n/a 13 Corporate Melbourne Global Express Yes www.acjcentres.com.au [email protected] Jet Centres Perth Hawker 800s n/a 8 Cessna Citation n/a 8 Ultra SA Piper Chieftain n/a 9 NSW King Air B200 n/a 10 Altitude NT n/a www.altitudeaviation.com.au [email protected] Aviation QLD Cessna Citation n/a 5-7 TAS VIC Piper Chieftain 1 7 Cessna 310 1 5 Geraldton Geraldton GA8 Airvan 4 7 n/a www.geraldtonaircharter.com.au [email protected] Air Charter Beechcraft 1 4 Bonanza Airnorth Darwin ERJ170 4 76 n/a www.airnorth.com.au [email protected] *Other cities/towns EMB120 5 30 on request Beechcraft n/a 10 Kirkhope Melbourne Kingair n/a www.kirkhopeaviation.com.au [email protected] Aviation Essendon Piper Chieftain n/a 9 Piper Navajo n/a 7 Challenger -
EVB Runway 7-25 Alternatives DRAFT 7 22 2019
NEW SNEW SMSMMMYRNAYRNA BEACH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Runway 7/25 Runway Safety Area Alternatives City of New Smyrna Beach DRAFT Prepared By: July 2019 New Smyrna Beach Municipal Airport Runway 7/25 Alternatives Table of Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 2. Florida Department of Transportation Airport Inspection Report .......................................... 2 3. C&S Companies Report ...................................................................................................... 3 4. 2018 Airport Master Plan Update ........................................................................................ 4 5. Airport Layout Plan ............................................................................................................. 6 6. FAA Versus FDOT Safety Area Requirements .................................................................... 6 7. Departure Surfaces ............................................................................................................. 7 8. Published Departure and Landing Distances ...................................................................... 7 9. Typical Aeronautical Insurance Policies .............................................................................. 8 10. Typical Airport Leases at the Airport ................................................................................ 9 11. Wetlands at the Ends of the Runway .............................................................................. -
NTSB-AAR-72-18 TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD Title PAGE
SA-424 FILE NO. 1-0002 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT WESTERN AIR LINES, INC. BOEING 720-047B,N3166 ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA MARCH 31, 1971 ADOPTED: JUNE 7, 1972 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, 0. C. 20591 REPORT NUMBER: NTSB-AAR-72-18 TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TiTLE PAGE . Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3.Recipient's Catalog No. NTSB-AAR-72-18 I. Title and Subtitle 5.Report Date Aircraft Accident Report - Western Air Lines, InC., Sune 7, 1972 Roeing 720-047B, N3166, Ontario International Airport, 6.Performing Organization Ontario. California, March 31, 1971 Code '. Author(s) 8.Performing Organization Report No. I. Performing Organization Name and Address IO.Work Unit No. Bureau of Aviation Safety 11 .Contract or Grant No. National Transportation Safety Board Washington, D. C. 20591 13.Type of Report and Period Covered 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Aircraft Accident Report March 31, 1971 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, 0. C. 20591 14.Sponsoring Agency Code 15.Supplementary Notes I6.Abstract Flight 366, a Boeing 720B, on a proficiency check flight, yawed and rolled out of control, and crashed while in the process of executing a 3-engine missed- approach from a simulated engine-out ILS instrument approach. The five crew- members and only occupants died in the crash. The weather conditions at Ontario were 600 feet overcast, with 3/4-mile visibility in fog, haze, and smoke. The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the failure of the aircraft rudder hydraulic actuator support fitting. The failure of the fitting resulted in the inapparent loss Of left rudder control which, under the conditions of this flight, precluded the pilotk ability to maintain directional control during a simlated engine-out missed- approach. -
Ntsb/Aas-64-Aa
, I (j (. .1 u!) \J _l'·,· ~ABLE OF CONTENTS A. INT~ODUCTION 1 . Rcvie1-1 u f in;1'tents 2. T11,pl·:::r:cn ta ti on of Requirements b., Re.so luUoI~ of Conflicts c <· Consider a t,iorJ rif Avc:.ilable Research J, Considerat icn of Past Di.fficultie:3 et Aircraft CcckFits Accide~i/Incia2nt Re2ord 6 Conclusions C .. CREd COMP.LEHZ!~T l.. Review of 11.eq1.iirements ;::i, Views of the Industry a. Ma~uf2cturers ~~ Air Carriers c. 1·'!.:.:Uu.:·:J.l Avi at.ion Agency cL. .Pilot Organization e., Flisht Eng:inc:er Organization h. Conclusions .D. cnn·.r DUTIE.S 1. Review of ~equirements 2. Views of the Industry a. Manufacturers b .. Air Carriers c. FBricral Aviation Agency d, Military e, Flight Engi.near On.;..n] za ti on f. Pilot Organization 000002 Evalua 1:.ion Conclusions I l. e.. Fi..-:.. J.\.FI?ENDI CES II. TJ, S. J.._i-:: C:::.2'.'rie~ l~:.r..:i.Je'."'_t.s f'::.r 1J 1~riod cfo.:,.;:-::1v .July =...> ~964 - 'L-;_:rbcjet Aircr:;.ft J.11' r.·;.:;:: ~·=-:·:~-= B·::a_-l.:'..::::"~'.:':":. ~Tr: s -:~:; te1--,lis:-~:::d by BAC-ll.~. n:.:;. 9 E\r~.:il·;,s.T ~.or, Com~tr~:.t-_:.se- ::i.s p:cs.:_::,s~1ted by ..L;n~ pj_j_ot Org~r.. iz:-.. -.·. .ior; IV. Limi t:a·:::i..c:".::: f::i::.· T:·-cr:.1.::;por r:: Ai:t-::::.a.f~ Op.:::::-·:;.-:-.~~::.·":; w:i rh 1.;.r:..> '.!V:"':L!."1 crew ~L: p~~0:etJ.t:::l ty ~~1E: Fligl1t E11ginc('=Y O:t;ar,j_zg.-,l..Jn v. -
KFP067 22Gb.Pdf
, , , " beginning as "The Boe ing Clipper". the opment of Model 294, the Air Corps "Pro word was not a Boeing model name like ject X" that was to become the XB-15, "Flying Fortress" (Model 299) or "Strat the Model 299 that was the ill-fated proto oliner" (Model 307). The word "Clipper", type of the B-17, and was cu rrently con made famous by the famous line of fast, tinuing XB-15 work and redesigning the square-rigged sailing ships developed by B-17 for production when the Pan Am re Donald McKay in the late 1840s, was ac quest was received on February 28, 1936. tually owned by Pan Ameri ca n. After ap With so much already in the works, it wa s The Boeing 314 Clipper was a marvelous machine plying it as part of the names on individ felt that the company couldn't divert the even by today's standards. She was big, comfort· ual airplanes, as "China Clipper", "Clip engineering manpower needed for still a able and very dependable. At 84,000 Ibs. gross per America", etc., the airline got a copy nother big project. weight, with 10 degrees of flap and no wind, she right on the word and subsequently be The deadline for response had passed used 3,200 ft. to take off, leaving the water in 47 came very possessive over its use. I t is re when Wellwood E. Beall, an engineer di seconds. At 70,000 Ibs. with 20 degrees of flap ported to have had injuncions issued verted to sa les and service work , returned and a30 knot headwind, she was off in just 240 h., against Packard for use of the work " Clip from a trip to Ch ina to deliver 10 Boeing leaving the water in only eight seconds. -
Aircraft Accident Investigation Report 821-1004
Jj. AUSTRALIA,.^ •<<-<- Aircraft Accident Investigation Report 821-1004 Cessna 411AVH-AYE Archerfield, Queensland 5 January 1982 BUREAU OF AIR SAFETY INVESTIGATION Aircraft Accident Investigation Report 821-1004 Reprographics Pty Ltd Cessna 411A VH-AYE Archerfield Airport Queensland 5 January 1982 The Secretary to the Department of Aviation authorised the investigation of this accident and the publication of this report pursuant to the powers conferred by Air Navigation Regulations 278 and 283 respectively. Prepared by the Bureau of Air Safety Investigation March 1983 Australian Government Publishing Service Canberra 1983 © Commonwealth of Australia 1983 ISBN 0 644 00485 1 Printed by Commonwealth Print Unit, Melbourne Contents Synopsis 1 1. Factual information 1 . 1 History of the flight 1 .2 Injuries to persons 3 .3 Damage to aircraft 3 .4 Other damage 4 .5 Personnel information 4 .5.1 Flight crew 4 .5.2 Air Traffic Controllers 5 1.6 Aircraft information 5 .6.1 History and documentation 5 .6.2 Engines and propellers 6 .6.3 Maintenance 7 .6.4 Weight and balance 8 1.7 Meteorological information 8 1.8 Aids to navigation 9 1.9 Communications 9 1.10 Aerodrome information 9 1.11 Flight recorders 9 1.12 Wreckage and impact information 12 1.13 Medical and pathological information 12 1.14 Fire 12 1.15 Survival aspects 13 1.16 Tests and research 13 1.16.1 Engines 13 1.16.2 Engine controls 13 1.16.3 Propellers 14 1.16.4 Propeller governors 14 1.16.5 Turbochargers 15 .16.6 Turbocharger controllers 15 .16.7 Exhaust pipes 16 .16.8 Fuel and oil samples 16 .16.9 Landing gear operation 16 .16.10 Engine response to throttle movement 16 . -
No Surprises Here
REPORT 2009 BUSINESS AIRCRAFT FLEET US were having a fire sale trying to NO SURPRISES HERE quickly get rid of their business air- craft in order to avoid government and public scrutiny, countries like Brazil were turning to Business Aviation as a business solution. The result – well, we think the numbers speak for them- selves. So yes, 2009 was a slow year for Business Aviation – as expected. The World Fleet continued to grow, although at a much slower rate than past years (the world fleet grew by seven percent last year, in comparison to this year’s 4.8 percent). And yes, Europe may have been a surprise as it navigated the crisis fairly well, but only saw a 9.7 percent increase in its fleet, which although strong is almost half the size of last year’s world-lead- ing 18 percent. But the slowdowns in Europe and the US are made up for by the 15.3, 27.1 and 13.3 percent growth rates in Africa, Asia/Middle East and South America respectively. FLEET TOTALS Ok, so we changed our minds about (As of End 2009) 2009. Business Aviation is not slowing World Fleet 29,992 down. Business Aviation is simply European Fleet 3,959 changing, shifting and going where Jet Aircraft Worldwide 17,118 business goes – building new Turboprops Worldwide 12,499 economies and ensuring that business gets done. By Nick Klenske ust take a brief glance at the Overview J numbers and it should be blatant- Let us start from the end – or as close No surprise here. -
Fokker (Bedrijf) 1 Fokker (Bedrijf)
Fokker (bedrijf) 1 Fokker (bedrijf) Fokker was de naam van een vliegtuigfabriek, vernoemd naar de stichter Anthony Fokker. Fokker raakte al vroeg in zijn jeugd geïnteresseerd in vliegen. Rond 1910 begon hij met de bouw van zijn eerste echte vliegtuig. Dit vliegtuig werd de "Fokker Spin" gedoopt. Hiermee werd Fokker op 21-jarige leeftijd beroemd toen hij op 31 augustus 1911 ter demonstratie rondjes rond de Grote Kerk van Haarlem vloog. Geschiedenis Anthony Fokker Eerste Wereldoorlog Voor het begin van de Eerste Wereldoorlog ging Fokker in Duitsland wonen waar hij een fabriek in Johannisthal bij Berlijn oprichtte. Later verhuisde de fabriek naar Schwerin. Het eerste bekende en succesvolle vliegtuig dat Fokker produceert was de Fokker Eindecker. Dit vliegtuig bezat als eerste de mogelijkheid door de bladen van de propeller heen te schieten zonder deze te beschadigen. Dit was mogelijk door een mede door Fokker uitgevonden mechanisme dat het machinegeweer blokkeerde wanneer er zich een propellerblad voor de loop bevond, het synchronisatiesysteem. Toen de Duitse regering Hugo Junkers en Een Fokker Dr.I Fokker tot samenwerking dwong, kwam Fokker in aanraking met dikke vleugelprofielen. Deze paste hij toe op twee andere zeer succesvolle vliegtuigen, de Fokker Dr.I Dreidecker en de Fokker D.VII. De Fokker Dr.I werd vooral bekend toen Manfred von Richthofen met dit type ging vliegen. Von Richthofen was de hoogst scorende luchtaas uit de Eerste Wereldoorlog met 80 neergehaalde vliegtuigen. Met zijn vuurrode Fokker Dr.I werd hij de nachtmerrie van de geallieerde piloten. Zijn bijnaam de Rode Baron had hij te danken aan de rode kleur van zijn toestel.