Flight International 2014 07 29

FLIGHTINTERNATIONAL

ROLLS REVERSAL HOW UK ENGINE MAKER WON ITS WAY ONTO AIRBUS NEWS FOCUS P22

TWISTS IN THE TAIL Dreamliner in debut at Farnborough show reveals details of stretch version’s aerodynamic tweaks 16

FOKKER REBIRTH Launch of Dutch-built jet moves closer as start-up seeks financing and programme partners 17

INVESTIGATION

WHAT NOW?Dealing with the fallout from MH17

9 7 7 0 0 1 5 3 7 1 2 6 6

3 1£3.40

29 JULY-4 AUGUST 2014

Yourprofitability up 50%With the A380, the sky is yours. Designed for 21st century growth, it offers 40% more capacity and the lowest seat mile costs in its class. The A380 cabin is the quietest and most spacious in the sky and with up to 19-inch wide seats in economy, it is no wonder passengers opt for the comfort of the A380 when given the choice. That means higher market share, higher load factors and higher revenues. All this allows airlines to increase their contribution to profi t by up to 50% per fl ight. Own the sky with the A380.

Airbus Widebody Family, our numbers will convince you.

airbus.com

Airbus Widebody Family

© A

IRBU

S, 2

014.

All

right

s re

serv

ed. A

irbus

, its

logo

and

the

prod

uct n

ames

are

regi

ster

ed tr

adem

arks

.

Inside the world ofaerospace every weekFlight International is your essential weekly summary of keyaerospace news and insight – all in one magazine. It keeps you in touch with what really matters from commercial aircraft programmes, to coverage of safety and operations, defence, business aviation and spaceflight as well as coverage from the top air shows.

Plus...with an iPad subscription you get faster delivery, video, stunning photos and links to even more content on Flightglobal.com

Read Flight International whenever you want, wherever you are on your iPad, via your desktop or in print – the choice is yours – subscribe today.

Subscribe to Flight International today

Visit: www.flightsubs.com/1684Call: Overseas +44 1444 475682 UK 0845 077 7733 quoting 1684

Email: [email protected]

29 July-4 August 2014 | Flight International | 5flightglobal.com

FLIGHTINTERNATIONAL


Embraer enters critical stage with E2 with design freeze scheduled for end of 2014 P15. Guidance on go-arounds the subject of international safety policy review P29

Rex

Feat

ures

, Em

brae

r

FLIGHTINTERNATIONAL

ROLLS REVERSAL HOW UK ENGINE MAKER WON ITS WAY ONTO AIRBUS NEWS FOCUS P22

TWISTS IN THE TAIL Dreamliner in debut at Farnborough show reveals details of stretch version’s aerodynamic tweaks 16

FOKKER REBIRTH Launch of Dutch-built jet moves closer as start-up seeks financing and programme partners 17

INVESTIGATION

WHAT NOW?Dealing with the fallout from MH17

9 7 7 0 0 1 5 3 7 1 2 6 6

3 1£3.40


DEFENCE 18 Airbus targets Poseidon in UK maritime

patrol battle. Private sector to drive India’s Avro replacement. Flybe to support RAF Atlas fleet

19 Boeing blames wiring redesign for $272 million KC-46A charge. Three compete for Danish fighter deal. Indian air force signs for six more C-130Js

20 Gray Eagle puts NERO electronic warfare system aloft. Grob Aircraft scans for buyers worldwide with G520 NG. Raytheon aims SDB II towards UK’s Spear requirement

BUSINESS AVIATION 21 Evektor floats plans for amphibious EV-55

in wake of fresh investment. Large jets surge in 20-year forecast

NEWS FOCUS 22 How Rolls-Royce won Airbus

REGULARS7 Comment 32 Letters34 Classified 37 Jobs 43 Working Week

NEWS THIS WEEK 8 KAI selected for 4.5t rotorcraft

programme9 Attractions of A330neo causes Hawaiian

to switch from A350-800. Taiwan’s Aviation Safety Council to investigate ATR 72-500 loss. Hachey to leave Bombardier in unit restructure

AIR TRANSPORT 14 Airbus to revamp A380 door seals after

loss of cabin pressure. Al Baker warns over German access restrictions. Airbus in ‘no rush’ to move towards Beluga replacement

15 Embraer enters critical stage with E2 programme

16 787-9 reveals aerodynamic advances on tailplane and fin. Airline flyers asking for wi-fi, Honeywell survey reveals. A350-900 passes final braking tests prior to certification

17 New Fokker 100 twinjet edging closer to reality. Sukhoi bides time over Superjet engine upgrade

COVER STORY10 Accusations fly after MH17 tragedy

As factions in Ukraine blame one another, the investigation must deal with an insecure crash site in a war zone

FEATURES24 HALF-YEAR SAFETY Better prepared

Industry must learn from near misses and expect the unexpected

27 Accidents and incidents Flightglobal data for January-June 2014

29 Second chances Forum studies pilots’ behaviour to clarify policy on go-arounds

VOLUME 186 NUMBER 5450

PIC OF THE WEEK This shot, supplied by Dassault, shows the wings of the first Falcon 8X about to be mated to the fuselage of the airframer’s flagship business jet. Assembly was completed at the end of June and Dassault is now preparing the Pratt & Whitney Canada PW307D-powered trijet for its first flight early next year.

Das

saul

t

flightglobal.com/imageoftheday

PA

COVER IMAGEAs investigators struggle to gain access to the crash site of the downed Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine, our analysis looks at the circumstances surrounding the incident P10

NEXT WEEK GULFSTREAM 650ER Gulfstream’s flagship G650ER gets the cutaway treatment and we provide an in-depth look at this 7,500nm (13,900km) ultra-long-range business jet.

Gul

fstre

am

THE WEEK ON THE WEBflightglobal.com

flightglobal.com

CONTENTS

Flightglobal reaches up to 1.3 million visitors from 220 countries viewing 7.1 million pages each month

BEHIND THE HEADLINES

Vote at flightglobal.com/poll

Find all these items at flightglobal.com/wotw

QUESTION OF THE WEEK

For a full list of reader services, editorial and advertising contacts see P33

EDITORIAL +44 20 8652 3842 [email protected] DISPLAY ADVERTISING +44 20 8652 3315 [email protected] CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING +44 20 8652 4897 [email protected] RECRUITMENT ADVERTISING +44 20 8652 4900 [email protected] SUBSCRIPTIONS +44 1444 475 682 [email protected] REPRINTS +44 20 8652 [email protected] FLIGHT DAILY NEWS +44 20 8652 [email protected]

Total votes: 3,829This week, we ask: MH17 shoot down❑ Airlines should have been avoiding conflict zone ❑ Could not have been foreseen

43%10%47%

Runaway success Niche product Panic measure

Last week, we asked: The A330neo is a…? You said:

HIGH FLIERSThe top five stories for the week just gone:1 FARNBOROUGH: Aero secrets of Boeing’s new Dreamliner2 FARNBOROUGH: Boeing asked to rein in 787-9 display3 PICTURE: A350 rejects take-off at maximum energy4 ANALYSIS: Farnborough air show 2014 order tracker 5 ANALYSIS: Rolls and Airbus – how the latecomer excelled

The DEW Line provides a brief update on the Royal Navy’s CVF-class aircraft carrier programme. Less than two weeks after its naming ceremony, the 65,000t HMS Queen

Elizabeth floated out at Rosyth, Scotland on 17 July. The ship is scheduled to begin sea trials in 2016. Second of class vessel HMS Prince of Wales will enter final assembly in September. Meanwhile, the RN on 22 July

marked a handover between the carrier HMS Illustrious and dedicated helicopter carrier HMS Ocean. “Lusty” is leaving service after 32 years of use, as the 21,500t Ocean returns to use after a £65 million ($110 million) refit, says The DEW Line. Arie Egozi discusses on his Ariel View blog how the Israeli Defense Forces are using unmanned air systems to locate and destroy rocket launchers in Gaza and “to supply real-time intelligence to ground forces”.

Flightglobal’s operations and safety editor, David Learmount, has done the rounds of TV chan-nels and radio studios in the wake of the Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash. He has shared his expertise with a host of stations including BBC World, Sky News, Channel 5, France 24, NBC and Russia Today. He says, the sub-jects most reporters wanted to examine is why airlines are not banned from airspace near conflict zones, and how the inter-national inquiry will work. Our MH17 coverage starts on P10.

IN THIS ISSUECompanies listedAerCap ........................................................17Aeroflot ..........................................................9Aeronaves ....................................................27Air Algerie ......................................................8Airbus ....................... 8, 14, 15, 16, 18, 22, 23Air Greenland ...............................................27Air India .......................................................27Alenia Aermacchi .........................................18Aliansa ........................................................27All Nippon Airways .......................................13Arkia Airlines ................................................13Asiana ...........................................................9Aspirasi Pertiwi ............................................21Beechcraft ...................................................20Bell Helicopter .........................................8, 21Boeing .......... 8, 12, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24Bombardier .................................8, 15, 18, 21Carson Air ....................................................27Cathay Pacific ..............................................23ConnectJets .................................................21East Air ........................................................27Embraer ...........................................15, 17, 21Emirates ......................................................14Engine Alliance ............................................23Ethiopian Airlines .........................................25Etihad Airways ..............................................14Evektor ........................................................21Falcon Aviation Services ..............................21Flybe Aviation Services ................................18Fokker..........................................................17Garuda Indonesia ........................................27General Atomics Aeronautical Systems ........20General Electric .....................................22, 23Genesys Aerosystems ..................................20Global Air Connection ..................................27Grob Aircraft.................................................20Guicango .....................................................27Hageland Aviation Services ..........................27Hawaiian Airlines ...........................................9Hindustan Aeronautics .............................8, 18Honeywell Aerospace .......................15, 16, 20Iran Air .....................................................8, 13Jet2 .............................................................27Jetstar Asia ..................................................27Kenya Airways ..............................................27Korea Aerospace Industries ............................8Korean Air Lines ...........................................13Lion Air ........................................................27Lockheed Martin ..........................................20Lufthansa ....................................................14Malaysia Airlines ..........................8, 12, 24, 27MBDA ..........................................................20McDonnell Douglas......................................13Mitsubishi ....................................................17NatureAir .....................................................27Nepal Airlines ........................................24, 27NetJets ........................................................21Northrop Grumman ........................................8Piaggio Aero .................................................21Pratt & Whitney ......................9, 15, 17, 22, 23Qatar Airways ...............................................14Raytheon .....................................................18Red Wings ...................................................24Rolls-Royce ........................................8, 22, 23Sibir Airlines .................................................13Singapore Airlines ........................................14Sukhoi .........................................................17Textron .........................................................21Thai Airways .................................................17TransAsia Airways ...........................................9Trans Guyana Airlines ...................................27Travel Service Airlines ...................................27Tupolev ..................................................13, 24US Airways ...................................................27Yemenia .........................................................9

6 | Flight International | 29 July-4 August 2014

Download The Engine Directory.flightglobal.com/ComEngDirectory

Download the new Commercial Engines Reportnow updated for 2014 with enhanced data and in-depth market analysis

COMMENT


See Feature P29

The most common category of airline accident all over the world is the runway excursion. It follows

that, if the industry could identify the causal factors in detail, then find ways to mitigate them, this move would have the potential to lower the accident rate more than any other safety strategy.

A factor in the majority of runway overruns or excur-sions on landing is that the final approach to land was not stabilised. So back in 2010 the airlines came up with a definition of a stable approach and told their pilots that if they were not stable by 1,000ft on final ap-proach they were to go around again.

But overruns kept happening anyway. Why? It turns out that pilots ignored that advice more than 90% of

the time, but that when they did ignore it they still landed safely more than 90% of the time. If that sounds confusing, it gets worse: when pilots go around they often handle the manoeuvre badly – sometimes fatally badly for all on board. So is it best to land anyway be-cause the go-around is even more risky?

The Flight Safety Foundation, leading the research on this frustrating issue, is refusing to be beaten, and is examining in great depth not only the visible problems pilots face, but also the psychological factors that bear on their dynamic decision-making in the critical land/go-around phase. Overruns are not always fatal, but if the FSF is successful it will save a lot of bent metal. ■

Do I do or do I don’t?

Rex

Feat

ures

Rebels can defend the crash site, but not their actions

See This Week P10

Read our archive of Flight International comments on editor Murdo Morrison’s blog at flightglobal.com/comment

The circumstances surrounding the loss of a second Boeing 777 with an MH callsign raise questions about investigation protocols and airspace status over conflict zones

Summary injustice

The loss of flight MH17 is not about Malaysia Airlines. Everyone in the aviation industry knows

what a cruel irony it is that this carrier has lost a second Boeing 777 with everybody on board – again apparent-ly through no fault of its own – and empathises with its employees at a dark time.

Of course, if this disaster is confirmed as the uninten-tional shoot-down it appears to be – unintentional in the sense that MH17 was not the intended target – we con-demn the trigger-happy carelessness that led to it, and the Russian government for supporting the unrest in eastern Ukraine that created the circumstances in which such an act could take place. There is no reason to doubt evidence that the fatal missile was launched from sepa-ratist-held eastern Ukraine. It is almost beyond belief that Russian President Vladimir Putin would risk put-ting in rebel hands weaponry of this power without hav-ing control over its use. Perhaps it will turn out not to be so, but at present Russia’s “explanations” for the shoot-down have zero credibility.

There are reasons to be optimistic about a high qual-ity independent international investigation carried out strictly according to the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s Annex 13, which governs standards for accident investigation. This is despite the disadvan-tages the investigators face: the accident site was unsecured for a week or more, and the flight data and cockpit voice recorders were in the hands of

A system where ICAO issues acategorised risk level to theairlines would be a good start

u nauthorised rebel personnel for several days before being handed over. At the time of going to press, the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch had been tasked with downloading the recorders and passing the results to the Dutch Safety Board, the designated lead agency. The AAIB reports the cockpit voice recorder had been downloaded and did not appear to have been tampered with. But the fact that evidence and equip-ment was not held in sterile conditions while awaiting professional investigation gives any nation that does not like the report’s conclusions the opportunity to dis-miss them. We hope no-one will stoop that low.

Meanwhile, there is a case for reviewing the way airspace status over conflict zones is rated. At present there is no standardised system. ICAO is the only agency with the credibility to run such an advisory sys-tem, which can only ever be advisory anyway. But a system where intelligence-based warnings are fed to ICAO, and where it issues a categorised risk level that the airlines understand, would be a good start. ■

THIS WEEK

flightglobal.com8 | Flight International | 29 July-4 August 2014

For more in-depth coverage of the global rotorcraft sector, go online to flightglobal.com/helicopters

Kore

a Ae

rosp

ace

Indu

strie

s

FINAL THREE-WEEK LAP FOR A350-900FLIGHT TESTING Airbus has launched a three-week route-proving campaign using its fifth A350-900, marking the start of the twinjet’s final certification stage. Aircraft MSN5, which has a furnished cabin comprising 265 seats, will use 14 airports across the world and a route via the North Pole, says Airbus. Tests will include performance from high-altitude airfields and automatic landings, as well as airport turnaround and handling tests intended to prove that the Rolls-Royce Trent XWB-powered aircraft is ready for airline operations.

ANA SET TO BECOME FIRST TO OPERATE 787-9AIRLINES All Nippon Airways will become the first carrier to operate the Boeing 787-9. Its first aircraft is due to arrive in Tokyo on 29 July, after being delivered at Boeing’s Everett factory two days earlier, and will initially be deployed on domestic routes. Air New Zealand, the first to receive a 787-9, will start using the type in October.

AUSTRALIA ADVANCES SEARCH FOR MH370INVESTIGATION Australia says the bathymetric survey of ocean floor where lost Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 is suspected to have crashed is well under way using two vessels, while the Australian Transport Safety Bureau assesses tenders related to an upcoming underwater search. The hunt for the Boeing 777-200ER, which dis-appeared on 8 March, “continues uninterrupted”, says Warren Truss, minister for infrastructure and regional development.

MORE DHRUVS FOR INDIAORDER Hindustan Aeronautics is to manufacture 16 Dhruv Mk III advanced light helicopters each for the Indian navy and coastguard. Approved by the nation’s Defence Acquisition Council, the deal is worth around $1.19 billion, including spare parts and support.

AIR ALGERIE MD-83 GOES MISSINGINCIDENT As we closed for press, there were no details on the loca-tion of an Air Algerie Boeing MD-83 that lost radar contact after de-parting Ouagadougou in Burkina Faso on 24 July. The service, being operated by Spanish carrier Swiftair, departed at 01:17 local time and was due to arrive in Algiers at 05:10. The MD-83 was transport-ing 110 passengers, two pilots and four cabin crew.

US NAVY SCANS FOR FIRE SCOUT RADARSENSORS The US Navy wants information from potential suppliers of a maritime radar for its Bell 407-based Northrop Grumman MQ-8C Fire Scout unmanned air vehicle. To have a minimum 180˚ field of regard and with synthetic aperture radar and surface search modes, the payload should weigh no more than 81.7kg (180lb).

BOEING TALKS TO IRAN AIR OVER SPARESAFTERMARKET Iran Air and its subsidiary Iran Airtours have held discussions with Boeing over the supply of services, including spare parts, for their aircraft fleets. The talks follow US government ap-proval to pursue business with Iran following dialogue last year over its nuclear programme, and an agreement to ease US sanctions.

UPGRADED AWACS RETURNS TO SERVICEMODERNISATION The French air force has begun operating its first upgraded Boeing E-3F airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft, following successful flight testing conducted from its Avord air base. Three more aircraft will be modified by late 2016.

BRIEFING

about potential co-operation on the programme.

Development of the LCH is expected to be completed in 2020, and the LAH in 2022. KAI foresees demand for 400 examples in South Korea, and a market for 600 overseas.

The LCH/LAH programme’s expected development budget is 1 trillion won ($978 million), with funding to come from the South Korean government and overseas investors.

Missions for the civilian LCH will include emergency medical services, coastal surveillance and VIP transport tasks, says KAI. The rotorcraft will be de-veloped with foreign partners, and its design subsequently adapted to the LAH standard.

Once operational, the armed type will replace assets including the Bell AH-1S and MD Helicopters MD500 current-ly in service with the South Korean army.

KAI has previously developed the twin-engined 8.7t Surion transport, with assistance from Airbus Helicopters. ■

SELECTION GREG WALDRON SINGAPORE

KAI picked for 4.5t rotorcraft projectSeoul names Korea Aerospace Industries as its preferred bidder to design helicopter for civilian and military duties

Airbus Helicopters helped the company to develop the Surion

Korea Aerospace Industries has emerged as the preferred

bidder for a South Korean programme to develop a 4.5t helicopter with both civilian and military variants.

The decision to appoint KAI to develop the light civil helicopter (LCH) and light armed helicopter (LAH) was made by the nation’s Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, as well as the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, the company says.

“KAI was selected as a preferred bidder for the core technology development of the LCH project and the system development of the LAH pro-ject,” it says. Local media reports indicate that it defeated a bid from the country’s other major aerospace player, Korean Air.

Following its selection, KAI will create a development plan for the LCH/LAH programme, and select overseas systems developers. The company has held discussions with AgustaWestland, Airbus Helicop-ters, Bell Helicopter and Sikorsky

THIS WEEK


Accusations fly after MH17 tragedyCOVER STORY P10

Taiwan’s Aviation Safety Council has started an

i nvestigation into the 23 July loss of a TransAsia Airways ATR 72-500, which killed 48 passen-gers and crew.

Ten people survived the accident, which occurred when the regional turboprop was operating flight GE222 between Kaohsiung and Magong in Taiwan’s Penghu island chain. The aircraft crashed into two houses near the latter airport, as its crew was attempting a second landing approach.

Reported heavy rain and poor visibility associated with the recent passage of Typhoon Matmo had led the pilots to initi-ate a go-around after aborting a first attempt. The aircraft came

down roughly 500m short of the threshold and around 500m left of the centreline of Runway 20.

Flightglobal’s Ascend Fleets database shows that the destroyed aircraft – B-22810 – was delivered to TransAsia in June 2000, and was owned by Sunshine Finance.

Taiwan has invited officials from Canada, France, ATR and Pratt & Whitney Canada to also be involved in its investigation.

The loss is the third fatal accident to have affected Trans-Asia since 1988, says Ascend. Two pilots died when an ATR 72-200F freighter crashed in De-cember 2002, and four crew died when an ATR 72-200 flew into high ground in January 2005. ■See Feature P29

One of the last customers to re-main loyal to the A350-800,

Hawaiian Airlines, has switched to the A330-800neo.

The Honolulu-based carrier has signed a memorandum of un-derstanding for six firm aircraft, with purchase rights for another six A330-800neos, with deliver-ies scheduled from 2019, it says.

“The A330-800neo’s fuel efficiency, additional range and commonality with our existing A330 fleet makes it an elegant

solution to our need for growth aircraft toward the end of this decade,” says chief executive Mark Dunkerley.

Airbus launched the A330neo at the Farnborough air show. The A330-800neo will be comparable in size to Hawaiian’s existing A330-200s, yet be able to fly 400nm (740km) further, with a range of 7,450nm, and will burn about 14% less fuel per seat using Rolls-Royce Trent 7000 engines.

The A330-800neo order is val-ued at roughly $2.9 billion at list prices, the airline says.

Hawaiian’s conversion leaves Airbus with just 28 remaining firm orders for the A350-800; the smallest of three variants in the XWB family. Customers include Aeroflot, Asiana and Yemenia.

The airframer is widely expect-ed to formally cancel the pro-gramme and switch remaining customers to the A330neo, or its A350-900/-1000 variants. ■

Bombardier’s aerospace presi-dent and chief operating

officer Guy Hachey is to step down after six years in the role, as the Canadian firm restructures its businesses.

The company is doing away with its aerospace division to create four units: transportation, business aircraft, commercial air-craft, and aerostructures and en-gineering services.

The heads of all four will report to group chief executive and president Pierre Beaudoin, who thanked Hachey for his con-tribution to the company.

The business segments remain headed by former Eurocopter chief executive Lutz Bertling at transportation, Eric Martel at busi-ness aircraft and Mike Arcamone at commercial aircraft. The head of the new aerostructures and en-gineering services segment will be appointed in the next few weeks.

“Bombardier Aerospace group functions and the customer ser-vices division will be absorbed into the three aerospace business segments, generating reductions in cost and overhead,” says the company. The new aerostructures business will design and develop “complex advanced composite and metallic aerostructures” for civil aircraft, it adds.

According to Beaudoin, the new organisational structure will “enable us to be more agile and flexible in addressing customer needs, while increasing our focus on growth areas”.

The cost and effort of bringing the CSeries to market, together with three new business jets – the Global 7000 and 8000 and the Learjet 85 – have added to Bombardier’s financial pressures in recent years. While Global and Challenger business jets have per-formed reasonably well for the Montreal-based company, falling orders for CRJ regional jets and the Q400 turboprop have made it essential that the CSeries is a rapid commercial success. ■

ORDERS EDWARD RUSSELL WASHINGTON DC

A330neo sways HawaiianSwitch from A350-800 likely to speed cancellation of XWB programme’s smallest variant

Taiwan investigates ATR 72-500 lossINCIDENT DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON ELLIS TAYLOR SINGAPORE

The carrier will introduce its first of at least six -800-model aircraft during 2019, says Airbus

The crash killed 48 people

Rex

Feat

ures

Airb

us

ORGANISATION GREG WALDRON SINGAPORE

Hachey to leave Bombardier in unit restructure


For more coverage about in-flight safety, visit our dedicated landing page at flightglobal.com/safety

Investigators are attempting to unravel the circumstances be-

hind the loss of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 against a volatile background of propaganda and armed conflict that is already dis-torting the narrative.

Not only will the Dutch-led in-quiry be tasked with ascertaining whether a hostile act destroyed the Boeing 777-200ER and wheth-er it might have been prevented, but it will also examine the deci-sion making on route selection.

Surveillance data suggests that several aircraft, including MH17, operated along the same airway – designated L980 – towards way-point TAMAK on the Russian bor-der in their transit of eastern Ukraine on 17 July. The region lies on a great circle path between European and south-east Asian cities and is a natural crossing point. Malaysia Airlines describes the route as “commonly used”.

But if MH17 was brought down by a missile – a suspicion that does not appear to be disput-ed at government level – the rea-son why this specific flight was singled out for attack is unclear.

There is preliminary surveil-lance evidence that MH17

strayed off airway L980 as it passed Dnipropetrovsk at 16:00, operating some 13km further north than preceding flights, in-cluding Air Astana’s KC904 and Jet Airways’ 9W119. This has yet to be confirmed by the investiga-tion team, but meteorological re-cords indicate thunderstorm ac-tivity in the vicinity at the time.

ALTITUDEThe aircraft left Amsterdam with 283 passengers and 15 crew and its flight-plan, approved by Euro-control, involved crossing Ukrain-ian airspace at 35,000ft. Although the carrier says this was “close to the optimum altitude”, air traffic control instructed the flight to re-main instead at 33,000ft.

This was the first available cruise altitude above a closed sec-tion of airspace within the Dnipro-petrovsk flight information region. Three days earlier the upper limit of this airspace closure had been raised from 26,000ft to 32,000ft along routes including L980.

The change appears to have been driven by concerns that so-phisticated surface-to-air weap-ons were being used to strike high-altitude targets, following

the crash of a Ukrainian air force Antonov An-26, which had been flying at 21,300ft, on 14 July.

Ukrainian president Petro Po-roshenko said the An-26 was shot down by “another, more power-ful missile” than a simple shoul-der-launched rocket.

Despite this threat, upper cruise levels remained open. ICAO had warned of safety risks within the Simferopol flight information re-gion to the south, owing to the Russian annexation of Crimea and confusion over air navigation re-sponsibility, but MH17 stayed well clear of this airspace.

Radar contact with the aircraft was lost at 16:20 about 50km from the TAMAK border way-point. There was no distress call.

Ukraine’s defence ministry says an emergency locator was detected at 16:45. Wreckage of the 777’s cockpit and forward fu-selage shows evidence of perfora-tion by high-velocity fragments.

US ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power told a Security Council session the next day that MH17 was “likely” brought down by a radar-guided surface-to-air missile from an SA-11 unit, or Buk-M.

She said there was “nothing threatening or provocative” about the 777, and that it was following its flight plan and transmitting its assigned transponder code.

Her Russian counterpart, Vita-ly Churkin, suggested the Ukrain-ian authorities should share

blame, asking: “Why did Ukrain-ian [controllers] send the flight to an area of military clashes?”

Although there is evidence of a sudden, destructive event over-coming the 777, Ukraine’s de-fence ministry insisted it had not launched any surface-to-air mis-siles during recent military oper-ations against separatist forces and that none of its fighters was operating in the airspace.

Unverified photographs have proliferated on social media, in-flaming the controversy. Ukraini-an counter-intelligence arm SBU’s

COVER STORY

Analysts could require weeks to determine whether there is evidence supporting a missile attack

Russia’s defence ministry has offered a baffling account of the circumstances surrounding the loss, using radar data to suggest a Ukrainian fighter was in the vicinity.

Its version of events – accompa-nied by maps and satellite photos – appears confused in a number of aspects. The ministry presented a map supposedly illustrating MH17’s track over Ukraine. It depicted the airways from way-points BULIG and MAKAK, through Donetsk, to the waypoints ABOLA, GOMED and TAMAK. These correspond to the airways W633 and L69.

But flight-plan and publicly-availa-ble surveillance data indicate that

MH17 was not flying either airway, instead operating the L980 route – which also converges on TAMAK – north of Donetsk.

Deputy chief of the general staff Andrei Kartapolov claims that MH17 initially stayed within the airway contained in the ministry presentation. He says the aircraft then “deviated” from the route, straying 14km outside of the airway to the north before attempting to correct its course.

There is evidence from transponder-derived surveillance data suggesting that, as it passed Dnipropetrovsk, MH17 moved a few kilometres north of airway L980.

Does Russia’s alternative explanation bear scrutiny?

ANALYSIS DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON

Accusations fly after MH17 tragedy Confusion characterises early stages of investigation as factions in struggle for Ukraine blame one another for disaster

Rex

Feat

ures

The remains of the aircraft may give clues as to its exact fate


NEWS FOCUS

The ongoing conflict inside eastern Ukraine has been

marked by several of Kiev’s mili-tary and paramilitary aircraft being shot down, both before and since the loss of Malaysia Air-lines flight MH17.

On 14 July – three days before the commercial 777-200ER was destroyed by a suspected SA-11 missile attack – a Ukrainian air force Antonov An-26 crashed after also being hit by a missile, fired by pro-Russian militants. Several crew members parachut-ed to safety after the aircraft was struck, at what the Ukrainian de-fence ministry said was an alti-tude of 21,300ft, but two others are believed to have been killed.

Exactly a month earlier, 49 mili-tary personnel were killed when an air force Ilyushin Il-76MD was shot down on a night-time land-ing approach to Lugansk.

Other recorded incidents in 2014 include the loss of 14 lives when a Border Guard-operated Mil Mi-8 transport helicopter was brought down near Sloviansk on 29 May, and the loss of an army Mi-24 assault helicopter and its two-person crew near the same location earlier the same month.

Ukraine’s defence ministry on 23 July announced that two of its air force-operated Sukhoi Su-25 ground-attack aircraft had been shot down by militants using “an-ti-aircraft missile systems”. The pilots of both aircraft ejected. ■

chief, Vitaly Naida, says there is “undeniable evidence” from such images that a Buk-M launcher was in the town of Torez, close to the crash site. His claim that Buk-M vehicles were slipped back into Russia hours after the crash is one of many that cannot be indepen-dently verified.

Russia’s defence ministry has put forward a suggestion, based on its own radar data, that a Ukrainian fighter fired a missile at the aircraft.

Dutch Safety Board investiga-tors have handed the cockpit-voice and flight-data recorders to the UK Air Accidents Investiga-tion Branch for analysis. But while the cockpit-voice recorder contains information from MH17, analysts could require several weeks to determine – if they can – whether there is evidence sup-porting a missile attack.

All routes in eastern Dnipro-petrovsk airspace have since been closed.

Prior to the loss of the two Malaysian 777s this year, the last high-casualty crash that in-volved a long-haul passenger aircraft was the Afriqiyah Airways go-around accident at Tripoli in 2010.

As with MH17, Dutch nation-als made up a large proportion of those on board and the inquiry took place against the backdrop of an armed anti-government uprising which complicated the investigation. ■

While this might have been related to weather-avoidance, Kartapolov openly queries whether the deviation was the result of a navigation error or instruction from Dnipropetrovsk air traffic control.

The ministry also presented a 6min playback of radar informa-tion from Rostov air traffic man-agement centre from 13:19UTC showing the secondary return from MH17 as it tracked on a heading of just under 120° to-wards TAMAK at about 490kt.

Two other radar tracks showed Singapore Airlines’ flight SQ351, another 777, from Copenhagen and Air India’s AI113, a 787, out of Delhi.

Kartapolov claims that Russian air surveillance systems detected a Ukrainian air force Su-25 “moving upwards” toward MH17 at a dis-tance of 3-5km. He says the Su-25 can achieve “for a short time” an altitude of 10,000m (33,000ft). But Sukhoi’s own data on the type lists a maximum service ceiling of 7,000m (23,000ft) without the additional burden of weapons.

Kartapolov says the Su-25 can be armed with a Vympel R-60 air-to-air missile. “What was the mission of the combat aircraft?” he asks. But the ministry’s radar playback does not offer any convincing evidence of a fighter presence.

It shows MH17’s track disrupted about 51km from the TAMAK way-point, its direction vector swinging sharply north-east, with a substan-tial loss of airspeed and the disap-pearance of altitude data.

The playback shows the simul-taneous appearance of a primary radar return in the same location, which air force chief of staff Igor Makushev interprets as the Su-25 – offering no other explanation, such as falling wreckage, even though the radar return was previ-ously undetected and remains largely stationary afterwards.

MH17’s radar data block vanishes about 90s after the initiating event. ■

THREAT CRAIG HOYLE LONDON

Shoot-downs a characteristic of Ukraine unrest

A SA-11 surface-to-air missile – or Buk-M – is

suspected of having brought the Boeing down

Rex

Feat

ures

Rex

Feat

ures

An Il-76MD was downed in June


COVER STORY

The investigation of the down-ing of Malaysia Airlines flight

MH17 in eastern Ukraine on 17 July is inevitably going to be car-ried out under circumstances that breach many of the international protocols that apply to such exer-cises. However assiduously the investigation is now carried out, this lays the eventual conclu-sions open to dispute by any party that does not agree with – or does not like – the findings.

Nevertheless, the technical in-vestigation is to go ahead under the leadership of the Nether-lands, following a decision by Ukraine to relinquish its right – as the state where the event oc-curred – to be the leader.

The Dutch Safety Board (OVV) received the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder from Ukraine in Kiev on 22 July, and flew them to UK to be download-ed by the Air Accidents Investi-gation Branch. The AAIB would not say whether the download had been successful, only that it is handing downloaded informa-tion to the Dutch for analysis.

The FDR and CVR had origi-nally been recovered from the

wreckage of the Malaysia Boeing 777 by separatist rebels in east-ern Ukraine and held by them for at least two days. Eventually the rebels agreed to hand these “black boxes” over to Malaysian authorities in separatist-held Donetsk. Malaysia had been qui-etly lobbying via diplomatic channels to secure them, and handed the recorders to Kiev once this was achieved.

Another potential challenge to the integrity of the eventual re-port’s conclusions is that the acci-dent site was never secured. It took four days for even the tiny advance party of professional investigators to gain access to the site, because it is in a rebel-held conflict zone.

EVIDENCE CONTAMINATEDSo the evidence on the site, whether aircraft wreckage, bod-ies, passenger luggage and pos-sessions, was not able to be pro-tected against tampering or even looting. The only “authority” on the site was wielded by gun-tot-ing rebels, who nevertheless let some journalists and local people have extensive access to the area.

The OVV is still trying to gain

Rebels retained MH17’s data recorders for at least two days

ANALYSIS DAVID LEARMOUNT LONDON

Investigators face tough task to find what went wrongProbe must deal with challenges of an insecure crash site in a war zone – and almost inevitably, disputed conclusions

assurances of safety for a full in-ternational team of investigators at the site by securing a cessation of hostilities in the crash area, and a safe corridor for access.

The OVV makes it clear that its investigation responsibility, under Annex 13 of the ICAO Chi-

cago convention, is not to estab-lish blame or criminality but to report what happened and make recommendations to prevent fur-ther such occurrences.

It made this statement: “If the investigation shows evidence of any criminal or terrorist activities,

Kuala Lumpur

Amsterdam

Ukraine

Intended route

MH17 ROUTE

SOURCE: Flightglobal

Lost contact

PLANNING

Lack of facts weakened risk evaluationAn issue in the MH17 story that has engaged the world’s media is why civil airliners were “allowed” to fly over a conflict zone.

The answer is that many agencies provide advice to airlines on the risks in certain airspace, but as ICAO explains, it is an airline’s deci-sion as to whether they take the ad-vice or not.

The only agency that can legally ban the use of airspace is the sover-eign state(s) beneath it. On 14 July,

three days before the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 was brought down, Kiev had closed its airspace over rebel-controlled eastern Ukraine from ground level up to flight level 320 (32,000ft) by issuing a notice to airmen (NOTAM), but this allowed MH17, and a score of other airlines, to fly through its eastern sector at FL330 or above.

Kiev appears to have believed that the rebels had access only to man-portable surface-to-air missiles Fl

ight

glob

al/T

im B

iche

no-B

row

n


NEWS FOCUS

The list below includes some of the civil aircraft that have been shot down when carry-ing out normal business in non-combat airspace. Many more have been downed in combat zones or areas in which rebels were active.■ 28 November 2002 Arkia Airlines Boeing 757 at Mombasa, Kenya. Two Strela heat-seeking missiles were fired at the Israeli charter flight just after take-off from Mombasa on its return flight to Israel. They did not cause any damage to the aircraft.■ 4 October 2001 Sibir Airlines Tupolev Tu-154 over the Black Sea. The aircraft, on a flight from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk, was accidentally shot down by the Ukrainian military carrying out an exer-cise from a Crimea base. The military shot at a target drone but the missile brought down the Sibir flight instead, killing all 79 people on board.

■ 3 July 1988 Iran Air Airbus A300, Persian Gulf. The aircraft, on a short scheduled flight to Dubai from Bandar Abbas, was shot down by two missiles fired from the USS Vincennes. The crew allegedly thought the radar return was an Iranian air force McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom. The 290 people on board were killed.■ 31 August 1983 Korean Air Boeing 747, near Sakhalin Island, Sea of Japan. The 747 had strayed into the edges of Soviet airspace and was shot down by Soviet air force inter-ceptors, killing all 269 people on board.■ 20 April 1978 Korean Airlines Boeing 707 in Russian airspace near the Bering Strait. The aircraft strayed off course into Russian airspace on a Paris-Anchorage sector and was intercepted by two Sukhoi Su-15s and damaged by missiles, after which it force-landed. Two people were killed. ■

Downings and near misses in detail

the information will subsequently be submitted to the relevant au-thorities in accordance with appli-cable regulations. The Dutch Safe-ty Board’s investigation will focus on ascertaining facts, rather than apportioning blame.”

However, the investigation of Rex

Feat

ures

Rex

Feat

ures

The Israeli charter jet had a narrow escape departing Mombasa

that are useless for targets above about 15,000ft, and also believed they would not be seeking to shoot down any aircraft except for

Ukrainian military targets, which they have successfully done several times in recent months.

Although information about the Ukraine internal conflict was interna-tionally known, the region had not been declared a war zone by ICAO or any other agency. NATO, however, had made public its concern that the rebels might be able to gain access to surface-to-air missiles more pow-erful than the weapons they were believed to have.

Decisions about whether to fly over conflict zones are a risk as-sessment task that airlines have to

undertake. Ukraine sits precisely astride the shortest possible routes from many northern European major airports to points in India and Southeast Asia, so a decision to route around it costs fuel.

If an authoritative aviation organi-sation like ICAO were to take on the task of providing precise, reliable advice about risky airspace, it would have to develop a system of intelli-gence-based categories that the airlines could relate to.

Such a single-point system does not exist at present. To enable ICAO to do this, an intelligence feed to the

agency would have to be agreed.The Dutch Safety Board, leading

the MH17 investigation, has clearly noticed this advice shortfall and has released a statement: “In addi-tion to the international accident investigation, the Dutch Safety Board is also conducting two other independent investigations: an in-vestigation into the decision-mak-ing process with regard to flight routes and an investigation into the availability of passenger lists. These investigation reports are ex-pected to be published ahead of the main accident report.” ■

events like this – believed to be an unintentional shoot-down – does come under the Annex 13 protocols despite the fact that it could be argued that it is not an “accident”, but the consequences of a deliberate act.

ICAO defines an “accident” as an event affecting the aircraft that harms or kills passengers between the time passenger boarding starts and disembarka-tion is complete. Almost imme-diately following the downing of the 777 there were calls for the investigation to be international.

INTENSE INTERESTThe active conflict between Kiev and the separatist militias, and Kiev and Moscow, which backs the Russia-leaning rebels, clearly makes the results of the probe a focus of great national interest, hence Ukraine’s decision to relin-quish its right to lead the investi-gation and hand leadership to the state that lost far more nationals among the passengers than any other – the Netherlands.

But the investigation is indeed to be international. In a state-ment, the OVV lists the partici-pants: “The Dutch Safety Board is also responsible for co-ordinat-ing all participating investigators and investigation teams from the countries involved (Ukraine, Ma-laysia, Australia, Germany, the United States, the United King-dom and Russia) and the ICAO. The international team currently consists of 24 investigators. A total of four Dutch Safety Board investigators are currently operat-ing in Ukraine.” ■

Rex

Feat

ures

Manpads are a grave threat

AIR TRANSPORT


For up-to-the-minute air transport news, network and fleet information sign up at: flightglobal.com/dashboard

A irbus is aiming to introduce a modified door for the A380

later this year, to eliminate a seal-ing weakness which led a Singa-pore Airlines aircraft to divert after loss of cabin pressure.

The airframer believes the weakness is also behind a num-ber of cabin noise complaints.

All 16 doors on the aircraft will be subject to a modification pro-gramme, says Airbus executive vice-president of programmes Tom Williams, which could be incorporated into an airworthi-ness directive.

One of Singapore Airlines’ A380s diverted to Baku, Azerbai-jan, in January after suffering damage to a left-hand door on the main deck.

Airbus has traced the problem to

the cover plate fitted above the A380’s doors as well as the internal seal around the door perimeter.

Williams says that the doors are a “complex” item of engi-neering, designed to be large – to accommodate emergency evacu-ation requirements – with elec-tric actuation.

The cover plate had started to separate from the upper edge of the door as a high-frequency vibration led to propagation of a crack through the skin.

While the subsequent pressuri-sation leak and diversion were the primary concern, Williams says: “We’re also looking at com-plaints from customers over noise from the doors.”

He says Airbus is developing a new seal and seal-carrier for the door, featuring a different cross-section, as well as a modified cover plate. “We think we have one that will work,” he adds.

There will be no changes to the surrounding structure of the door, he stresses. Airbus intends to have finalised the modification by around the fourth quarter of this year. The airframer had de-livered 135 A380s by the end of June 2014. ■

FREIGHTERS DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON

‘No rush’ towards Beluga replacementAirbus has pushed back development of a successor aircraft to its A300-600ST Beluga transport, as adjust-ments to its logistics operation ease the pressure for a quick decision.

The airframer is constructing spe-cialised docking stations at its load-ing facilities, to avoid losing productivity to weather conditions.

But executive vice-president for programmes Tom Williams says that the airframer’s shift of some compo-nents to road transport, particularly for single-aisle manufacture, has proven beneficial.

“That’s worked out quite well,” he said, during the Farnborough air show. “The economics are very good.”

He says the change has given Airbus a “bit more flexibility”. The

Beluga fleet will concentrate on car-rying sections for which there is no alternative shipping method.

“There’s not the same urgency [to build a successor],” he says. “We’ve bought a bit of time.”

Airbus only has five Beluga aircraft and Williams says a replacement will require a disproportionate level of investment and development.

“We wanted not to rush,” Williams says, adding that Airbus had wanted to adopt a “minimum approach” to secure the capacity required to han-dle a ramp-up of both its A320neo single-aisle and A350 long-haul air-craft programmes.

He expects Airbus to revisit a pos-sible Beluga replacement in a year or two. ■

Qatar Airways boss Akbar Al Baker has vented his frustra-

tion at the way Germany limits access to the Gulf carriers, high-lighting his region’s support for the country’s aviation industry through the airlines’ huge Air-bus orderbooks.

“Germany is an industrial giant. It has the world’s best brands. And both business peo-ple and tourists want to go in and out,” says Al Baker. “Why are we as Gulf carriers being restricted?”

The airline currently serves three destinations in Germany: Berlin, Frankfurt and Munich. Gulf rival Emirates has four destinations and will deploy Airbus A380s on its Frankfurt flights from Septem-ber. Etihad Airways, which flies to three points, rescued Air Berlin three years ago and holds a 29% stake in the German leisure airline.

“If our load factors to Germany are high – as they are for Lufthan-sa – then why are they blocking other airlines?” asks Al Baker.

“If Qatar Airways, Etihad and Emirates decide tomorrow to cancel all our orders to Germa-ny because our traffic rights are

either being renegotiated or im-peded, Airbus would lose nearly 700 aircraft worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Do you know what it would do to the jobless market in Germany? We create jobs,” says Al Baker.

“The talk is that Lufthansa wants traffic rights with Gulf carri-ers to be renegotiated. If that hap-pened, the reaction from us would be: ‘That’s fine, then we won’t support one of the main German industries – aviation,’” he adds. ■

Al Baker warns over German access restrictions LEGISLATION MAX KINGSLEY-JONES LONDON

MODIFICATIONS DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON

Airbus to revamp A380 door sealsMove, which also involves cover plates, comes after weakness leads to loss of cabin pressure on SIA aircraft

Airb

us

Road transport has replaced the Beluga for some components

“We are also looking at complaints from our customers over noise coming from the doors”TOM WILLIAMS EVP programmes, Airbus

“If our load factors to Germany are high, then why are they blocking the other airlines?”AKBAR AL BAKER Chief executive, Qatar Airways

AIR TRANSPORT

flightglobal.com

A350-900 passes final braking testsAIR TRANSPORT P16

29 July-4 August 2014 | Flight International | 15

Now halfway between pro-gramme launch and sched-

uled first flight, Embraer’s E2 fam-ily of re-engined and re-winged E-Jets is rapidly taking shape.

In four months, workers at the Brazilian airframer’s OGMA cen-tre of excellence for metal pro-duction – located in Evora, Portu-gal – will start cutting the first metal of the E190 E2’s advanced new wing.

Two months later, Embraer plans to complete critical design reviews for all major systems, in-cluding the fly-by-wire technolo-gy pioneered by the airframer’s Legacy 500 business jet and KC-390 tanker-transport.

That will lead to a design freeze in late 2014, construction of the first airframe and assembly begin-ning in late 2015, and the first two Pratt & Whitney PW1900G en-gines arriving in early 2016.

BIG DECISIONSFirst flight of the E190 E2 – which in 2018 will be the first of the three E2 variants to enter ser-vice – will follow in the second half of the year, says Luís Carlos Affonso, Embraer’s chief operat-ing officer for the commercial aviation division.

Though service entry is still at least three-and-a-half years distant, the design and configuration deci-sions Embraer has made thus far – and is to make over the next few months – will play a significant role in the programme’s future.

Embraer launched the pro-gramme in November 2011 in re-sponse to decisions by Airbus and Boeing to re-engine the A320 and 737 families. For Embraer, that meant there was no room left in the market for a new, small narrowbody, with the two ver-sions of the Bombardier CSeries, A319neo and 737 Max 7 already crowding the space.

Instead, Embraer’s fallback strategy was to attack the large-regional-jet market it first entered with the E190 a decade ago. That decision saved Embraer the task

of designing a new cross-section, and drove a supply-chain strate-gy focused on preserving as much commonality with the E-Jet “E1” family as possible.

“The E1 is, I would say, a very modern airplane,” Affonso says. “We are trying to keep the systems architectures [on the E2] similar to better leverage the customer base we have on the E1. The mechan-ics will recognise it’s an E-Jet.”

Embraer has already claimed 250 firm orders in less than 14 months for the E-Jet E2 family, from four operators.

The systems architecture inside the aircraft will remain virtually identical to the E1 fleet, with the latest generation of the Honeywell Primus Epic integrated flightdeck system selected again. It will offer the same cockpit experience while adding new functions, such as a new flight-management system and synthetic vision, with addi-tional capacity for the functionality to grow as cockpit systems ad-vance over the next two decades.

For Embraer, the biggest depar-ture within the E2 programme is

the design of the wing, which was showcased at the airframer’s ex-hibit at the recent Farnborough air show. Pratt & Whitney is supply-ing the first 10% of fuel consump-tion reduction on the E2 by deliv-ering the PW1700G engine for the E175 E2 and the PW1900G for the E190 and E195 E2. Most of the rest of the change in fuel consumption comes from the new aerofoils.

The shape reveals how much Embraer’s wing-design skills have evolved over the past 15 years.

“It’s a completely new wing. The span of the wing is increased by 5m on both the 175 and the 190/195,” Affonso says. “And of course a completely new shape,

new aspect ratio, smaller relative thickness. It’s a modern wing, much more efficient.”

The addition of fly-by-wire flight controls means Embraer still has more decisions to make about how much capability to in-tegrate into the wings. Airbus and Boeing use fly-by-wire systems to alleviate gust loads, smoothing the ride for passengers and slight-ly improving fuel efficiency.

“This system can do everything. It is very capable and we can add functionalities,” Affonso says. “We are considering gust alleviation but this is under study as we speak.”

P&W, meanwhile, has assured Embraer that the oil system fail-ure that has kept the Bombardier CSeries fleet grounded for nearly seven weeks poses no risk to the E2 schedule. The PW1900G on the E190 and E195 models of the E2 will share the same turbo ma-chinery as the PW1500G on the CSeries. As a result, the E-Jet en-gine will not require a separate certification campaign, but only an addendum to the CSeries cer-tificate, Affonso says. ■

DEVELOPMENT STEPHEN TRIMBLE WASHINGTON DC

Embraer enters critical stage with E2Programme decisions made in next few months will be key to success of aircraft, which is due to enter service in 2018

Embr

aer

Firm orders for the E2 family, which shares much in common with the E1, have already reached 250

“It’s a completely newwing. The span of thewing is increased by5m on both the 175and the 190/195”LUÍS CARLOS AFFONSO Chief operating officer, commercial aviation, Embraer

AIR TRANSPORT


The Farnborough debut of Boeing’s latest 787 derivative

has enabled details of the air-craft’s aerodynamic advances to be examined close up.

The 787-9 is the first Boeing air-liner with hybrid laminar-flow control (HLFC), which is a feature of its fin and tailplane. This drag- reducing aerodynamic technology

For up-to-the-minute air transport news, network and fleet information sign up at flightglobal.com/dashboard

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN 787-8 AND 787-9

These close up pictures of the 787-9’s tail show the hybrid laminar-flow control additions, compared with the 787-8 pictured on the leftA: HLFC system on tailplaneB: HLFC system on fin

Boeing 787-8

A B

Boeing 787-9

TECHNOLOGY MAX KINGSLEY-JONES LONDON

787-9 reveals aerodynamic advancesFirst Dreamliner stretch variant at Farnborough air show exhibits hybrid laminar-flow control features on its tailplane and fin

Airline passengers are increas-ingly considering the availa-

bility of in-flight wireless when buying tickets, a study suggests.

The Honeywell Aerospace wi-fi survey finds that 22% of fli-ers are prepared to pay more for a ticket if wi-fi is available, and 17% of fliers have switched carri-ers for better wireless access.

The study, based on a survey of 1,045 adults who have used in-flight wi-fi, also finds that 66% of travellers take into account wi-fi availability when booking, and 37% “would be upset” if wi-fi was not available. ■

Airbus has carried out a maximum-energy rejected

take-off with its A350-900 at the Istres base, the final major test prior to certification.

The test was performed on 19 July with aircraft MSN1. While the twin-engined A350 has already conducted rejected take-off tests, the maximum-energy event is intended to examine the extreme case of a rejection at high speed and high weight with brak-ing capability at its limits.

Airbus says the brakes reach a temperature of around 1,400°C (2,552°F) as a result of the energy absorbed in stopping the aircraft. Under the certification criteria the

A350-900 passes final braking testsPROGRAMME DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDONCONNECTIVITY

JON HEMMERDINGER WASHINGTON DC

Airline flyers asking for wi-fi

aircraft must remain standing for 5min before firefighters can cool the brakes. Airbus says the test was “successfully performed”.

The maximum-energy test is left until last because of the risk

of damage to the aircraft. Certifi-cation will follow a series of route-proving flights which will begin in July. The A350 test fleet has accumulated over 540 flights and clocked up 2,250h. ■

Airb

us

Stopping the aircraft can cause brake systems to reach 1,400°C

looks set to become standard on all future Boeing products, as it will also equip the 787-10 and 777X family.

Boeing is reluctant to talk much about the system and will not dis-close how much benefit it deliv-ers, saying only it is “significant”. The company does, however, con-firm that the system uses suction

to delay the transition of the air-flow boundary layer from laminar flow into turbulent flow.

“Boeing has finally found the ingredients to the ‘secret sauce’ to make [HLFC] work,” deputy chief project engineer on 787 derivative development Ed Petkus told Flightglobal earlier this year.

While HLFC is incorporated into the 787-10, there is “no firm plan” to introduce it on the -8, says Mark Jenks, vice-president of 787 development. “There’s a business case we have to run – it’s a function of how many more -8s are we going to build and the detail cost to put it on,” he says

As these images comparing the 787-8 and -9 show, the only dis-cernible pieces of the HLFC sys-tem are the small doors inboard on the underside of each tail-plane and either side of the fin. Flightglobal understands that these panels have two sets of hinges allowing them to tilt both ways like saloon bar doors. The system then generates suction to maintain the laminar flow.

Another feature of the 787-9 is its high-lift system, adapted from the 787-8 to cater for higher oper-ating weights. Although the wing’s planform and flaps are identical to the -8, the -9 is offered with three additional flap settings (10, 17 and 18), meaning there are a total of nine positions (exclud-ing “up”), compared with six on the 787-8. ■

AIR TRANSPORT

flightglobal.com

Airbus targets Poseidon in UK patrol battleDEFENCE P18


Long-running plans to resur-rect production of the Fokker

100 twinjet appear to be gaining momentum as the Netherlands Aircraft Company works on se-curing the financing and supply chain partners to launch the air-craft, dubbed the F120NG.

“We are not going to give a timetable or timeline at this stage, but the fact that we are sharing more details… demonstrates we are confident the funding is immi-nent and the project will make sig-nificant steps in the coming few months,” chief executive Maarten Van Eeghen said at the Farnbor-ough air show.

The plan is to produce a new-build 125- or 130-seater that is a stretch of the basic Fokker 100 design, says chief engineer Rudi den Hertog. The only physical changes to the airframe are to the wing, which will feature slightly more span, winglets and some “tweaks” to the wing profile.

The F120NG will be powered by Pratt & Whitney’s PurePower PW1X17G, which is essentially the same engine that has been de-veloped for the Mitsubishi Re-

gional Jet and is rated at 17,600lb-thrust (78kN). Netherlands Aircraft Company has worked with P&W on the F120NG project and the engine maker has signed off the engine-airframe integra-tion, says den Hertog.

Mating P&W’s geared turbofan with the lightweight Fokker 100 airframe produces a competitive aircraft in this size category that burns 50% less fuel per seat than the original F100, claims Nether-lands Aircraft Company. “The aircraft is uniquely positioned,

complementing the Airbus and Boeing fleets, covering the entire 90- to 150-seat segment with the lowest seat mile and trip cost,” says Van Eeghen.

Netherlands Aircraft Compa-ny is acutely aware that the pro-ject, which has been more than a decade in the making and sub-ject to a couple of false starts, has its doubters.

“This programme has matured over the last year, and promises to have a substantial competitive edge over current and projected

players,” says Van Eeghen.The F120NG will compete

with Bombardier’s CSeries and Embraer’s E2.

Final assembly will take place in the Netherlands. A nacelle supplier has been selected but has yet to be announced, and talks are under way with two avionics suppliers.

The earliest the F120NG could enter service is 2019, based on a five-year development and test-ing programme from when it ob-tains the official go-ahead. ■

DEVELOPMENT MARK PILLING FARNBOROUGH

New Fokker edging closer to reality Dutch start-up talks to financiers and suppliers to produce lighter weight, fuel-efficient stretched version of former twinjet

Sukhoi Civil Aircraft says it does not yet see a need to put

upgraded engines on its Superjet 100, but that this could change depending on the performance of upcoming new-generation jets from its competitors.

At the Farnborough air show, senior vice-president for econom-ics and finance Artem Pogosian said the Superjet provides 6-8% in fuel savings over the current-gener-ation regional jets.

The Russian airframer is still expecting its jet to save 3-4% more fuel versus upcoming new-generation aircraft such as the

Mitsubishi Regional Jet and the Embraer E2 family.

“We understand that now our product is better. In future we will analyse what is happening with our competitors, and if we foresee we couldn’t provide a better solu-tion, of course we will change our position,” says Pogosian.

The Superjet is powered by the PowerJet SaM146 turbofan.

Mitsubishi Aircraft’s MRJ will be powered by Pratt & Whitney PW1200G geared turbofans when it enters the market in 2017, while Embraer’s re-engined E195 E2 will have PW1900G powerplants. ■

REGIONAL JETS

Sukhoi bides time over Superjet engine upgrade

DELIVERIES

Thai flag carrier receives first 787-8Thai Airways took delivery of its first of eight Boeing 787s on 18 July, with its lead example being a -8 variant. The aircraft will have 264 seats in a two-class configuration, with 24 business and 240 economy class seats, says the carrier. Out of the eight 787s it will receive on lease from AerCap over the next three years, six will be in the -8 variant, while the remaining two are stretched -9s.

Thai

Airw

ays

NAC

The F120NG is being touted as covering the 90- to 150-seat class with the lowest cost per seat mile

DEFENCE


India’s Avro programme to re-place obsolete Hindustan Aero-

nautics-built HS 748 transports will be handled by the nation’s private sector. Taken during a De-fence Acquisition Council meet-ing led by defence minister Arun Jaitley, the decision means state-owned airframer HAL will have no role to play in the estimated $2.2 billion deal.

The procurement of 56 new transports through the Buy & Make route calls for a foreign orig-inal equipment manufacturer to deliver 16 aircraft of the selected type, with an Indian agency from the private sector to produce the remainder under license.

“Following the change of government, the existing sched-ule remains in place, and we will respond to the request for proposals shortly,” says Federi-co Lacalle, regional sales direc-tor, Airbus Defence & Space, Asia Pacific. The company is of-fering its C295 tactical transport, while Alenia Aermacchi is pro-moting the C-27J. India’s bid sub-mission deadline has been ex-tended until 28 August.

New Delhi’s requirements will test the capabilities of its fledgling private sector aerospace compa-nies, as its requirement calls for the local partner “to produce 16 aircraft with a minimum of 30% value addition to be achieved in India in the first phase”. This should rise to 60% for the remain-ing 24 aircraft, with the local com-pany also expected to gain the ca-pability to perform Level D servicing.

Flightglobal’s Ascend Fleets da-tabase records the Indian air force as operating 62 HS 748s, the old-est of which was built in 1961. ■

To get more defence sector coverage, subscribe to our fortnightly newsletter:flightglobal.com/defencenewsletter

India’s requirements will test its fledgling private sector aerospace companies

One of the potential bidders for a future UK maritime patrol

aircraft requirement is calling on the Ministry of Defence to hold a competition, rather than “rush in” to a sole-source deal to buy Boeing’s 737-based P-8 Poseidon.

Airbus Defence & Space has been touting its multirole C295 as an affordable means of reinstating a lapsed maritime patrol capabili-ty for the Royal Air Force, propos-ing an acquisition of around 12 aircraft. A Portuguese air force ex-ample was on display at the Farn-borough air show as part of the airframer’s promotional activity.

Pointing to a long-running con-sultation involving the MoD and industry called the Air ISTAR Op-timisation Study (AIOS), Richard Thompson, head of military air-craft UK for Airbus Defence & Space, says: “All of a sudden there seems to be an urgency to replace the maritime component.”

Highlighting a pre-show con-cern that the MoD could be poised to order the P-8 as a successor to its retired British Aerospace Nim-rod MR2s, Thompson says: “The P-8 is not the only off-the-shelf so-lution. There are alternatives.”

Twelve C925s equipped with maritime patrol and anti-subma-rine warfare equipment already used by the UK armed forces

could be acquired for half the price of six P-8s, while life-cycle costs would be between one-quarter and one-fifth those of the larger type, he claims.

Several other systems are being promoted for possible UK application, including a Saab so-lution based on its 2000 turbo-prop and a Bombardier Q400 proposal backed by companies including L-3 Communications.

Thompson also believes that additional capacity on the UK’s A330 Voyager programme could be used to satisfy other future air-borne command and control re-quirements. One potential appli-cation could be to adapt several aircraft to serve as replacements

for the RAF’s Boeing 707-based E-3D airborne warning and con-trol system fleet, he suggests.

“We have put forward what we think is a balanced set of propos-als for overland and maritime sur-veillance, and to bring Voyager in in the fullness of time for airborne early warning and command and control,” Thompson says. “Now we need customer engagement.”

“The AIOS is one of a number of ongoing strands of analysis that will contribute to the Strategic De-fence and Security Review 2015,” says the MoD, which during Farn-borough announced funding to extend operations of the RAF’s Sentinel R1 and Shadow R1 sur-veillance aircraft until 2018. ■

TRANSPORTS ATUL CHANDRA BENGALURU

Private sector to drive India’s Avro replacement

REQUIREMENT CRAIG HOYLE LONDON

Airbus targets Poseidon in UK maritime patrol battleCompany highlights cost benefit of C295 airframe, as part of “balanced set of proposals”

MAINTENANCE

Flybe to support RAF Atlas fleetFlybe Aviation Services has been chosen as preferred bid-der to maintain the Airbus A400M for the UK. The Exeter-based MRO provider will sup-port the Royal Air Force’s 22 Atlas tactical transports, to be delivered from September, at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire.

The MoD is considering the P-8 as a Nimrod MR2 successor

Billy

Pix

Rex

Feat

ures

DEFENCE


Gray Eagle puts NERO aloftDEFENCE P20

Boeing blames a wiring redesign on the KC-46A

programme for a $272 million forward loss announced on 24 July, but dismisses a government estimate predicting more delays and up to another $515 million in cost overruns.

Although the KC-46A Pegasus is based on the 35-year-old air-frame of the 767, Boeing was forced to redesign the wiring sys-tem late in the development phase, says chief financial officer Greg Smith. That change re-quired the company to increase spending to keep the programme on track to deliver 18 operational aircraft to the US Air Force by August 2017, as required by its fixed-price contract, which has a $4.9 billion ceiling, Smith says.

Announced during a second quarter earnings filing, the charge

comes three months after a report by the US Government Account-ability Office (GAO) disclosed that Boeing was estimating a $271 million cost overrun on the contract. The same report also disclosed that the air force was estimating a $787 million cost

overrun on the programme, for which Boeing would be solely responsible under the terms of its contract.

Although the USAF took a more pessimistic view than Boeing, the wiring redesign was not among the most significant

risks cited in the GAO report. Instead, it listed the programme’s software maturity and “aggres-sive” flight test schedule as the most likely causes for possible delays of between six and 12 months for reaching the initial operational capability milestone in August 2017.

Boeing chief executive Jim McNerney says he “disagrees with that assessment”. The KC-46A flight test schedule was planned using commercial practices that, he says, are more efficient than the military’s system.

“Other than the problems on the wiring – wiring bundle sepa-ration on the detailed design – the rest of the programme is mov-ing along well,” says McNerney.

“It doesn’t mean that some-thing can’t crop up in the future, but we don’t see it now.” ■

Lockheed Martin must defeat bids from Boeing and the

Eurofighter consortium if it is to finalise a planned sale of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to Denmark, – although another potential rival has opted against pursuing the opportunity.

Boeing, Eurofighter partner company Airbus Defence & Space and Lockheed on 21 July tabled responses to a Danish request for proposals, respectively offering the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Typhoon and conventional take-off and landing F-35A. Saab and Sweden’s Defence and Security Export Agency (FXM) opted against responding, however.

Type selection activities on the new combat aircraft programme are expected to conclude by mid-2015, the Danish defence ministry says, with its evaluation criteria to assess military and strategic capability, economic factors and industrial participa-tion opportunities.

Lockheed Martin has received a contract worth almost $565

million to produce an additional six C-130J-30 tactical transports for the Indian air force.

“The total cumulative face value of the contract is $2.06 billion,” says the US Department of Defense of the Foreign Military Sales deal.

Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2017, with the new aircraft to be operated from Panagarh air base in India’s east-ern state of West Bengal.

India placed its first, $1.2 billion order for six C-130Js in late 2008, with the special mission-configured transports having entered use at Hindon air base by 2011.

New Delhi has chosen not to order an additional aircraft to re-place aircraft KC-3803, which crashed in March. ■

FLEET

Indian air force signs for six more C-130Js

Three compete for Danish fighter dealBIDS CRAIG HOYLE LONDON

PROGRAMME STEPHEN TRIMBLE WASHINGTON DC

Wiring redesign led to KC-46A chargeAirframer reveals $272 million loss due to late development change, but says Pegasus on track for 2017 introduction

The refuelling and transport aircraft is based on the 767 airframe

Boei

ng

Denmark is a Level 3 partici-pant in the Lockheed-led F-35 programme, with long-term plans calling for an acquisition of 30 of the aircraft. However, Copenha-gen last year opted to compete the requirement to replace its Lockheed F-16AM/BMs.

Referring to a “clear technology growth path” for its candidate, Boeing says: “The Super Hornet is the best match for Denmark in terms of capability, price and op-portunities for Danish industry.”

“With its strong partnership between European nations and

more than 400 aircraft in service, Eurofighter is the rational choice for Denmark,” says Typhoon campaign director Uli Fingerle.

Confirming Sweden’s decision to withdraw the Gripen NG from the process in a letter to the defence ministry, FXM director general Ulf Hammarström says: “the conclusion not to submit a tender is the result of a comprehensive assessment that the state and the industry have made together.” ■Additional reporting by Beth Stevenson

Copenhagen is seeking to replace its current fleet of F-16s

AirT

eam

Imag

es

DEFENCE


For more coverage of the burgeoning unmanned air system sector log on to flightglobal.com/UAV

US contractor Raytheon will offer its SDB II precision-

guided bomb for the UK’s Spear Capability 3 requirement to arm the Eurofighter Typhoon and Lockheed Martin F-35B, taking on European rival MBDA.

“We anticipate SDB II will ab-solutely be a viable capability for that [UK] requirement, and expect to put forward a proposal,” says Mike Jarrett, the company’s vice-president, air warfare systems.

The 113kg (250lb) weapon is equipped with a tri-mode seeker, making it suitable for use against stationary and moving targets. “Flight testing is progressing nicely. We have had a number of successful firings where we have prosecuted targets,” Jarrett says.

“We’re making great progress towards a system verification re-view in the coming months, and anticipate a ‘Milestone C’ deci-sion before the end of the year,” he says. Once secured, the latter would clear the way for the weapon to enter low-rate initial production for the US Air Force.

Raytheon in August 2010 re-ceived a five-year engineering and manufacturing development phase contract from the USAF, and Jarrett says there is already considerable interest in the weapon from numerous potential export customers.

“We don’t travel anywhere where there isn’t a discussion,” he says, adding that international deliveries could potentially begin in 2017.

MBDA – which supplies the Brimstone air-to-surface missile for the Royal Air Force’s Panavia Tornado GR4s and is to integrate the system with the Typhoon – is also pursuing the Spear Capabili-ty 3 requirement.

The European company most recently competed with its US rival for a UK air-launched weapon deal more than a decade ago, when the Ministry of De-fence selected Raytheon Systems to provide its Paveway IV. ■

Grob Aircraft is offering a new generation version of the

G520, with the company seeking buyers for the high-altitude type.

The German company is pitch-ing the G520 NG to governments worldwide, highlighting its ability to carry out reconnaissance with a 7.5h endurance. The aircraft can reach an altitude of 50,000ft and has a maximum take-off weight of 4,700kg (10,362lb), it says.

The company says it has con-ducted a number of demonstra-tion flights for potential custom-ers and could begin production as early as next year. Its predecessor

WEAPONS CRAIG HOYLE LONDON

Raytheon aims SDB II towards UK Spear need

The US Army has completed the integration and testing of

an electronic warfare capability with its General Atomics Aero-nautical Systems MQ-1C Gray Eagle unmanned air vehicle.

Derived from the communica-tions electronic attack surveil-lance and reconnaissance jam-mer carried by manned Beechcraft C-12s, the networked electronic warfare remotely oper-ated (NERO) system was adapted for use used by the UAV.

Testing concluded at at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah in late June, following two years

of engineering analysis and inte-gration work. The Joint Impro-vised Explosive Device Defeat Organization funded the effort. Other partners included the pro-ject manager for the army’s UAV programme, the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Indiana, Gen-eral Atomics and Raytheon.

NERO was flown on the Gray Eagle for 32h during testing, with the jammer having been active for 20h of this total.

“The NERO capability may well be part of the army’s future integrated electronic warfare sys-tem,” says Col Jim Ekvall, chief of

the service’s electronic warfare di-vision. “Airborne electronic attack provides an enormous amount of support to troops on the ground, and with the NERO payload on a UAV, mission times are increased and are more cost effective.”

The jammer was able to operate at full power with no im-pact on the UAV, the army says.

“This demonstrated the via-bility of a Gray Eagle-based high- powered jamming capability to support the army’s EW counter-communications and broadcast-ing EW requirements in the future,” it adds. ■

G520 NG scans for buyers worldwideRECONNAISSANCE ELLIS TAYLOR SINGAPORE

SURVEILLANCE BETH STEVENSON LONDON

Gray Eagle puts NERO aloft US Army successfuly tests high-power electronic attack systems integrated into MQ-1C UAV

US

Arm

y

The jammer was adapted for unmanned applications from technology carried by Beechcraft C-12s

– Grob Aerospace – certificated the G520 Egret in 1991 and built six of the aircraft, including one two-seat trainer.

Rolf Amende, head of mainte-nance for the G520, describes the aircraft as a “poor man’s satel-lite”, but one that could be used

to perform a variety of military and scientific roles, from fisheries and traffic reconnaissance to act-ing as a communications node.

The revived NG variant has a 750shp Honeywell TPE331-14 engine, and a digital cockpit pro-vided by Genesys Aerosystems. ■

The aircraft can reach an altitude of 50,000ft

Gro

b Ai

rcra

ft

BUSINESS AVIATION


How Rolls-Royce won AirbusNEWS FOCUS P22

PIAGGIO CONNECTSPiaggio Aero has appointed UK business aircraft services pro-vider ConnectJets as exclusive sales agent for the Avanti EVO in the British Isles and Channel Islands. ConnectJets plans to launch a road show for the sev-en-seat turboprop in the third quarter, shortly after planned certification and service entry. ConnectJets is also set to ap-point a UK service centre to sup-port the aircraft in its territory.

EMBRAER DELIVERIESEmbraer Executive Jets deliv-ered 29 business jets in the second quarter, unchanged from the same period last year. Shipments consisted of six Phenom 100s, 16 Phenom 300s, six Legacy 650s and one Lineage 1000, compared with 11 Phenom 100s, 12 Phenom 300s, five Legacy 650s and one Lineage 1000 between April and June 2013. Deliveries for the first six months totalled 49 business jets – 39 light and 10 large-cabin jets. This com-pares with 31 light and 10 large in the same period last year.

FALCON APPROVALAbu Dhabi’s Falcon Aviation Services has signed a memo-randum of understanding with Boeing subsidiary CDG to pro-vide European Part 21J engi-neering and supplemental technical documentation ser-vices for Falcon’s new VIP com-pletion centre at Dubai World Central, which is due to be con-structed by mid-2015.

RELENTLESS SIMULATORBell Helicopter has appointed fellow Textron subsidiary TRU Simulation + Training to design and develop a Level D full-mo-tion simulator for the 525 Relentless. The simulator will employ TRU’s ultra-high-defini-tion visual system with a 240˚ horizontal by 80˚vertical field of view. First flight of the 525 is scheduled for later this year, ahead of certification and ser-vice entry in 2015.

IN BRIEF

Czech design and engineering company Evektor is planning

an amphibious variant of the EV-55 Outback once the standard version of the twin-engined turbo-prop has entered service.

“There is a big market for an amphibious aircraft in the nine- to 14-seat cabin class – there is noth-ing else like it around,” says depu-ty director Petr Sterba. “We have already drawn up basic designs and are now looking at companies who will supply the floats.”

Sterba says Evektor is not in a hurry to bring this design to mar-ket. “We are concentrating on the

classic-configured EV-55 first but would like to launch the amphib-ian a year after its certification by the end of 2016,” he says.

Evektor is confident that its high-wing EV-55 will be finished within this timeframe now it has the backing of Malaysian compa-ny Aspirasi Pertiwi. The Kuala Lumpur-based firm is investing $200 million in the Evektor group over the next decade, for an undis-closed share in the company.

Around $50 million of the funding has been set aside to complete EV-55 certification. “So far we have spent around $100

million on the programme [launched in 2005] which has been funded using company profits alongside a Czech govern-ment grant,” says Sterba.

Future investment priorities in-clude building a production facil-ity capable of making up to 50 air-craft per year and establishing a sales and service centre network.

The first EV-55 prototype (MSN001) made its maiden sortie in 2011 and has logged 172h to date. The production conforming aircraft is now being assembled in preparation for its first flight early next year. ■

DEVELOPMENT KATE SARSFIELD LONDON

Amphibious EV-55 is floatedEvektor plans seaplane variant of its twin-engine turboprop in wake of fresh investment

Strong growth is anticipated across light, medium and

large cabin business aircraft sectors over the next 20 years driven by “long-term market drivers” such as wealth creation, expanding globalisation of trade, replacement aircraft and the in-creasing adoption of business jet use in high-growth economies including China, Russia and India, according to Bombardier’s latest industry market forecast.

Between 2014 and 2033 the Canadian airframer forecasts deliveries of 22,000 business jets worth $617 billion across the three segments in which it competes with its Learjet, Challenger and Global families. This tally consists of 9,200 deliveries worth $264 billion between 2014 and 2023, and 12,800 deliveries worth $353 billion from 2024 to 2033, says Bombardier.

Industry deliveries are expect-ed to increase slightly this year, the airframer predicts, driven by the introduction of new aircraft programmes including the super-midsize Challenger 350, which entered service in June with frac-tional ownership provider NetJets. Business aircraft orders,

Large jets surge in 20-year forecast OUTLOOK KATE SARSFIELD LONDON

Net

Jets

The Challenger 350 recently entered service with NetJets

however, will “remain challeng-ing in 2014”, Bombardier predicts, “but [are] projected to improve beginning in 2015”.

The large aircraft sector is ex-pected to experience the fastest growth rate of the three categories over the next 20 years, the fore-cast says, generating a total of 5,250 deliveries – 24% of overall industry unit shipments. These deliveries are valued at $286 bil-lion, representing approximately 46% of the delivery revenues during the forecast timeframe.

Similarly, the midsize category is predicted to turn around quick-ly, generating 7,650 deliveries – 35% of overall industry units shipped between 2014 and 2033.

“These deliveries are valued at $226 billion, representing 37% of the delivery revenues forecast during this 20-year period,” Bombardier says.

The light jet sector will take longer to recover, the forecast pre-dicts, due the continued weak demand for these lower-end of-ferings and a stubbornly high in-ventory of pre-owned aircraft. “In 2004, the light jet category repre-sented about 50% of business air-craft deliveries. Over the next two decades, the sector is forecast to generate a total of 9,100 deliv-eries, representing 41% of indus-try shipments and 17% of the delivery revenues over the fore-cast period,” says Bombardier. ■

NEWS FOCUS


The UK manufacturer’s sole-source engine supply deal for A330neo marks culmination of major turnaround in fortunes

How Rolls-Royce won Airbus

For more news about the Airbus A330 programme, visit our landing page at: flightglobal.com/A330

WIDEBODIES MAX KINGSLEY-JONES LONDON

Rolls-Royce took more than two decades to get an engine

onto an Airbus product. But the UK company is now in pole posi-tion as Toulouse’s prime wide-body engine partner after securing its third Airbus sole-source sup-ply deal, to power the A330neo.

In truth, Rolls had been part of the Toulouse scene since the late 1980s through the International Aero Engines consortium, which began powering the A320 in 1989. But it was the widebody market where it needed to be – and nearly was, right at the start of the Airbus project.

It is ironic that it took Derby so long to get one of its gas turbines bolted onto an Airbus, given that the original “A-300” was to have Rolls-Royce power when pro-posed in the 1960s. The engine was the 54,000-58,000lb-thrust (240-258kN) RB.207 and the air-craft was a widebody twinjet an-cestor of what would become the first Airbus.

Flight International wrote in November 1967: “The next six months will be critical for the Anglo-French-German A-300 Airbus, and indeed, for the Euro-pean aircraft industry’s aspira-tion to stay in the front rank of civil aviation. If the A-300 does not secure the necessary 75 or-ders from the home market for which it has been designed, then

Europe may never again build a big transport aircraft – and the world demand will ultimately be met by America and Russia.”

DROPPING OUTHistory shows that Airbus got there in the end, but initially it was a Franco-German affair. The UK bailed out of Airbus as a full partner in April 1969 and the “big twin” plans were scaled

down around the smaller A300B, spelling the end for the too-pow-erful RB.207.

Meanwhile, Rolls-Royce’s smaller “big fan” – the RB211 – was in development as the sole choice on the Lockheed TriStar. From 1977 it found its way onto the Boeing 747.

Despite overtures from Derby about the RB211, Airbus opted for an off-the-shelf solution from General Electric, so it was the McDonnell Douglas DC-10’s CF6 that powered the first A300Bs. And so began a transatlantic ro-mance that lasted for three dec-ades. In fact, the moment the love affair began to sour can be pinpointed to February 1997, when GE walked away from plans to power the then-pro-posed A340-500/600.

GE blamed the failure of the talks on the two sides’ “inability to agree on financial terms and con-ditions. We defined the engine for the aircraft’s technical require-

ments, but could not reach agree-ment on price and risk-sharing.”

By that time, Rolls finally had its foot in the Airbus door, with the Trent – itself an RB211 itera-tion – having joined the A330 programme in 1995 as the third of three power choices behind GE and Pratt & Whitney.

TRENT FIRSTThe first Trent-powered A330 was delivered to Cathay Pacific in early 1995 and today more than 600 of the twinjets are flying with Rolls-Royce power, ac-counting for more than 55% of the total fleet. Half the A330s on order today (excluding the Neo), will be Trent-powered.

Rolls may have been the new kid on the block in Toulouse 20 years ago, but it quickly charmed Airbus and the Trent became the natural substitute after GE with-drew from the A340-500/600. At

the Paris air show in June 1997, Airbus launched the A340 growth derivatives with Trent 500 power only – but avoided describing the deal as exclusive.

The next piece of the jigsaw came in July 1999, when GE signed up with Boeing to be ex-clusive supplier on Boeing’s “777X” family, which subse-quently became the -200LR/300ER. With the market estimated at “around 500 air-craft”, Boeing said “the business case didn’t allow us to do any-thing else” other than a sole-source engine deal.

That argument obviously didn’t stack up for the 787, so

Number of aircraft

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

'13'12'11'10'09'08'07'06'05'04'03'02'01'00'99'98'97'96'95'94

SOURCE: Flightglobal's Ascend Fleets database

AIRBUS A330 – DELIVERIES BY ENGINE MANUFACTURER1994-2013

Rolls-Royce General Electric Pratt & Whitney

The Rolls-Royce-powered HBN 100 was a pre-Airbus mid-1960s study

GE blamed the failureof the talks on thetwo sides’ “inabilityto agree on financialterms and conditions”

Airb

us

NEWS FOCUS


Half-year safety reviewFEATURE P24

Cathay Pacific took delivery of the first Trent-powered Airbus A330s in 1995, with more than 600 of the total fleet now using Rolls-Royce engines

Rolls secured a slot on that pro-gramme. But the Trent 1000 has struggled to match the success of GE and currently has just one-third of the engine market.

ROLLS INWhen Airbus launched the A350 Mark 1 in 2005, it was powered by a GE GEnx engine. But a Trent option was quickly added and the Rolls option became the only choice a year later when the A330-derived plans were shelved and replaced by the all-new A350 XWB.

The polarising of the GE/Boe-ing and Rolls/Airbus relation-ships took another step forward when the US engine maker be-came sole source on the 21st cen-tury iteration of the 777X last year. It had already secured a

similar deal on the revamped 747-8 family, although sales in the large-aircraft sector continue to disappoint.

Fast forward to this year’s Farn-borough and the final piece of the puzzle slotted into place, when Rolls and Airbus announced they were getting together to reinvent the A350 Mark 1. And as with all exclusive deals, the customers aren’t exactly ecstatic, but Air Lease boss Steve Udvar-Hazy thinks it will be okay.

Air Lease had been “cam-paigning for two engine choic-es”, says Udvar-Hazy, but after GE absconded, Rolls and Airbus “were able to forge an arrange-ment that is very satisfactory to the customer”.

Airbus sales chief John Leahy explains: “We have built into the

price of the airplane an economic package from Rolls-Royce. We’ve taken the liberty of negotiating [the discount achieved through an engine competition] in ad-vance with Rolls, so all the cus-tomers get a good price.”

Flightglobal’s Ascend Fleets da-tabase shows that Rolls-powered aircraft now account for two-thirds of Airbus’s widebody deliv-eries each year and almost 80% of its widebody backlog. With Pratt & Whitney in rapid decline and GE taking its ball home on the A330neo, the only non-Rolls position going forward is with En-

gine Alliance on the A380.But the next chapter in the

Rolls/Airbus love affair may take a little longer to write. With En-gine Alliance apparently luke-warm towards Emirates boss Tim Clark’s enthusiasm for an “A380neo”, we could well see a Trent derivative become the ex-clusive engine on any second-generation Airbus superjumbo.

And as Airbus chief executive Fabrice Brégier said of a re-en-gined A380 at Airbus’s Farnbor-ough wrap-up conference: “Will it take place one day? Yes. Will it be for 2020? I don’t think so.” ■

General Electric25.2%

Rolls-Royce50.4%

Pratt & Whitney10.3%

Unannounced14%

SOURCE: Flightglobal's Ascend Fleets databaseNOTE: Data for firm orders at July 2014 andexcludes A330neo

AIRBUS A330 BACKLOG BYENGINE MANUFACTURER

General Electric 5.2%Engine Alliance 5.8%

Pratt & Whitney 2.1%

Rolls-Royce77.1%

Unannounced9.7%

SOURCE: Flightglobal's Ascend Fleets databaseNOTE: Data for firm orders at July 2014 andexcludes A330neo

AIRBUS WIDEBODY BACKLOGBY ENGINE MANUFACTURER

PRODUCTION DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON

A330neo transition ‘complete by 2019’Airbus aims to complete the transi-tion to all-A330neo production by the end of 2019, following its launch of the re-engined type.

The airframer is intending to intro-duce the initial variant, the A330-900neo, before the close of 2017 and roll its output over to the new type exclusively during 2018-19.

Airbus has a backlog of 232 pas-senger A330s, mostly the larger -300, but it is also producing the type at a rate of 10 per month.

Chief operating officer for custom-ers John Leahy says there are “a

couple of hundred holes to fill” in terms of pre-transition slots for the current A330.

But he is confident that the popu-larity of the type will enable Airbus to bridge the gap to the beginning of A330neo production. “There are good and solid reasons to buy [cur-rent A330s] today,” says Leahy. “We expect to maintain production.”

Airbus’s A330 line also includes the A330-200 freighter, but the back-log is for just 11 aircraft, and sales of the type – particularly in the weak car-go market – have been soft. ■

Airb

us

flightglobal.com

HALF-YEAR SAFETY

24 | Flight International | 29 July-4 August 2014

DAVID LEARMOUNT LONDON

It has been another safer six months to fly. Declining global accident rates, however, raise the prospect of complacency, so safety bodies are encouraging the industry to learn more from incidents where no damage occurred and to be ready to deal with the unexpected

ANALYSIS

AIRLINE ACCIDENT REPORTS PUBLISHED THIS YEAR

BETTER PREPARED

AIRLINE ACCIDENT reports, either final or interim, published by investigators during the first six months of 2014:

■ Russian investigators have con-cluded that an unstable approach at high speed contributed to the fatal 29 December 2012 Red Wings Tupolev Tu-204 overrun at Moscow Vnukovo airport. The aircraft’s ap-proach speed, up to 24kt higher than it ought to have been, pro-longed the Tu-204’s float before it made contact with the runway. This resulted in a reduction in available

landing distance, while the soft 1.12g touchdown in a crosswind meant weight-on-wheels switches did not activate, and the spoilers did not deploy and the thrust-revers-ers would not operate. However, the crew did not wait for confirmation of reverser deployment before engag-ing high engine power, which in-stead accelerated the Tu-204 forwards. The report says the crew’s failure to engage reverse thrust cor-rectly meant the aircraft did not de-celerate and eventually overran the runway, colliding with a highway em-bankment. Five of the eight occu-

pants of the aircraft, which had been operating a positioning flight, were killed in the crash.

■ Pilot fatigue and demanding air-port approaches were examined at a US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) hearing into the 14 August 2013 fatal crash of a UPS Airbus A300-600. The air-craft crashed on final approach to Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International airport, Alabama. “We have not identified any anomalies with the airplane, systems, or en-hanced ground proximity warning

system [EGPWS],” said the NTSB’s Daniel Bower. The pilots were carry-ing out a non-precision localiser/DME approach to the 2,146m-long runway 18 because the main ILS

“We have notidentified anyanomalies with theairplane, systems, or EGPWS”DANIEL BOWER NTSB

The disappearance of Malaysia Air-lines flight MH370 has cast a shadow over a set of excellent global airline safety figures for the first half of 2014.

Even including MH370, the figures are good, but without it they are exceptional.

MH370 cannot be declared an “accident” at present. The official line is that its loss was probably the result of deliberate action by someone on board. So, while reporting and examining the facts surrounding the missing Boeing 777-200ER, this report will look at this year’s statistics to 30 June minus the MH370 figures, just as other incidents involving de-liberate or hostile action are excluded.

MH370 disappeared on 8 March. It was last seen on radar over the Andaman Sea, and no

The 30 June fatal crash of a Nepal Airlines Twin Otter was the only one involving a commercial passenger aircraft in the first six months

flightglobal.com

HALF-YEAR SAFETY

there would be 10 fatal airline accidents per day in which revenue passengers would be killed. The number of deaths that would re-sult annually is more difficult to make mean-ingful, because it would depend if it were fac-tored for the much greater number of people

on each flight today, and the greater distance covered by faster aeroplanes. But he points out that whichever way the figures are fac-tored, the number of passenger deaths annu-ally would be between 50,000 and 200,000.

Michel Masson, of the European Aviation Safety Agency’s European Human Factors Advisory Group (EHFAG) says EASA has been preparing for some time for the unde-sirable secondary effect – not a particularly obvious one – of an industry that gets used to having very few fatal accidents. That

runway was closed. The sky was overcast with calm winds and 16km visibility beneath the 1,000ft cloudbase. At 04:47 local time, the flight crew received a “sink rate” alert from the EGPWS at 235ft above airfield level with a descent rate of 1,536ft/min (7.8 m/s). There is a low hill beneath the final approach path for runway 18, and the decision height for that ap-proach was 500ft AAL, said Bower. The aircraft hit trees and terrain about 1.93km (1.20 miles) from the end of the runway and caught fire. Cockpit voice recorder tran-

scripts show that the pilots men-tioned they had been feeling tired on recent trips. Data from the hear-ing showed that UPS’ pilots called in unfit for duty owing to fatigue on 138 occasions in 2013.

■ A short-circuit in a lithium-metal battery probably caused the fire that damaged an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 787-8 last year, and certifi-cation requirements for lithium bat-teries designed for use in aircraft equipment must be improved, the UK Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) says in a new special bulle-

tin. The fire at London Heathrow airport on 12 July 2013 was prob-ably the result of a botched electri-cal assembly of the aircraft’s emergency locator transmitter (ELT). This led to short-circuiting, causing its battery to overheat and start a process known as thermal runaway, which generates intense heat. The fire spread in the aircraft’s rear up-per fuselage while the aircraft was empty and unattended until the fire crews arrived, causing extensive damage to the 787’s composite materials hull. The AAIB explained this ELT is powered by a five-cell

lithium-metal (not lithium-ion) bat-tery, and described what it found: “The internal battery pack had expe-rienced severe disruption, exhibiting evidence of a very high-energy ther-mal event, consistent with having a thermal runaway. All five cell cases had been breached and burnt mate-rial had been ejected into the bat-tery compartment and outside of the ELT case.” The AAIB said: “It is recommended that the [US Federal Aviation Administration] develop enhanced certification require-ments for the use of lithium-metal batteries in aviation equipment,


Rex

Feat

ures

❯❯

Aviation is getting so safenow that it is difficult toexplain to ordinary travellersjust how safe it is

almost one-half the previous all-time record. Those figures include all fatal airline acci-dents involving all types of operations, in-cluding pure freight, airline crew base train-ing, and ferry or positioning flights.

The largest passenger aircraft involved in a fatal accident this year to 30 June was a 19-seat Nepal Airlines de Havilland Canada Twin Otter. It was the only commercial trans-port passenger aircraft fatal accident. The oth-ers all involved non-passenger operations (see accident list).

Looking back 40 years at the first half of 1974, there had been 25 fatal airline accidents involving passenger flights in that period, when far fewer flights took place every day.

Paul Hayes, safety director at Flightglobal’s Ascend consultancy, says aviation is getting so safe now that it is difficult to explain to or-dinary travellers just how safe it is. The chances of being on board a fatal flight are so small that the number of noughts between the decimal point and the first positive figure is so massive it feels meaningless.

Applying the airline fatal accident risk that was current in 1950 to the number of flights that take place today, Hayes has deduced that

Number of fatalities

FATAL ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES IN FIRST SIX MONTHS OF EACH YEAR: 2004–14

SOURCE: Flightglobal archive

Number of fatal accidents

Year1404 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

0

10

15

20

25

trace of it or the 239 people on board has been found since, but the Indian Ocean search will resume in August. The details of the event, in-sofar as they are known, are shown separately (see accidents list under Fatal events: sched-uled passenger flights).

REDUCTIONIf this event were included as an accident – and if the death of those on board were as-sumed – a preliminary estimate of airline fatal accidents in the first six months of 2014 shows six, and the total number of resultant deaths is 267. That compares with the previ-ous global best-ever period – January-June 2013 – in which there were nine fatal acci-dents and 58 fatalities.

If MH370 is omitted, the figures for this year are five fatal accidents and 28 fatalities –

❯❯


HALF-YEAR SAFETY

CONTINUED

AIRLINE ACCIDENT REPORTS PUBLISHED THIS YEAR

potential effect is, basically, a lapse into complacency. Since the industry has always used the lessons from accidents to spur it to-wards higher performance, will airline ac-countants attempt to reap the safety harvest by reducing investment in things like train-ing and maintenance?

Masson points out what happens statistical-ly when policy has to be made using very little accident data. In this situation, he says, “there is an unclear trend and correlation between ac-cident scenarios, a risk of complacency, and of safety awareness erosion”. He notes safety agencies have long argued that learning from actual accidents is insufficient, and that “a risk-based approach making use of precursors is needed”. This means that incidents that have not culminated in damage because the crew intervened must be recorded and treated – for risk assessment purposes – as the accident they would have become had the crew not inter-vened – because one day the crew might not.

Masson explains that the European Com-mercial Aviation Safety Team (ECAST), since 2012, has taken the following policy line: se-vere incidents must be investigated, the re-ports published and shared among the com-munity. In Europe, he notes, “this poses a translation challenge”. The ECAST also demands that safety assumptions, safety de-

fences and barriers “must be continuously challenged”, using selected incidents and a formal process, and an efficient dissemination process must be established.

CO-ORDINATIONECAST has also set up a task force looking at high-risk incidents. These do not happen often, but could do. The other area of study is how to prepare crews for unexpected combi-nations of events that partly result from the complexity of today’s airliners. For unique combinations of events, checklists cannot be written nor procedures prepared. This work is performed in co-ordination with the Europe-an Network of Analysts, according to Masson.

to take account of current indus-try knowledge on the design, opera-tional characteristics and failure modes of lithium-metal batteries.”

■ At a June public hearing review-ing evidence on the 6 July 2013 Asiana flight 214 accident at San Francisco international airport, the US NTSB said that crew failures ultimately caused the accident, but systems mode complexities and poor training provision by the air-line will probably be ruled to be contributory factors. Carrying out a visual approach to runway 28L in

excellent visibility, the aircraft be-came very low and slow on short final having been fast and high ear-ly in the approach. The crew did not realise how low and slow the air-craft was, but noticed in the last few seconds and began to advance the power levers. The lowest air-speed just before the aircraft’s tail hit the sea wall well short of the runway threshold was 103kt, and the stickshaker had begun operat-ing. The speed had dropped so low because, although the autothrottle was engaged, the engines had stayed at idle and the crew had not

realised this. The crew had retard-ed the power levers manually to idle earlier in the approach when they were fast and high, and the autothrottle went into “hold” mode when the autopilot was in flight level change mode, a mode in

which the autothrottle does not control the speed – attitude does. The crew expected the autothrottle to control their speed but it did not. The hearing was told that the crew did not understand these mode complexities even when they had been informed about them. The NTSB has requested that Boeing improve the description of the sys-tem in its flight crew manual, asked the Federal Aviation Administration to review the certification of the system, and said that Asiana must improve its pilot training in auto-matic systems. ■

The crew did notrealise how low andslow the aircraftwas, but noticed inthe last few seconds

Among the events so far this year listed in the accidents and incidents summary, high-risk events can be identified even from such a short period. For example, the Etihad Regional, Lion Air, Jet2 and Travel Service Airlines heavy landings are part of a trend the industry is beginning to acknowledge, and there contin-ues to be an undesirable number of long land-ings and runway overruns/excursions despite industry attempts to raise awareness of the risk. And according to the EHFAG theory that Masson describes, the heavy landings which “merely” damage the gear and buckle the fuse-lage are risk indicators of a potentially worse outcome. If a landing becomes heavy enough it will eventually be described as a crash. ■

“There is an unclear trend and correlation between accident scenarios, a risk of complacency, and of safety awareness erosion”MICHEL MASSONEuropean human factors advisory group, EASA

❯❯

❯❯

Rex

Feat

ures

MH370 cast a shadow over an exemplary six months for airline safety

HALF-YEAR SAFETY


AA airfield approach/early descent

AAIB UK Air Accidents Investigation

Branch

AAL above airfield level

ACARS automatic communication

addressing and reporting system

ADC air-data computer

ADF automatic direction finder

AF air force

AGL above ground level

AMSL above mean sea level

AOA angle of attack

ASI airspeed indicator

ATC air traffic control

C climb

C-B circuit breaker

CFIT controlled flight into terrain

CNK cause not known

CVR cockpit voice recorder

DME distance measuring equipment

ECAM electronic centralised aircraft

monitor

EFIS electronic flight-instrument

system

EGPWS enhanced ground proximity

warning system

EGT exhaust gas temperature

EICAS engine indicating and

crew alerting system

ER en route

ETOPS extended-range twin

operations

FAA US Federal Aviation

Administration

FDR flight data recorder

FL flight level = altitude, in

hundreds of feet, with international

standard pressure-setting (ISA) of

1013.2mb set on altimeter (eg

FL100 – altimeter reading of

10,000ft with ISA set)

FMS flight management system

G on ground

GPU ground power unit

GPWS ground proximity warning

system

HP high pressure

IFR instrument flight rules

IMC instrument meteorological

conditions

ILS instrument landing system

ISA international standard

atmosphere – sea level pressure of

1013.2hPa and standard temp -

erature/pressure lapse rate with

altitude

L landing

LP low pressure

MEL minimum equipment list

MTOW maximum take-off weight

NDB non-directional beacon

NTSB US National Transportation

Safety Board

PAPI precision approach path

indicator

PAX passengers

PF pilot flying

PNF pilot not flying

RA runway/final approach

SID standard instrument departure

TAWS terrain awareness and

warning system

TO take-off

TOGA press-button selected take-

off/go-around thrust

VASI visual approach slope indicator

VFR visual flight rules

VHF very high frequency

VMC visual meteorological

conditions

VOR VHF omni-range navigation

beacon

V1 take-off decision speed

Conversion factors

1nm = 1.85km

1ft = 0.3m

1kt = 1.85km/h

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ACCIDENTS AND INCIDENTSJANUARY–JUNE 2014NOTES ON TABLESData comes from Flight International’s research in association with Flightglobal advisory service Ascend, which compiles the World Aircraft Accident Summary, among other safety analysis products. Details of non-fatal incidents are not made available officially by authorities in many countries, but Flight International continues to list known significant incidents to maximise the availability of relevant information. We accept that the non-fatal listing may be weighted against the airlines of those countries that make safety information more readily available.

Date Carrier Aircraft type/registration Location Fatalities (crew/pax)

Total occupants (crew/pax)

Phase

FATAL EVENTS: SCHEDULED PASSENGER FLIGHTS8 Mar Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER (9M-MRO) Over Malacca Strait 12/227 12/227 ERThe Malaysian authorities believe the circumstances of this flight’s disappearance probably suggest deliberate action by a person or persons on board. The aircraft, operating flight MH370 from Kuala Lumpur for Beijing, took off shortly after midnight and climbed to FL350. Over the Gulf of Thailand, just after Kuala Lumpur ATC had handed the aircraft over to Ho Chi Minh ATC and the crew had acknowledged the handover call, the aircraft’s transponder stopped operating, so MH370 was no longer visible to ATC on secondary radar. The MH370 crew never contacted HCM. The last automatic ACARS transmission had taken place during the climb. On military primary radar the aircraft was seen to turn west and fly across the Malaysian peninsula, then head northwest over the Malacca Strait before contact was lost. Inmarsat estimates the aircraft, when over the Andaman Sea, turned south towards the open Indian Ocean. This is deduced from automated aircraft responses to “handshake” signals from Inmarsat satellites. The aircraft’s “handshake” responses con-tained no data, but the aircraft’s range from the satellite could be deduced each time. These range “pings” each provide a long arc on the globe’s surface, somewhere along which the aircraft must be. This happens each time the “handshake” takes place, so together with the primary radar data showing the aircraft’s early track and speed, this enables an estimated plot of the aircraft’s track to be proposed. The last satellite re-sponse received took place shortly after 08:00 Malaysia time, about the time the aircraft would have run out of fuel. Searches have been conducted in the Indian Ocean to the west and northwest of Australia but they found nothing on the surface or the sea bed. The search was suspended in May but will resume in August 2014. The aircraft remains missing and no wreckage has been found. The crew and passengers are missing, presumed dead.

FATAL ACCIDENTS: REGIONAL AND COMMUTER AIRLINES16 Feb Nepal Airlines DHC Twin Otter 300 (9N-ABB) ER Jumla-Pokhara, Nepal 3/15 3/15 ERHit high terrain in cloud and deteriorating weather that included imbedded cumulo-nimbus. The investigators said the accident was caused by a crew loss of situational awareness.

FATAL ACCIDENTS: NON-PASSENGER FLIGHTS18 Jan Trans Guyana Airways Cessna Grand Caravan (8R-GHS) Mazaruni region, Guyana 2 2 ERThis cargo flight crashed in forest not long after take-off from OIive Creek bound for Imbaimadai. The pilot put out a mayday call stating that the aircraft was going down.

17 Feb Global Air Connection BAe 748-2B (5Y-HAJ) Rabkona airport, South Sudan 1 4 LThe aircraft was chartered by the International Organisation for Migration, which reports that the aircraft veered off the runway, across a ditch and one of the wings hit vehicles, causing a fire.

HALF-YEAR SAFETY


Date Carrier Aircraft type/registration Location Fatalities (crew/pax)


Phase

FATAL ACCIDENTS: NON-PASSENGER FLIGHTS8 Apr Hageland Aviation Services Cessna Grand Caravan (N126AR) 50km SE of Bethel, Alaska, USA 2 2 ERThe aircraft entered a steep descent during crew training manoeuvres in good daylight weather and hit the ground.

8 May Aliansa Douglas DC-3 (HK4700) North of San Vicente del Caguan, Colombia

5 5 ER

The aircraft was operating a cargo flight from Villavicencio to Florenzia but it came down in high terrain north of San Vicente. Official casualty reports say there were five crew on board, but press reports maintain there were six.

Date Carrier Aircraft type/registration Location Injuries (crew/pax)


Phase

SIGNIFICANT NON-FATAL ACCIDENTS (ALL OPERATIONAL CATEGORIES)2 Jan NatureAir Bombardier Dash 6 (TI-BFN) La Fortuna airport, Costa Rica -/- 2/? L

The aircraft overran the runway and the nose gear collapsed.

5 Jan Air India Airbus A320 (VT-ESH) Jaipur International airport, India -/- 5/168 LTouched down on soft ground to the left of runway 27 in fog with a visibility of about 200m, and received substantial damage when it veered further left and its port wing struck a tree. The aircraft had diverted from Delhi where the visibility precluded landing, and it is understood to have had insufficient fuel on board to divert elsewhere from Jaipur. Runway 27 has a Cat 1 ILS.

10 Jan Carson Air Fairchild Metro (C-FJKK) Regina airport, Saskatchewan, Canada

- 2 L

The aircraft touched down about half-way along the runway in poor visibility with a 5kt tailwind and a contaminated surface. It overran the end by about 100m.

18 Jan Aeronaves McDonnell Douglas DC-9F (XA-UGM) Plan de Guadelupe airport, Mexico - 3 LThe aircraft landed at night in poor visibility about two-thirds of the way along the runway and ran off the left side.

29 Jan Air Greenland DHC Dash 8-200 (OY-GRI) Ilulissat airport, Greenland -/3 3/12 LThe crew expected a crosswind on landing, and checked the threshold wind frequently as they carried out their choice of an NDB approach to runway 07. On short final the wind was reported from 140˚ at 26kt gust-ing 39kt. On landing the left main gear failed – the investigation later determined it was a stress failure. The aircraft swung left off the runway and down a slope to rocks, and the crew ordered an evacuation.

1 Feb Garuda Indonesia Boeing 737 (PK-GFW) Juanda, Surabaya, Indonesia -/- 6/104 TOTread from the aircraft’s left outer main gear tyre was shed during the take-off run. At the destination, the crew carried out a fly-by with the gear down in front of the tower to see if damage was visible, then landed on runway 28. During the landing roll the tyre failed, and debris caused major damage to the left spoilers, thrust reverser, wing underside and aft fuselage.

1 Feb Lion Air Boeing 737-900 (PK-LFH) Juanda-Surabaya airport, Indonesia -/5 7/215 LThe aircraft bounced four times during its landing on runway 28, also triggering the tailskid indicator, smashing the nosewheel and bursting a main gear tyre. The final touchdown registered nearly 4g and caused fu-selage wrinkling aft of the wing. The surface wind was reported to be 270deg at 16kt

2 Feb East Air Airbus A320 (EY-623) Kulyab, Tajikistan -/- 6/186 LInbound from Moscow Domodedovo, the aircraft carried out a daytime approach in heavy snow. It overran the runway end into deep snow and suffered major damage.

13 Feb Jetstar Asia Airbus A320 (9V-JSN) ER over Java, Indonesia -/- ?/? ERUnintentionally flew, at night, through volcanic ash cloud downwind of Mount Kelud, sustaining major damage to both engines, but they continued to function. The aircraft landed safely at Jakarta.

17 Feb Jet2 Boeing 737-800 (G-GDFC) Funchal airport, Madeira, Portugal -/- 7/175 LThe aircraft suffered windshear on short final approach to runway 05, owing to a variable crosswind from the left reported at 330˚ at 14kt gusting to 24kt, caused by the fact that the runway is on the lee side of high ground when the wind is from that direction. The captain persisted with the approach despite the fact that a high sink rate developed just before touchdown, and the aircraft bounced on landing. The aircraft came to a halt safely, but suffered a tail-scrape and some fuselage deformation.

22 Feb Travel Service Airlines Boeing 737-800 (OK-TVT) Lajes airport, Azores Islands -/- 6/164 LThe flight was from Prague, Czech Republic to Montego Bay, Jamaica, with a planned fuel stop at Lajes. The wind at Lajes was strong, gusting and variable with a crosswind from the right. The aircraft encountered se-vere windshear and turbulence in the last 5nm (9km) of the approach to runway 15. The aircraft touched down hard on the main and nose gear simultaneously, bounced and touched down a second time with a de-celeration of 3.5g that caused damage to the undercarriage and fuselage frames.

25 Feb Guicango Embraer Brasilia (D2-FFZ) Nr Lukapa airport, Angola -/- 3/14 ERA technical issue – thought to be engine problems – developed en route from Luanda to Dundo, forcing the crew to attempt a diversion and emergency landing on runway 18 at Lukapa. The crew lost directional con-trol on the wet runway, veered right and came to rest on rough ground, sustaining substantial damage.

13 Mar US Airways Airbus A320 (N113UW) Philadelphia international airport, USA

-/2 5/149 TO

The aircraft was taking off from runway 27L bound for Fort Lauderdale when the crew, immediately after rotate, aborted the take-off because of indications of a No 1 engine fire. The nose gear touched down and col-lapsed and the aircraft came to a halt partly off the runway. Two passengers were injured in the evacuation.

11 Apr Kenya Airways Embraer 190 (SY-FFC) Dar es-Salaam, Tanzania -/- 6/49 LThe aircraft ran into a heavy rain shower on short final approach to runway 23 and the captain took control from the co-pilot who had lost sight of the runway. On landing the aircraft veered right off the runway before returning to it. The aircraft suffered major damage.

20 Apr Blue Bird Aviation Fokker 50 (5Y-VVJ) Guriel landing strip, Somalia - 3 LThe aircraft landed long and ran off the end of the runway at high speed. The left wing failed and broke away.

24 Apr Wasaya Airways Beechcraft 1900 (C-FWXL) Sachigo Lake airport, Ontario, Canada

-/- 2/9 C

The crew heard “wind noise” soon after take-off and suspected a door failure despite getting no warnings. When a crew member went to check it, the main cabin door “popped open” about 25cm and the door warn-ing light came on. The crew elected to turn back and declared an emergency. On approach the door had opened fully, and it separated on landing.

8 May Ariana Afghan Airlines Boeing 737-400 (YA-PIB) Kabul international airport, Afghanistan

-/- 5/130 L

The aircraft overran the end of runway 29 by about 300m, destroying the ILS localiser array. The aircraft encountered heavy rain on short final approach and the runway was wet.

10 May IRS Airlines Fokker 100 (5N-SIK) Kwasi Posa, Nr Magaria, Nigeria -/- 2 ERThe aircraft was carrying out a post-maintenance (C-check) ferry flight from Bratislava, Slovakia to Kano, Nigeria. Shortly after waypoint Ganla on airway UA604 the crew reported an unspecified system problem that appears to have affected navigation, because they got lost in a sandstorm. Fearing that they would run out of fuel, the crew force-landed on flat ground, and the right main landing gear and the nosewheel collapsed.

SAFETY


DAVID LEARMOUNT LONDON

A European safety forum has found that compliance with standard practice on go-arounds is poor – and is studying pilots’ behaviour to clarify policy and reduce accidents

SECOND CHANCES

Conventional wisdom says pilots should go around if an approach is not stabilised by 500ft – but in most cases, they do not do so, says the FSF

Rex

Feat

ures

❯❯

Failing to abandon a risky approach when necessary can be disastrous, but many times in recent years, go-arounds – formerly considered a simple ma-

noeuvre – have themselves ended in disaster.The Go-around Safety Forum, held by the

Flight Safety Foundation, Eurocontrol and the European Regional Airlines Association in Brussels this time last year heard that “one in 10 go-around reports record a potentially

hazardous go-around outcome, including ex-ceeded aircraft performance limits or fuel en-durance”. Go-arounds occur between one and three times every 1,000 flights.

This has led, since the debate began in about 2010, to a dichotomy: is it less danger-ous to land from an unstabilised approach than to carry out a go-around? That is a seri-ous question that needs precise answers, and in 2011, the FSF committed to finding them out, because it is clearly not a matter of a simple yes or no.

A “stabilised” approach describes one in which the aircraft is on (or very close to) the de-sired approach path and glideslope, at the cor-rect speed, and in its landing configuration, and all these parameters must be met at or before reaching a designated point on final approach to the runway. The FSF says that 3.5-4% of all ap-proaches are deemed to be unstable.

Conventional wisdom still says that if an approach is not stabilised by 500ft on final ap-proach (some airlines say 1,000ft), crews should go around, but, according to early re-sults from the FSF’s project, they hardly ever do so. Only on 3% of unstable approaches, says the FSF, do pilots elect to go around, so 97% of the time they decide to ignore stand-ard operating procedures and land despite the unstable parameters, and much of the time they do so with no negative consequences.

The reason for the advice to go around from an unstabilised approach is that a poorly exe-cuted approach is deemed to be the usual cause of that most common of all airline acci-dents: the runway excursion. The foundation comments: “It can be argued, therefore, that the almost complete failure to call go-arounds as a preventive mitigation of the risk of con-tinuing to fly approaches that are unstable constitutes the number one cause of runway

SAFETY


WHEN GO-AROUNDS GO WRONG

The events listed below were all acci-dents in which the crew lost control of the aircraft during an attempted go-around. The 2013 accidents are still being investi-gated, the Afriqiya, Armavia and Gulf Air events were all attributed at least partly to somatogravic illusion at night, and the China Air Lines one was the result of crew control inputs resulting from confusion over whether the autopilot was engaged or not.■ 17 November 2013 Tatarstan Air

Boeing 737-500 at Kazan, Russia.■ 29 January 2013 SCAT Bombardier

CRJ200ER at Almaty, Kazakhstan■ 12 May 2010 Afriqiya Airways Airbus

A330-200 at Tripoli, Libya■ 3 May 2006, Armavia Airbus A320 at

Sochi, Russia■ 23 August 2000 Gulf Air Airbus A320

at Bahrain■ 26 April 1994 China Air Lines Airbus

A300B4 at Nagoya, Japan

excursions.” The FSF’s acting chief oper-ating officer William Bozin said earlier this year: “We have to step back and face the reali-ty that a new construct must be considered to drive pilots toward a go-around when it is in-deed absolutely required…while [the basic stable-approach criteria] serve as an excellent guide on how to fly an aircraft with precision on approach, a small deviation from the strin-gent criteria does not necessarily create a risk worthy of triggering a go-around decision.”

PSYCHOLOGICAL FOCUSThe FSF, still in the process of researching data to identify all the risks associated with that land/go around decision, has begun examining the complex psychology of pilot decision-mak-ing specifically at that critical point. Its chosen means of understanding the mental processes is to send a series of carefully framed questions to 2,300 professional pilots. Here is an exam-ple: “What is the implicit incentive structure for flying go-arounds – versus continuing the unstable approach – that pilots perceive in their organisation’s culture?”

The state of individual pilot situational awareness on final approach is what the FSF is trying to analyse. It explains: “Put very simply, prior to the pilots’ ability to accurately assess the operational landscape for potential threats and risks to aircraft stability, which would then shape their decision-making around com-pliance, they must first and foremost be fully aware of the objective world around them.”

That sounds obvious, but it is not that sim-ple. The brief time window in which a land/go-around decision has to be made and carried out is not static – the situation is changing con-tinuously – and fast. The potential exists for a pilot to make a decision to land, then change it to a go-around because of a developing aware-ness of risk, or because of an external effect such as wind shear or a vehicle driving onto the runway without clearance to do so.

The FSF had previously developed a model for assessing how pilots cope with rapidly changing situations – the dynamic situational awareness model. The team will apply it also to the land/go-around decision-making pro-cess when it has gathered all the data. The FSF explains how it uses DSAM: “This study em-ployed DSAM for measuring and interpreting the psychological and social factors that collec-tively make up situational awareness. Within this model, situational awareness comprises

power to weight ratios. In the 1970s, when far less data was gathered and far less analysis done, military pilots – especially those flying navy fixed-wing aircraft – assumed that every approach was deemed to be a go-around un-less, on short finals, all the parameters were seen to be good for a landing. The go-around forum last year made this observation: “En-couraging pilots to be ‘go-around minded’ is essential for operational safety and an analogy may be drawn with encouragement to be ‘go-minded’ after V1 is passed during take-off.”

POOR COMPLIANCEWhat needs to be done? The FSF says: “If our go-around policies were effective even 50% of the time, the industry accident rate would be re-duced 10-18%. There is no other single deci-sion, or procedure, beyond calling the go-around according to SOPs that could have as significant an effect in reducing our accident rate.” The FSF adds: “Why, then, is compliance so poor?”

Two of the FSF’s questions to pilots are aimed at finding out whether pilots have a dif-ferent idea from their airline bosses of what constitutes an approach from which a landing attempt would be risky: “Do pilots accept the basic definitions set by their organisations for what defines an unstable condition, as well as the standard operating procedures (SOPs) their organizations have set out to handle them?”; and “Apart from their company’s definitions, beyond what thresholds of insta-bility on key flight parameters do pilots per-sonally define themselves to be in an unstable state that warrants a go-around decision?”

Early analyses from the FSF questions were revealing in that they described the problem in detail without providing an instantly obvious

nine distinct but interconnected and seamless sub-aspects of awareness.” The FSF wants to understand “how each of these sub-aspects in-fluences a pilot’s risk assessment and decision-making processes, singly and in con-cert with one another, to remain compliant ver-sus non-compliant, in the face of aircraft insta-bilities while on approach”.

That is a tall order in an increasingly com-plex world with larger and more complex air-craft, albeit with generally benign, predictable handling characteristics and impressive

“The almost complete failureto call go-arounds…constitutes the number onecause of runway excursions”FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION

❯❯

External effects such as wind shear can influence decision-making in a fast-changing environment

Rex

Feat

ures

SAFETY


ACCORDING TO current industry wisdom, which is now being re-viewed for fine tuning, pilots should abandon “unstable” approaches and go around safe-ly. Between 3.5% and 4% of all approaches are estimated to be unstable, yet pilots make a go-around decision in only a tiny fraction of those. What follows are examples of unstable ap-proaches that should have prompted a go-around decision but did not, with dire results.

■ 5 January 2014Vineland Corporation Bombardier CL600 business jet at Aspen County airport, Colorado, USA. It landed long in a high, gusting tailwind, bounced dramatically and rolled inverted, killing two of the three people on board. The landing was the second at-

tempt. The pilot had carried out a go-around from the first.

■ 14 August 2013UPS Airbus A300-600F at Birmingham airport, Alabama, USA. The aircraft was carrying out a localiser/distance meas-uring equipment approach be-fore dawn to a runway with no approach lights. It got too low over rising ground and hit trees, crashing about 1,000m (3,280ft) short of the threshold.

■ 6 July 2013Asiana Boeing 777 at San Francisco International airport, USA. The crew were carrying out a localiser/DME approach in excellent daylight visibility but were relying on the auto-throttle to keep the aircraft’s approach reference speed cor-rect, and were not monitoring

the air speed indicator. Because of the flight manage-ment mode selected and the fact that the crew had retarded the throttles manually to idle to correct a fast/high situation early in the approach, the throttles stayed in idle. The aircraft dipped below the glideslope and, when the crew noticed that they needed to go around, the airspeed was just 103kt (191km/h). The air-craft’s tail hit the sea wall short of the runway threshold. It cartwheeled to a halt and three people were killed. ■

ANALYSIS

THE PERILS OF NOT MAKING THAT CRUCIAL CALLBetween 3.5%and 4% of allapproaches areestimated to be unstable

solution. Here are several examples presented at the go-around forum: “Flight crews that con-tinued an unstable approach to a landing com-pared with crews that decided to go around, scored lower on all nine dynamic situational awareness constructs identified in the DSAM, and demonstrated significantly less discussion about potential threats; pilots who continued approaches unstable, compared with those who go around, are less compliant with check-list use and standard calls.

“Most pilots do not feel they will be repri-manded for non-compliance with GA; flight crews who continued unstable approaches were more comfortable operating on the mar-gin of the safety envelope, and find little fail-safe in protective crew norms and processes. They will use a convenient, easy justification for non-compliance; most pilots believe their company instability criteria for a go-around is unrealistic and their personal thresholds are below 1,000ft for profile and around 500ft for energy management. There is little disincen-tive for non-compliance, nor incentive for compliance to GA policies.”

“GET-HOME-ITIS”Other factors have a psychological influence, for example the long-accepted pilot malady commonly nicknamed “get-home-itis”, nor-mally credited with motivating crews to bust through decision heights on approach in mar-ginal visibility because of their keenness to land. But the same motivation could also en-courage them to ignore instability as a risk. Get-home-itis is heightened by fatigue, par-ticularly on the final landing of a duty period, or among pilots operating at a period of circa-dian low, like those of the UPS Airbus A300 freighter at Birmingham, Alabama (see box).

And another factor – highlighted in the con-clusions from the 2013 go-arounds forum – might be this: “Go-around is relatively rare manoeuvre for most commercial pilots. On av-erage, a short-haul pilot may make a go-around once or twice a year and a long-haul pilot may make one every two to three years. This might partially explain pilot reluctance to perform a go-around.” Hence one of the forum’s recom-mendations was that awareness of all the risks involving the land/go-around decision, and in the performance of go-arounds under different circumstances, should be emphasised not only for pilots but across the board in airline man-agement. Management should have an under-standing of the implications of the decision pi-lots are making before they chart the circumstances under which their pilots are ex-pected to make it. Another precondition for dealing successfully with the problem, says the FSF, is this: “A just culture must prevail if problems in go-around safety are to be suffi-ciently understood and addressed.”

The relative rarity of real go-arounds, plus

the fact that pilots are practically never given recurrent training involving all-engine go-arounds in simulator sessions, is judged to be a major factor in loss of control during go-arounds. Because of existing recurrent training regulatory requirements, based on tenets that have not been revised since the 1950s, most go-

arounds that crews get in recurrent training take place on an approach with an engine fail-ure. This places its own demands on the pilots, but the climb rate during go-around with an engine failure is quite low, so things happen slowly, which makes things easier if the missed approach pattern is complex. An all-engines go-around delivers a high rate of climb together with a powerful pitch-up moment, so if the missed approach point demands a climb-ing turn and levelling out at a height not much above the go-around altitude for traffic conflict avoidance reasons, the workload is fierce.

A second FSF experiment using the same survey will investigate the “personally held thresholds for instability that pilots believed would necessitate a go-around call”, given a se-

ries of developing scenarios. But the foundation is not stopping at the pilots – it is carrying out a management survey in parallel with the pilot survey and a study of the risks inherent in the go-around itself. Also, air traffic controllers are responsible for providing real-time weather and runway surface contamination updates. It is also ATC’s responsibility to consider pilot work-load if they demand changes to the approach pattern or runway in use once the approach has begun. Finally, if it is ATC, rather than the crew, who demands that a go-around should be car-ried out, it should again consider pilot workload and, if the missed approach procedure pattern is demanding because of terrain or traffic patterns, provide simple, brief instructions. A longer-term objective is to simplify missed approach procedures where possible.

In the end, however, the FSF programme’s recommendations will have three general ob-jectives: to enhance crew dynamic situational awareness in the go-around situation; to re-fine the go-around policy (by reviewing the stable approach parameters and the stable ap-proach height); and to “minimise the subjec-tivity of go-around decision-making”. The precise measures that will ensure the delivery of these objectives – and the ultimate objec-tive of safer go-arounds – should be published before the end of this year.

And if the go-around measures work as in-tended, a secondary effect of reducing runway excursions could deliver a dramatic reduction in the overall accident rate. ■

The potential exists for apilot to make a decision toland, then change it to ago-around because of adeveloping awareness of risk

LETTERS


[email protected]

We welcome your letters on any aspect of the aerospace industry. Please write to: The Editor, Flight International, Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5AS, UK. Or email [email protected]

The opinions on this page do not necessarily represent those of the editor. Flight International cannot publish letters without name and address. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length.

FLIGHTINTERNATIONAL

We welcome your letters on any aspect of the aerospace industry. Please write to: The Editor, Flight International, Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5AS, UK. Or email [email protected]

The opinions on this page do not necessarily represent those of the editor. Letters without a full postal address sup-plied may not be published. Letters may also be published on flightglobal.com and must be no longer than 250 words.

FLIGHTINTERNATIONAL

Is Rolls-Royce gearing up?

MH17

Parallels with Iran Air incidentAs happened with MH370, a great deal of dubious and premature opinion is being expressed about Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, often by those who should at present hold their peace.

Most especially it seems to be assumed that until an area – in this case eastern Ukraine – is designated a hazard, airlines should not exercise their own judgement.

Flying over a combat zone where aircraft flying as high as 21,000ft have been brought down can only be described as irre-sponsible in the kindest light.

Uppermost in all airlines’ priorities should perhaps have been memories of the incident involving the cruiser USS Vincennes, which, for reasons that have never been satisfactorily explained, downed an Iran Air Boeing in the Persian Gulf in 1988. It was flying at 14,000ft in clear weather and was clearly visible for what it was, which did not protect it.

This is an event to which President Obama should perhaps at-tach due importance when holding forth on this latest incident. The Vincennes incident and the downing of the Malaysian aircraft may have much in common.

Certainly both acts are equally reprehensible and perhaps both equally and similarly irresponsible.Richard ChandlessVovray en Bornes, France

I read with interest the descrip-tion of the Rolls-Royce Advance engine concept (Flight Interna-tionaI, 8-14 July) as an “evolu-tion” of the Trent engine family “[using] an advanced IP turbine to drive the fan through a power gearbox, making the LP turbine redundant.”

Translation: The three-spool Trent has evolved into a two-spool machine with a reduction gearbox in the fan drive train.

One must wonder whether a geared turbofan by any other name would mesh as sweetly?RP CzachorChief consulting engineer (retired)Urbana, Illinois, USA

Why be a pilot?I read with interest your letter from Anthony Petteford of CTC (Flight International, 8-14 July).

Firstly I don’t believe it’s the closed cockpit door which is responsible for the mythical pilot

shortage. It’s more likely to be the massive cost to start a career, and the continuous downward movement of

terms and conditions, much of it

driven by the large training organisations and airline management.

Most intelligent young people can see a career in the cockpit is less desirable than ever before.

As far as encouraging youngsters into the profession, I would recommend they look long and hard at what they are taking on. While the race to the bottom in terms and conditions continues, don’t expect too many sharp youngsters to be queuing outside the recruiter’s door!Capt Paul Harper-LittleBy email

Role of the RATWith regard to Mr Schulz’s letter about the FAA waiver for 787-9 ram air turbine (Flight Interna-

tional, 15-21 July), I want to point out the following:

In normal operation the RAT may be used once or twice for real in a aircraft’s life span.

So it is logical to change the device if it is used in normal op-eration to make sure no degrada-tion of the capacitor can happen.

So I think a waiver and time limit to come up with a better de-vice is a reasonable solution.

And for ETOPS the RAT is not delivering any thrust so the en-gines cannot be restarted, so it re-ally does not matter where you are over the Atlantic Ocean.F PlasmansBy email

Weight a minuteIn your cover story about the 787 (Flight International, 15-21 July), there seems to be an error in the spec sheet comparing the different models. The Model-8 shows a landing weight of 380 tons, far higher than the take-off weight of 227.9; it has to be 180 instead of 380.Rodolfo A SernaBogota, ColombiaEditor’s reply: Apologies. We entered the number in imperial rather than metric measure-ments. It should be 172.4t.

DisconnectWith regard to your feature on the Bombardier CSeries (Flight International, 8-14 July) – is this what one calls “joined-up man-agement”?

At the top of column two: “as of late June little is known about the nature and cause of the un-contained failure…”

Top of column three: “Both companies say the cause of the… incident is well understood…”Peter MartinBeacon Hill, UK

The USS Vincennes

Rex

Feat

ures

The Advance concept

Training courses to take you there

Build your career

READER SERVICES


EDITORIAL, ADVERTISING, PRODUCTION & READER CONTACTS

Flight International welcomes unsolicited contributions from readers but cannot guarantee to return photographs, transparencies, etc safely.

© and Database Rights 2014 Reed Business Information Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of the publishers.

Ascend, a Flightglobal advisory service, is a leading provider of expert advisory and valuations services to

the global aviation industry. Its specialist, independent services inform and shape the strategies of aviation businesses worldwide. Ascend offers an unrivalled breadth and depth of aviation expertise and experience, backed by unique access to robust industry data. www.ascendworldwide.com Tel: +44 20 8564 6700 email: [email protected]

Flightglobal Pro is a paid-for news and data service for professionals who need to find new opportunities or track competition within the air transport industry. The service puts a wealth of global intelligence at your fingertips, covering everything from airline fleets, routes and traffic, through to aircraft finance, industry regulation and more. www.flightglobal.com/pro

Flightglobal Insight provides a range of tailored research reports and analysis, with access to information and industry expertise from the unrivalled Flightglobal Premium services portfolio. www.flightglobal.com/insight Tel: +44 20 8652 3914 email: [email protected]

Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper. Published by Reed Business Information Ltd, Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5AS, UK. Tel: +44 20 8652 3500.

Newstrade distributed by Marketforce (UK) Ltd, Blue Fin Building, 110 Southwark Street, London SE1 0SU, UK. Tel: +44 20 3148 3300.

Classified advertising prepress by CCM. Printed in Great Britain by Polestar (Colchester) Ltd.

Flight International published weekly 49 issues per year. Periodicals postage paid at Rahway, NJ. Postmaster send changes to Reed Business Information, c/o Mercury International Ltd, 365 Blair Road, Avenel, NJ 07001

This periodical is sold subject to the following conditions: namely that it is not, without the written consent of the publishers first given, lent, re-sold, hired out or in any unauthorised cover by way of trade, or affixed to, or as part of, any publication of advertising, literary or pictorial matter whatsoever. No part of the content may be stored electronically, or reproduced or transmitted in any form without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISSN 0015-3710

EDITORIAL +44 20 8652 3842 Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5AS, UK [email protected]

Editor Murdo Morrison FRAeS+44 20 8652 4395 [email protected] Head of Strategic Content/ Flight Daily News Editor Dominic Perry +44 20 8652 3206 [email protected] Managing Editor/Defence Editor Craig Hoyle +44 20 8652 3834 [email protected] Editor Dan Thisdell +44 20 8652 4491 [email protected] Operations/Safety Editor David Learmount +44 20 8652 3845 [email protected] & General Aviation Editor Kate Sarsfield +44 20 8652 3885 [email protected] Aerospace and Defence Reporter Beth Stevenson+44 20 8652 4382 [email protected] Magazine Enquiries Dawn Hartwell +44 20 8652 3315 [email protected]

AIR TRANSPORT TEAM Editor Airline Business Max Kingsley-Jones +44 20 8652 3825 [email protected] Flightglobal Premium News Graham Dunn +44 20 8652 4995 [email protected] Editor Niall O’Keeffe +44 20 8652 4007 [email protected] Air Transport Editor David Kaminski-Morrow +44 20 8652 3909 [email protected] Transport/MRO Reporter Michael Gubisch +44 20 8652 8747 [email protected] Reporter Oliver Clark+44 20 8652 8534 [email protected]

AMERICAS Americas Managing Editor Stephen Trimble +1 703 836 8052 [email protected] Americas Editor – Air Transport Ghim-Lay Yeo+1 703 836 9474 [email protected] Air Transport Reporter Edward Russell+1 703 836 1897 [email protected] Jon Hemmerdinger+1 703 836 3084 [email protected]

ASIA/PACIFIC Asia Editor Greg Waldron +65 6780 4314 [email protected] Reporter Mavis Toh +65 6780 4309 [email protected] Reporter Ellis Taylor +65 6780 4307 [email protected] Australia Correspondent Emma Kelly

EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST Israel Correspondent Arie Egozi Russia Correspondent Vladimir Karnozov

FLIGHTGLOBAL.COM Editor Stuart Clarke +44 20 8652 3835 [email protected] Web co-ordinator Rebecca Springate +44 20 8652 4641 [email protected]

EDITORIAL PRODUCTION Head of Design & Production Alexis Rendell Global Chief Copy Editor Lewis HarperChief Copy Editor, Europe Dan BlochLayout Copy Editors Andy Hemphill, Sophia Huang, Tim Norman, George NortonGlobal Production Editor Louise Murrell Deputy Global Production Editor Rachel Kemp Production Assistant Lizabeth DavisGlobal Digital Producer Jerome JoyceDeputy Digital Producer Damion DiplockDigital Production Editor Colin MillerWeb Production Editor Andrew CostertonSenior Designer Lauren MillsTechnical Artist Tim Bicheno-Brown Consulting Technical Artist Tim Hall

READER SERVICES Subscriptions Jenny SmithFlight International Subscriptions, Reed Business Information,PO Box 302, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, RH16 3DH, UK

Subscription Enquiries +44 1444 475682Fax +44 1444 445301 [email protected]

Subscription Rates1 Year 2 Years 3 Years £137/$219/ £232/$372/ £328/$525/€169 €287 €405Only paid subscriptions available. Cheques payable to Flight International

DISPLAY ADVERTISEMENT SALES Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5AS, UK

Group Display Sales Manager Stuart Burgess [email protected] Sales Support Gillian Cumming +44 20 8652 8837 [email protected]

EUROPESales Manager Shawn Buck +44 20 8652 4998 [email protected] Sales Manager Mark Hillier +44 20 8652 8022 [email protected] Display Account Manager Grace Hewitt+44 20 8652 3469 [email protected]

NORTH & SOUTH AMERICA Vice-President, North & South America Rob Hancock +1 703 836 7444 [email protected] Regional Sales Director Warren McEwan +1 703 836 3719 [email protected] Sales Executive Kaye Woody +1 703 836 7445 [email protected] Reed Business Information, 333 N.Fairfax Street, Suite 301, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA

ITALY Sales Manager Riccardo Laureri +39 (02) 236 2500 [email protected] Laureri Associates SRL, Via Vallazze 43, 20131 Milano, Italy

ISRAEL Sales Executive Asa Talbar +972 77 562 1900 Fax: +972 77 562 1903 [email protected] Talbar Media, 41 HaGiva’a St, PO Box 3184, Givat Ada 37808, Israel

ASIA/AUSTRALASIA Sales Manager Michael Tang +65 6780 4301 [email protected] Fax: +65 6789 7575 1 Changi Business Park Crescent,#06-01 Plaza 8 @ CBP, Singapore 486025

RUSSIA & CIS Director Arkady Komarov [email protected]/Fax: +7 (495) 987 3800 World Business Media, Leningradsky Prospekt, 80, Korpus G, Office 807, Moscow 125190, Russia

CLASSIFIED & RECRUITMENT Group Sales Manager Louise Rees +44 20 8652 8425 [email protected] Manager Sophie [email protected] Recruitment Sales Executive Katie Mann+44 20 8652 [email protected] Classified Sales Executive Daniel Brooker+44 20 8652 [email protected] Key Account Manager – Asia Michael Tang +65 6780 4301

ADVERTISEMENT PRODUCTION Production Manager Sean Behan +44 20 8652 8232 [email protected] Manager Classified Alan Blagrove +44 20 8652 4406 [email protected]

MARKETING Marketing Director Justine Gillen+44 20 8652 8031 [email protected]

DATA TEAM Head of Data Pete Webber +44 20 8564 6715 [email protected] Commercial Aviation Steven Phipps +44 20 8564 [email protected] Defence & GA John Maloney+44 20 8564 [email protected]

PUBLISHING MANAGEMENT Publishing Director Melanie Robson Publisher Mark Pilling

For a full list of events see flightglobal.com/events

EVENTS12-14 AugustLABACESao Paulo, Brazilabag.org.br

8-9 SeptemberAscend Aviation 2020 Finance ForumTokyo, Japanascendconferences.com

12 SeptemberMediterranean Business AviationSliema, Maltaaeropodium.com/mba.html

17-21 SeptemberAfrica Aerospace and DefenceWaterkloof, South Africaaadexpo.co.za

25-26 SeptemberCentral Asian Business AviationAlmaty, Kazakhstanaeropodium.com/cp/caba

1-2 OctoberAircraft eEnablement Connectivity & IFE Conference (AEEC 2014)London Heathrow, UK aircraft-commerce.com

9-11 OctoberAfrican Air ExpoAccra, Ghanaafricanairexpo.com

14-16 OctoberHelitech InternationalAmsterdam, Netherlandshelitechevents.com

16-17 OctoberInternational Business Aviation SymposiumKursaal Congress Centre, San Marinoaeropodium.com/sanmarino

17-21 OctoberNBAA Business Aviation Convention and ExhibitionOrlando, USAnbaa.org

28-30 OctoberAIRTEC 2014Frankfurt, Germanyairtec.aero

2-3 NovemberOffshore/Onshore AviationArmed Forces Officers Club, Abu [email protected]

1-2 DecemberAscend Aviation 2020 Finance ForumSan Francisco, [email protected]

3-4 DecemberSafety in Air Traffic ControlLondon, UKflightglobalevents.com/safetyATC2013

8-10 DecemberMiddle East Business AviationDubai, UAEmeba.aero

10-11 May 2015Aviation AfricaDubai, UAEaviationafrica.aero

19-21 MayEBACE 2015Geneva, Switzerlandebace.aero

TEL

+4

4 (0

) 20

86

52

48

97 F

AX

+4

4 (0

) 20

86

52

377

9 E

MA

ILcl

assi

fied.

serv

ices

@rb

i.co.

ukCLA

SSIF

IED

34 | Flight International | 29 July - 4 August 2014 flightglobal.com

CLASSIFIEDTEL +44 (0) 20 8652 4897 FAX +44 (0) 20 8652 3779 EMAIL [email protected] may be monitored for training purposes

+44 (0) 1258 818181 [email protected] [email protected] timleacockaircraft.com

Independent Authorised Sales Representative for the United Kingdom

New and used aircraft

TEL

+4

4 (0

) 20

86

52

48

97 F

AX

+4

4 (0

) 20

86

52

377

9 E

MA

ILcl

assi

fied.

serv

ices

@rb

i.co.

ukCLA

SSIF

IED

flightglobal.com 29 July - 4 August 2014 | Flight International | 35

Dauphin AS.365Parts Specialistsw w w. a l p i n e . a e roTel: +41 52 345 3605

LONDON BIGGIN HILL

CLOSE TO THE HEART OF LONDON

HANGARAGE AND

OFFICES AVAILABLE

IN LONDON TODAY

For long and short term competitivelypriced office space and hangarage contact: Katy Woolcott

+44(0)1959 [email protected]

Equipment,Maintenance & Service

Aircraft spares

Hangarage Courses and tuition

Build your career

Try Flightglobal Training’s new site for the fastest

route to building your aerospace and aviation career

Scan with your smart phone to search the latest aerospace and aviation training

Training courses to take you thereZZZ�ÀLJKWJOREDO�FRP�WUDLQLQJ

HU

ND

RED

S O

F JO

BS

@fli

ghtg

loba

l.com

/job

s

REC

RU

ITM

EN

T

flightglobal.com/jobsEMAIL [email protected] CALL +44 (20) 8652 4900 FAX +44 (20) 8652 4877

Getting careers off the ground


6WDUW�ZLWK�MREV�IOLJKWJOREDO�FRP��

7+(�MRE�VLWH�IRU�WKH�DYLDWLRQ��

DQG�DHURVSDFH�LQGXVWU\�

5HDG\�WR�GHSDUW�IURP�\RXU�MRE"

<RXU�LQGXVWU\��\RXU�MRE�VLWH

3ULQW 2QOLQH 0RELOH

HU

ND

RED

S O

F JO

BS

@fli

ghtg

loba

l.com

/job

s

REC

RU

ITM

EN

T


Interested? Apply online

at Jet2careers.com

B737 & B757 Type Rated Captains

&RPSHWLWLYH�6DODU\��%HQHÀWV

Jet2.com�LV�WKH�1RUWK·V�OHDGLQJ�OHLVXUH�DLUOLQH��RSHUDWLQJ�D�ÁHHW�RI�B757-200s and B737-300s & 800s. As we continue to grow, we are recruiting Type Rated Captains to join our Team.

We have vacancies at Belfast, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle, Leeds, Blackpool, Manchester and East Midlands��IURP�ZKLFK�ZH�RSHUDWH�VFKHGXOHG�OHLVXUH�ÁLJKWV�WR�WKH�0HGLWHUUDQHDQ��WKH� &DQDULHV�DQG�JUHDW�OHLVXUH�FLWLHV��DQG�RXU�DOO�LPSRUWDQW�5R\DO�0DLO�ÁLJKWV�²�GHOLYHULQJ�WKH�)LUVW� Class mail. You will need enthusiasm, energy and commitment to customer service to deliver Friendly low fares to our all important customers.

Our new Flight Crew Training Centre�LQ�%UDGIRUG�KDV�WKUHH�6LPXODWRUV��SURYLGLQJ�D�JUHDW� HQYLURQPHQW�WR�GHYHORS�\RXU�VNLOOV��:H�RIIHU�VHYHUDO�SLORW�FRQWUDFW�W\SHV�LQFOXGLQJ�)XOO�7LPH� RU�6XPPHU�2QO\��HDFK�SURYLGLQJ�H[FHOOHQW�EHQHÀWV.

7KLV�LV�D�JUHDW�RSSRUWXQLW\�WR�EH�SDUW�RI�DQ�H[FLWLQJ�IRUZDUG�WKLQNLQJ�EXVLQHVV�²�KHOS�XV�WR�VHQG� the North on holiday with Jet2.com and Jet2holidays!!

British International Helicopters (BIH) is one of the UK’s largest domestically owned helicopter operators.

Part of the Rigby Group (RG), the parent company for a portfolio of privately owned and highly successful businesses operating across Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, British International Helicopters

�)0/��VWLYH[LZ�H�ÅLL[�VM��OLSPJVW[LYZ�HUK�LTWSV`Z�V]LY��WLYZVUULS�

As part of our continuing operations and expansion plans we are seeking to recruit enthusiastic pilots for the following position.

Chief Helicopter Pilot MoD/SAR - NewquayReporting to the Director of Operations the Chief Pilot will oversee the military aviation contracts that the company Z\WWVY[Z��;OL`�^PSS�IL�YLX\PYLK�[V�Å`�[OL�SPUL�HUK�Z\WLY]PZL�[OL�day to day running of operations with multiple aircraft types, as well as liaising between the Base Managing Pilots and Director VM�6WLYH[PVUZ��;OL`�^PSS�HSZV�JVU[YPI\[L�[V�[OL�KL]LSVWTLU[�VM�HKKP[PVUHS�^VYR�[OH[�[OL�JVTWHU`�W\YZ\LZ��;OL� WVZP[PVU� PZ� IHZLK� H[� 5L^X\H`� ^P[O� ZVTL� [YH]LS� [V� [OL�JVTWHU`»Z�V[OLY�IHZLZ�HZ�YLX\PYLK��

(WWSPJHU[Z� T\Z[� OH]L� WYL]PV\Z� TPSP[HY`� Å`PUN� L_WLYPLUJL�HUK�OVSK�H�]HSPK�(;73�/��HUK�09�/��^P[O�H�TPUPT\T�VM��OV\YZ�L_WLYPLUJL� VM� ^OPJO� H� WYVWVY[PVU� T\Z[� OH]L� ILLU� VU� SHYNL�TLKP\T�OLSPJVW[LYZ�

Please send CV and covering letter to [email protected]

Engineering Business Strategy Consultant

Glasgow Airport

Due to continued development of our engineering facilities, Loganair

now invites applications from consultants who are experienced in

developing, implementing and driving strategic changes, ideally within

an engineering EASA Part 145 organisation. Applications will also be

considered from experienced personnel who have a strong business

background with defined skills regarding finance, procurement and

project management.

The successful candidate will previously have held senior positions

within mid-large sized airlines and will lead on projects involving:

engineering cost control and optimising value; stock purchasing and

control; aircraft reliability and timely rectification of defects; productivity

and resource allocation; and cultural change and development.

The consultant will work with the existing engineering team, leading

with ideas and solutions. It is essential that the consultant has excellent

people management skills, having the ability to work closely with

others, influencing and developing the existing team. The role is one

of leadership. It is vital that the incumbent has a style of working that

is grounded, practical, open and inspiring.

The consultant will be based in our Head Office, adjacent to Glasgow

Airport, though some travel around our network will be necessary.

Specific working requirements will be discussed at interview.

To apply, please send your CV and a covering letter to

Brian Mitchell, Director of Human Resources by email:

[email protected]

Applications will not be accepted via recruitment agencies or similar.

HU

ND

RED

S O

F JO

BS

@fli

ghtg

loba

l.com

/job

s

REC

RU

ITM

EN

T


DON’T WANT TO KEEP THEIR FEET ON THE GROUND.

For those who

easyJet is one of the biggest airlines in Europe, and we’re growing at real pace. There are no signs of us slowing down - in fact, we’re about to open up three new bases across Europe: in Amsterdam, Porto and Naples.

For talented, experienced and ambitious Captains and Co-pilots, that means we have some amazing opportunities to join us in one of these bases and be part of it from the very start.

Operating an A320 family aircraft, you’ll travel to some of Europe’s most challenging destinations, where you’ll join an ever-expanding pan-European airline that’s revolutionising the way people travel.

With integrity, energy and a genuine passion for flying, you’ll have a real desire to be part of a highly professional and successful pilot team and meet these minimum requirements:

• Currently operating on A320 family aircraft

• UK EASA licence (or converted by start date)

• Class 1 unrestricted medical

• Low-visibility Cat IIIB-qualified

• Right to live and work in Europe with unrestricted access across the easyJet network

• Minimum ICAO Level 5 English with requirement to achieve Level 6 within six months of employment

Full eligibility criteria for each role can be found on our website, together with application details.

Working for easyJet isn’t just about flying planes – it’s being part of one of the biggest success stories in modern aviation.

This is generation easyJet. There really is no career like it.

Find out why at careers.easyjet.com

Captains and Co-Pilots

Amsterdam, Porto, Naples

€Attractive

HU

ND

RED

S O

F JO

BS

@fli

ghtg

loba

l.com

/job

s

REC

RU

ITM

EN

T


We are an international group, acting as sales and service representatives of the world’s leading business jet manufacturer.

We are expanding our activities and seek an:

Accountable Manager and

CEOFor a fast growing

Maintenance and Aircraft Modification Company

Job description:

We seek a person with proven experience, who is able to lead a profitable and growing business in a competitive and challenging market. While always ensuring the highest commitment to quality of service.

Responsibilities:

• Full responsibility for all company activities and P&L.

• Drive business growth by attracting more maintenance customers and developing aircraft modification projects.

• Lead an efficient, flexible organization with a fluctuating workload.

• Manage and be accountable for: aircraft service center, design organization, aircraft modification projects, logistics and finance.

• Work closely with Board of Directors on developing business growth and profitability strategy. Report on progress.

• Work closely with the CEO of the Holding Group on strategic and critical missions.

Qualifications:

• At least 5 years of experience in running aircraft maintenance organizations.

• At least 5 years experience and qualification as Accountable Manager of an EASA Part-145 Maintenance Organization and preferably of an EASA Part-21 Design Organization, also experience with EASA Part M.

• Engineering background with a strong business orientation.

• Proven leadership abilities and a willingness to work hard to succeed.

• Fluent German and English.

Terms of employment:• EXCELLENT TERMS WILL BE OFFERED TO THE SUITABLE CANDIDATE.• Place of work: Northern-Germany.

Applications to be sent to: [email protected]

British International Helicopters (BIH) is one of the UK’s largest domestically owned helicopter operators.

Part of the Rigby Group (RG), the parent company for a portfolio of privately owned and highly successful businesses operating across Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, British International Helicopters

�)0/��VWLYH[LZ�H�ÅLL[�VM��OLSPJVW[LYZ�HUK�LTWSV`Z�V]LY��WLYZVUULS�

As part of our continuing operations and expansion plans we are seeking to recruit enthusiastic pilots for the following position.

As365N2 Helicopter Captain - NewquayCaptain on a single pilot, multi crew day/night VFR/IFR operation based at Newquay supporting our military client with a MRCO (Z��ÅLL[��;OL�YVSL�PU]VS]LZ�WHZZLUNLY�[YHUZMLYZ�[V�UH]HS�ZOPWZ��PUJS\KPUN� OVPZ[� VWLYH[PVUZ�� HZ� ^LSS� HZ� ZWLJPÄJ� TPSP[HY`� [HZRZ�PU� � Z\WWVY[� VM� V\Y� JSPLU[»Z� HJ[P]P[PLZ��>VYRPUN� VU� H� ZTHSS� \UP[�requires you to be a team player with strong communication ZRPSSZ�

Applicants must hold a minimum of valid CPL(H) and IR(H) with H�TPUPT\T�VM� ��OV\YZ� L_WLYPLUJL�VM�^OPJO�H� WYVWVY[PVU�T\Z[�OH]L�ILLU�VU� SHYNL�TLKP\T�OLSPJVW[LYZ�� (KKP[PVUHSS �̀� P[�is the client’s requirement that applicants must have previous TPSP[HY`� Å`PUN� L_WLYPLUJL� VM� LTIHYRLK� VWLYH[PVUZ� HUK� HSS�HWWVPU[TLU[Z�HYL�Z\IQLJ[�[V�JSPLU[�ZJY\[PU`�HUK�HWWYV]HS��

Please send CV and covering letter to [email protected]

*HW�H[SUHVV�UHOLHI�WRGD\

MREV�IOLJKWJOREDO�FRP

7+(�MRE�VLWH�IRU�WKH�DYLDWLRQ�

DQG�DHURVSDFH�LQGXVWU\�

5HFUXLWPHQW�KHDGDFKH"

3ULQW 2QOLQH 0RELOH

2QH�LQGXVWU\��RQH�MRE�VLWH

HU

ND

RED

S O

F JO

BS

@fli

ghtg

loba

l.com

/job

s

REC

RU

ITM

EN

T


RECRUITMENT ADVERTISEMENT FOR CIVIL SERVICE VACANCY

CIVIL AVIATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

Senior Operations Officer (Helicopter Operations Inspector) Salary: Master Pay Scale Point 45 (HK$89,565 approximately US$11,482* per month) to Master Pay Scale Point 49(HK$103,190 approximately US$13,229* per month) (See Note 1).(*Based on exchange rate of HK$7.8 = US$1) (subject to fluctuation)

Entry Requirements: Candidates should have (a) (i) a current Airline Transport Pilot’s Licence (ATPL) (Helicopters) with Class One Medical Certificate andnot less than 3000 flying hours in command of helicopters of which 2000 hours should be in command of twin-engine helicopters; and (ii) not less than 12years’ relevant post-licence experience of which not less than five years should be as an Aircraft Rating and Instrument Rating Examiner or in other regulatoryduties; OR (b) an International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) contracting state’s Commercial Pilot’s Licence (CPL) (Helicopter) with Instrument Rating;and a minimum of seven years’ post-licence experience in civil aviation management and operations or as a regulator; and have passed the ATPLexaminations; AND (c) strong command of written and spoken English.

Duties: A Senior Operations Officer (Helicopter Operations Inspector) is mainly deployed on helicopter operations matters including - (a) monitoring of theoperating standards of helicopter operators in Hong Kong; (b) monitoring standards of crew training and associated training facilities, operations andtraining manuals, pre-flight briefings, flight planning facilities and the adequacy of staffing and accommodation; (c) observation of tests conducted byoperators’ examiners for the issue/renewal of authority to sign certificate of test and type rating tests forms; (d) investigation of aircraft accidents andincidents; and (e) assisting in formulation of policies and requirements on flight standards and operations matters. (Notes: Post holders are required totravel extensively on duty and work irregular hours)

Notes:(1) Subject to the prevailing situation, candidates with additional experience may be granted increments for previous relevant experience in the civil

aviation field in excess of the stipulated minimum. (2) For the purpose of heightening public awareness of the Basic Law (BL) and promoting a culture of learning of BL in the community, assessment of

BL knowledge will be included in the recruitment for all civil service jobs. Results of the BL test for degree/professional grades will be one of theconsiderations to assess the suitability of a candidate but will not affect his/her eligibility for applying for civil service jobs. As a general principle, themain consideration for suitability for appointment remains a candidate’s qualification, experience and caliber.

(3) Candidates should submit their application forms together with an Experience Resume by mail to the enquiry address on or before the closing datefor application. The Experience Resume can be downloaded from the Civil Aviation Department’s website.(http://www.cad.gov.hk/english/recruitment.html)

Terms of Appointment: A new recruit will normally be appointed on civil service agreement terms for three years. He/she will be required to serve onagreement terms for at least 3 years before they can be considered for appointment on the prevailing permanent terms. (A gratuity may be granted upon satisfactory completion of the full agreement period with consistently high standard of performance and conduct. Inaddition, in compliance with the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Ordinance, the Government will arrange to make contributions for the appointee toa registered mandatory provident fund scheme (MPF scheme). The amount of gratuity payable will be the sum which, when added to the Government’scontribution to the said MPF scheme, equals to 15% of the total basic salary drawn during the contract period.)

Enquiry Address, Fax. No and E-mail Address: For enquiry or request for an application form, please write to the Administration Division, Civil AviationDepartment, Level 5, Civil Aviation Department Headquarters, 1 Tung Fai Road, Hong Kong International Airport, Lantau, Hong Kong S.A.R., People’sRepublic of China. (Fax.: (852) 2910 6399) or e-mail to <[email protected]>, quoting reference “CAD PR/5-25/64(2014)”.

Closing Date of Application: 1 September 2014

General Notes:(a) Persons who are not permanent residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) may also apply for this vacancy but will be

appointed only when no suitable and qualified candidates who are permanent residents of the HKSAR are available.(b) Applications from serving civil servants in the Senior Operations Officer (Senior Operations Inspector) / Senior Operations Officer (Helicopter

Operations Inspector) rank of Civil Aviation Department would not normally be considered.(c) As an Equal Opportunities Employer, the Government is committed to eliminating discrimination in employment. The vacancy advertised is open to

all applicants meeting the basic entry requirement irrespective of their disability, sex, marital status, pregnancy, age, family status, sexual orientationand race.

(d) Civil service vacancies are posts on the civil service establishment. Candidates selected for these vacancies will be appointed on civil service termsof appointment and conditions of service and will become civil servants on appointment.

(e) The entry pay, terms of appointment and conditions of service to be offered are subject to the provisions prevailing at the time the offer of appointmentis made.

(f) The information on the maximum pay point is for reference only and may be subject to changes.(g) Fringe benefits include paid leave, medical and dental benefits, and where appropriate, assistance in housing. (h) Where a large number of candidates meet the specified entry requirements, the recruiting department may devise shortlisting criteria to select the

better qualified candidates for further processing. In these circumstances, only shortlisted candidates will be invited to attend recruitment examinationand/or interview.

(i) It is Government policy to place people with a disability in appropriate jobs wherever possible. If a disabled candidate meets the entry requirements,he/she will be invited to attend the selection interview/written examination without being subject to further shortlisting.

(j) Holders of academic qualifications other than those obtained from Hong Kong institutions/Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority mayalso apply but their qualifications will be subject to assessments on equivalence with the required entry qualifications. They should submit copies oftheir official transcripts and certificates by mail to the above address.

(k) Civil service vacancies information contained in this column is also available on the GovHK on the Internet at http://www.gov.hk.(l) Towards the application deadline, our on-line system would likely be overloaded due to large volume of applications. To ensure timely completion of

your on-line application, it is advisable to submit the application as early as possible.

How To Apply: Application Forms [G.F. 340 (Rev. 3/2013)] can be downloaded from the Civil Service Bureau of HKSAR’s website (http://www.csb.gov.hk).Candidates must state clearly the details of professional qualification obtained on the application forms and attach the Experience Resume. (SeeNote 3) Completed forms, together with the Experience Resume, should reach the above enquiry address of the recruiting department on or before theclosing date for application. Online application can also be made through the Civil Service Bureau's website (http://www.csb.gov.hk). Candidates whoapply online should submit the Experience Resume within one week after close of application period to the above enquiry address, and the onlineapplication number should be quoted on the envelopes and the Experience Resume. If candidates fail to provide the Experience Resume, theirapplications may not be considered. Candidates who are selected for interview will normally receive an invitation in about six to eight weeks from theclosing date for application. Those who are not invited for interview may assume that their applications are unsuccessful. For enquiries, please contact thedepartment via the means stated above.

42 | Flight International | 29 July- 4 August 2014 flightglobal.com

www.ctcaviation.com/ctcflexicrew

CTC FlexiCrewHigh flyers, on demand

Seeks Type Rated PilotsLocations UK & Worldwide

Flexible & Permanent Positions

Email: recruitment@sigmaaviationservices.comwww.sigmaaviationservices.com

Tel: +353 1 669 8224Fax: +353 1 669 8201

Email: recruitment@sigmaaviationservices.comwww.sigmaaviationservices.com

The preferred company for Stress (Fatigue & DT), GFEM,Composites), Aeronautical Research. Business units:Contract staff, Workpackages, Innovation and New

Concepts, Aeronautical Research. www.bishop-gmbh.comContact [email protected]

Tel 0049-(0)40-866-258-10 Fax 0049-(0)40-866-258-20

REC

RU

ITM

EN

T

!""#$%&'%#()**#(*+(####,-./0./1234561789,:49-.;-6<#

===;34561789,:;-6<#

>4561789,:#

>?9-@/,@34#A9563?/-9#

B9536119,!

you’re in safe hands with us

Call: +44 (0)1524 381 544Email: [email protected]

To advertise in this Employment Services Index

call +44 (0) 20 8652 4900fax +44 (0) 20 8261 8434

email [email protected] note that calls may

be monitored for training purposes

Flight International


call +44 (0) 20 8652 4900fax +44 (0) 20 8261 8434





call +44 (0) 20 8652 4900fax +44 (0) 20 8261 8434




WORKING WEEK

flightglobal.com

Helping put safety first at EverettKim Doman is the safety, foreign object debris and logistics senior manager at Boeing’s Everett Delivery Center, where around 3,000 employees work on delivering the company’s widebody airliners

WORK EXPERIENCE KIM DOMAN

Doman: Working to eliminate injury risk factors across the business

Did you always seek aviation employment?Like many children of my era I was definitely intrigued by the idea of being an astronaut. Life took me in different directions, but flight, especially high-speed flight, has always been exciting to me. I worked in Boeing Defense, Space and Security, and the Blue Angels use our Boeing property for their base of operations while they are in Seattle for the annual Seafair community celebration. Where were you educated?I received my Bachelor of S cience in physics from the University of Puget Sound. Like many of my colleagues I’ve since had the benefit of training through the Boeing Leadership Center, and also received an Advanced Safety Certificate after joining the Environment, Health & Safety organisation.Boeing has been your only aviation employer?I had a “fun” start to my aviation career at the former Boeing Plant 2 site as a shortage requirements administrator. The position involved using big binders full of parts flow requirements to determine when manufacturing engineering plans needed to be completed for the parts/ subassemblies to be delivered on time. Then I would walk across the bay and work with manufacturing engineers on any plans that were late or needed soon. One of the things I’ve truly a ppreciated about working at a large company is the ability to

learn and contribute in a variety of ways. I’ve been in many different functional roles, from scheduling experimental projects to developing and implementing a process for investment decisions on air-plane software improvements. I also spent several years in Envi-ronment, Health & Safety, work-ing to implement our manage-ment systems and eliminate injury risk factors across differ-ent organisations. What are your duties now?I’m currently the safety, foreign

object debris and logistics senior manager for the Everett Delivery Center, which has approximate-ly 3,000 Boeing employees. This is one of only three centres in the world involved in delivering twin-aisle airplanes, so it’s both a significant opportunity and a tremendous responsibility. How do you stress workplace safety?Boeing has an enterprise-wide “Go for Zero” initiative, where we are all teaming up to eliminate injuries – knowing we need to work it one day at a

time. At the Everett Delivery Center and in all of our manu-facturing facilities we are con-tinually working with employ-ees to educate and protect each other and eliminate potential hazards through continuous process improvement and in-creased workplace awareness. That’s a full time job for all of us, especially when you are deliver-ing airplanes in record numbers.How do you challenge yourself?Throughout my career I moved into new functions or part of the business every few years because I wanted to learn and be challenged. When I got into safety it really hit home because I want to help people go home to their families injury-free, and also because people are passion-ate about the subject. Whether they share my perspective on things or not, they are passionate about safety. What better place to Go for Zero than at the Everett Delivery Center?What’s your least favourite part of the job?The stress of feeling responsible every time someone suffers an injury. We’re a close-knit team and when anyone gets hurt it impacts all of us deeply.

For more employee work experiences, pay a visit to flightglobal.com/workingweek

If you would like to feature in Working Week, or you know someone who does, email your pitch to kate.sarsfield@ flightglobal.com


Training courses to take you there

Build your career

www.boeing.com/boeingedge/materialservices

A full load of passengers and cargo. Conditions on the ground that are often less than perfect. That’s when the confidence and

reliability of Boeing landing gear make all the difference. Boeing is your complete source for landing gear services, including

new landing gear, components, an overhaul and exchange program, and Boeing’s unparalleled customer support. Everything

to give you the edge and keep you flying.

It all comes down to this.

Tons of cargo.

Hundreds of passengers.

Flight International 2014 07 29

Documents

Transcript of Flight International 2014 07 29