The AirSafe.com News

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Showing posts with label canada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label canada. Show all posts

19 July 2014

Seven Todd Curtis interviews about the crash of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17

In the immediate aftermath of the crash of a large airliner, there is typically an intense focus on the event by the world's media.

In the case of the crash in eastern Ukraine of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17; a Boeing 777 that was traveling between Amsterdam, Netherlands and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; there was ample circumstantial evidence that the jet was shot down by a surface to air missile, but this was not directly confirmed within the first two days after the crash.

The crash occurred in an area of active military activity in eastern Ukraine, and no official investigative bodies were able to examine the crash site or the aircraft wreckage. In spite of that situation, there was substantial video and photographic evidence that clearly indicated that the aircraft experienced a catastrophic inflight breakup prior to impact.

Todd Curtis of AirSafe.com was interviewed over a dozen times in the first 48 hours after the crash. Seven of those interviews, which were conducted from 17-19 July 2014, were compiled into the latest podcast episode from AirSafe.com.

The media organizations in the podcast episode included the following:

  • 17 July 2014
    - BBC World (TV)
    - BBC Five Live (radio)
    - NTN 24 La Tarde (see video below)
    - BBC WM 95.6 (radio)
  • 18 July 2014
    - CKNW Vancouver, BC (radio)
    - CJAD Montreal (radio)
  • 18 July 2014
    - CTV News Channel Canada (TV)

Resources
Seven Todd Curtis interviews about flight MH17
Boeing 777 crashes
AirSafe.com MH370 page
Other AirSafe.com podcasts
Flight MH17 Wikipedia page
Crash rates by airliner model
AirSafe.com podcast home page
Listen to the podcast on TunIn


NTN 24 La Tarde interview (Spanish)


23 August 2013

Fire danger from Honeywell ELTs may exist on aircraft beyond the 787

After last month's fire involving the emergency locator transmitter (ELT) on a Ethiopian 787 in London, the FAA and other regulatory agencies around the world have ordered that these ELTs be deactivated, inspected, or removed. The ELT on that aircraft was manufactured by Honeywell, which has produced about 6,000 ELTs for use in aircraft around the world.

A recent airworthiness directive from Transport Canada airworthiness directive (AD), which takes effect on 26 August 2013, has gone a step further, requiring that Honeywell ELTs on a variety of aircraft be inspected by the end of 2013. Transport Canada stated that the AD was issued as a precautionary measure to address the possibility of a fire due to wiring installation discrepancies of the ELT system. Depending on the outcome of the AAIB investigation, Transport Canada may revise the AD or mandate additional corrective actions.



Affected aircraft
Previous directives from the UK and US authorities were limited to the 787. This latest Canadian AD covers a much wider range of aircraft, including the Boeing models 717, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, MD11, MD80 and MD90; and the Airbus models A300, A310, A320, A321, A330, A340 and A380.

Other countries following Canada's lead
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has also adopted the Canadian AD. According to various media reports, the FAA also plans to issue a similar AD for US-registered aircraft.

Why ELT fires are potentially catastrophic
As was described in some detail in an earlier AirSafeNews.com article on the Ethiopian 787 event, fire caused by an ELT would be particularly worrisome because these devices, unlike other systems such as engines and auxiliary power units, do not come equipped with fire suppression systems, and they are typically located in parts of the aircraft that are inaccessible from the cabin. In the event of an in flight fire, it may not be possible to put out the fire, and it may spread to other parts of the aircraft.

In the event of an onboard fire, typical emergency procedures include landing at the closest suitable airport, but if the fire occurred if the aircraft were far from a a suitable airport, which would be the case for many transatlantic or transpacific flights, passengers and crew could be exposed to large amounts of smoke and fumes for a significant amount of time.

In such a situation, emergency oxygen systems may not have been useful for passengers since these systems are typically designed to supply passenger with a combination of oxygen from the emergency oxygen system and ambient air from the cabin, including any smoke or fumes that are present in the cabin.

21 August 2011

Single passenger survives 737 crash in Canadian Arctic

20 August 2011; First Air; 737-200; flight 6560; Resolute Bay, Canada: The aircraft (C-GNWN) was on a chartered domestic Canadian flight from Yellowknife in the Northwest Territories to to Resolute Bay in Nunavut Territory. The aircraft crashed near the runway during a landing attempt and broke up.

There were four crew members and 11 passengers on board. While both fight attendants survived, both pilots were killed, and only one passenger, a seven-year-old girl, survived. Her six-year-old sister was among the 10 passengers who did not survive.

This was the 71st time that airline passengers were killed on a 737. The previous fatal crash was in August 2010 in South America. This crash is also the first fatal accident in North America involving a jet airliner since a 2006 crash of a Delta Connection CRJ-100 in Lexington, KY.

Prior to this fatal crash, the airline had two prior serious, though nonfatal, incidents involving of their 737 fleet. In 2001, a First Air 737 landed short of the runway Yellowknife and was seriously damaged. While the aircraft was too damaged to be repaired, none of the 98 passengers or six crew members were injured. In a 2004 landing incident in Edmonton, Alberta, the aircraft landed to the side of the runway and struck a number of lights and a sign before the crew was able to come to a stop on the runway. This aircraft returned to service, and was the same one involved in the fatal Resolute Bay crash.

Additional Resources
Fatal 737 plane crashes
Fatal airliner crash rates by model



CBC news report on the crash

17 June 2010

United Express Flight Crash in Ottawa Injures Three

16 June 2010; United Express; Embraer E145; flight 8050; Ottawa, Canada: United Express 8050, a nonstop flight from Washington's Dulles airport to Ottawa's Macdonald-Cartier airport, landed on runway 7, was unable to stop on the runway, coming to rest about 150 meters off the end of the runway. It was raining at the time of the accident.

One witness claimed that the aircraft was hydroplaning on the runway, and a second witness who was monitoring air traffic control communications reported that the pilot told the control tower he had no traction on the wet runway.

The nose landing gear appears to have collapsed, although the rest of the aircraft appears intact. There was no post crash fire. Both pilots and one passenger were injured. The other 32 passengers and the flight attendant were not injured.

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is conducting an accident investigation, with the assistance of the NTSB.

About the ERJ-145
The Embraer ERJ-145, along with the similarly designed ERJ-135 and ERJ-170, were involved in three previous crashes during passenger flights, and none have resulted in any fatalities. In 2006, an ERJ-135 operating as an executive aircraft was involved in a midair collision with a Gol Linhas Aereas 737-800 over the Amazon in Brazil. The ERJ-135 was able to land and none of the occupants were injured. However, the 737 crashed and all six crew members and 148 passengers were killed.

About United Express
There have been three crashes involving United Express aircraft that have killed passengers, with the most recent being in 1996. None of them involved an aircraft operated by Trans States. The NTSB database also lists about 35 previous incidents and accidents involving United Express.

About Trans States
Trans States airlines, which has been operating under its current certificate since 1988, currently has a fleet of about 28 Embraer 145 aircraft. Prior to this accident, the NTSB lists four previous serious incidents involving Trans States. In the past, it has operated as a regional affiliate of a number of larger airlines including Delta (Delta Connection>, Northwest Airlines (Northwest Ailink), TWA (Trans World Express), United (United Express), and US Airways (US Airways Express).

27 November 2008

Risks from Incapacitated Pilots and Pilots Who May Deliberately Crash Airplanes

What an Air Canada Event Says About Incapacitated Pilots

AirSafe.com reviews the investigation into a January 2008 incident where an Air Canada pilot became mentally incapacitated and had to be removed from the cockpit. Once the first officer was removed, the captain was able to safely land the aircraft. The event caused some in the aviation community to question whether this kind of incident may have led to serious problems in the past. While a review of the available incident and accident record by AirSafe.com revealed no proven cases of a mentally incapacitated pilot deliberately causing death or serious injury to passengers, there have been several cases where such behavior was suspected, and one case where a pilot crashed an airliner on purpose.

On 19 November 2008, the Air Accident Investigation Unit of the Irish Department of Transport released their incident report on a 28 January 2008 event involving an Air Canada flight. The captain declared an emergency and diverted to Shannon, Ireland due to the incapacitation of a flight crew member.

The Air Canada 767 was on a scheduled flight from Toronto to London and carried 146 passengers and nine crew members. After the first officer became incapacitated, the captain declared an emergency and completed the flight with the assistance of a flight attendant who was also a licensed pilot.

According to the incident report, the first officer had arrived late for his flight, with the captain having already completed all preflight preparations before the first officer's arrival.

During the early phases of the flight, the first officer left the flight deck several times for short periods, and made it clear to the captain that he was tired.

At one point, the captain allowed the first officer to take a controlled rest break in cockpit. Over an hour later, as the aircraft was near the midpoint of its ocean leg, the first officer began to display unusual behavior, including rambling and disjointed conversation.

The first officer left the cockpit again, and after he returned he didn't follow proper cockpit reentry procedures, and also neglected to fasten his seat belt. It became apparent to the captain that the first officer was suffering from an unknown medical condition which impaired his ability to carry out his required duties on the flight deck. The captain summoned the lead flight attendant to get the first officer removed from the cockpit. The lead flight attendant removed the first officer with the help of other flight attendants. One of those flight attendants sustained a wrist injury during the removal.

After the removal of the first officer, the captain had the lead flight attendant check to see if there were any flight crew members among the passengers. None were on board, but one of the flight attendants held a commercial multiengine license, and she assisted the captain as the flight diverted to Shannon, Ireland.

The first officer was hospitalized in Ireland for 11 days before being transferred by air ambulance back to Canada for further treatment.

News reports about this incident focused on the more dramatic elements of the event, such as what the first officer said after being removed from the cockpit, or how and where the first officer was restrained in the cabin. However, this incident raised more serious issues in the minds of many passengers, such as whether the mental state of a pilot should be a concern, or whether a mentally unstable flight crew member has ever caused serious injuries or deaths to airline passengers.

AirSafe.com not aware of any reliable, publicly available information about the number of pilots in the US or elsewhere who have been removed from flight status due to some kind of psychological or psychiatric issue.

The information is more clear when it comes to cases where an airliner crashed as a result of deliberate flight crew actions. Quite simply, there are no proven events where an airline pilot's deliberate actions or mental state led to the deaths of one or more passengers. Correction (28 March 2012) - On February 1968, 24 passengers were killed in the crash of a JAL DC8 in Tokyo after the the captain deliberately disengaged the autopilot and flew the aircraft into Tokyo bay. All of the crew members survived, but 24 of the 166 passengers were killed. It was later reported that the captain had been suffering from schizophrenia.

There has been at least one case of a pilot deliberately crashing an airliner.
On 11 October 1999, an Air Botswana pilot, who had been grounded for medical reasons, took off alone in an Air Botswana ATR42 airliner, and crashed it into two of the airline's other ATR42s on the ground. Fortunately, there was no one else in the other two aircraft. The pilot was the only person killed in this event.

There were two other crashes that many in the aviation community suspected were caused by pilot actions, but investigative authorities found no conclusive evidence that they were deliberately caused by one of the pilots. On 31 October 1999, an EgyptAir 767 en route from New York to Cairo, crashed in the Atlantic, killing all 217 on board. The NTSB concluded that the airplane's departure from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic Ocean was a result of the first officer's flight control inputs, but could not determine a reason for the first officer's actions.

On 17 December 1997, a SilkAir 737, traveling between Jakarta and Singapore, crashed into a river, killing all 104 people on board. While there was ample evidence that the captain was under great personal stress, and indications that both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were turned off prior to the crash, there was no evidence that either pilot deliberately brought the aircraft down.

These past events, as well as the most recent event involving Air Canada, remind the public that while there's always a possibility that a pilot would deliberately put passengers or aircraft at risk, there have been no passenger deaths or serious injuries associated with incidents where such behavior was proven.


A copy of the Air Canada incident report from the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit is available at http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/air-canada-jan-2008.pdf.

You can hear the associated podcast at:
http://www.airsafe.com/podcasts/show75-air-canada-pilot.mp3

13 January 2008

Turbulence Event on an Air Canada A319 Flight on 10 January 2008

The aircraft was on a scheduled domestic flight from Victoria, BC to Toronto, ON. The aircraft had a possible encounter with moderate to severe turbulence while in the vicinity of the Canadian Rockies. The crew diverted to Calgary, where injured passengers and crew members were treated for minor injuries. The aircraft was not seriously damaged, and there were no fatalities among the five crew members or 83 passengers.

For further details, please choose one of the podcast options below:

Audio: MP3 | Video: iPod/MP4 | WMV | Google Video | YouTube

To download a copy of the MP3 audio file or one of the MP4 or WMV video files, visit the AirSafe.com podcast home page at http://podcast.airsafe.org.

Related Resources: Turbulence Risks http://www.airsafe.com/cabin/turb.htm

To obtain a PDF file or PowerPoint presentation of the contents of this podcast, please contact AirSafe.com at http://feedback.airsafe.org/.