FLIGHT SAFETY INFORMATIONS - 12/06/08

Caros Membros da CSV:
Estamos lançando hoje o nosso Blog com notícias de interesse da Comunidade de Segurança de Vôo.
As notícias abaixo foram extraídas de diversos órgãos de informações e também de entidades governamentais, tais como NTSB e FAA.
A vantagem do Blog é que podemos atualizá-los a qualquer momento e a outra é que temos um espaço para comentários onde todos poderão emitir suas opiniões a respeito das notícias aqui publicadas.
Caso você tenha algum artigo relacionado à segurança de vôo e quer vê-lo publicado aqui, entre em contato conosco.
Agradecemos a todos pelo apoio.


FAA Issues Inspection Call For Boeing Planes

Potential Fuel-System Issues Affect Hundreds Of Aircraft
A little-reported proposal from the FAA could have ramifications for a number of airlines. Last week, the FAA issued a notice for customers flying a variety of Boeing airliners, ordering them to check for a potential fuel-system problem.

The proposed notice calls for checks for possible air leaks that "could result in multiengine flameout," which in turn could lead to the proposal says the problem "an inability to restart the engines, and consequent forced landing of the airplane."

The Wall Street Journal first reported the issue, which applies to over 3,500 aircraft in US service... though both Boeing and the FAA say many planes have already been checked. The Everett (WA) Herald added the order applies to 737s, 747s and 777s.

The checks are not considered a high-priority safety measure at this time, the FAA added.

The FAA cites engine stoppages on six Boeing aircraft between 2002 and 2004. Some of those incidents occurred in-flight, while others occurred during ground operations. None of those incidents resulted in any accidents; Boeing has since redesigned the troublesome fuel system component.

The FAA hastened to add the problem is not related to the January landing mishap involving a British Airways 777... despite apparent similarities to the problems cited by the agency, and those cited in the British investigation. As ANN reported, in that January 17 accident the aircraft's twin turbofans spooled down on approach to Heathrow, and did not answer to commands from the plane's autopilot, and then the flight crew, to throttle up.

FMI:
www.faa.gov,
www.boeing.com

aero-news.net

Casualty Count In Sudan Airways Crash Lowered

But Cause Remains A Mystery

Investigators in the Sudan are still trying to reconcile varying witness accounts of the Tuesday night downing of a Sudan Airways plane. The Press Association cites the Sudan Civil Aviation Authority in reporting that 29 passengers and crewmembers died, but 171 escaped the burning plane.

Two differing stories on what happened to the Airbus were related by official sources.

As ANN reported, Police Chief Mohammad Najib told officials the high winds around Khartoum Airport at the time, "caused the plane to crash land, split into two and catch fire."

But airport director Youssef Ibrahim told Sudanese television the airliner had landed safely, and the pilots were talking to the control tower to get further instructions when the accident occurred."One of the engines exploded and the plane caught fire."

One survivor described a rough landing, followed by a sharp impact several minutes later.

Investigators have determined the plane skidded off the runway and hit navigation poles marking the end of the runway, sparking a fire on the right side of the aircraft. Passengers say an engine burst into flames, which engulfed the cabin after an evacuation had started.

In a freak post-crash complication, two civil defense workers were injured when a fuel tank was left undrained and exploded in the summer sun.

FMI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_International_Airport,
www.sudanairways.com
aero-news/net


Some injuries as jet aborts takeoff in Ivory Coast

ABIDJAN, Ivory Coast (AP) — A Brussels Airlines jetliner carrying about 150 people aborted its takeoff from Abidjan's airport Wednesday night, and several passengers suffered minor injuries during making an emergency evacuation.

One of the pilots of the Airbus A330 told the passengers he had stopped the takeoff after hearing a loud popping sound that he thought was a tire exploding. A fire truck raced to the runway and quickly extinguished one burning tire.

The pilot initially told passengers to remain in their seats. But suddenly the crew started shouting, "Evacuate! Evacuate!" The doors of the plane opened, and everyone hurried down the emergency slides.

Several passengers suffered minor injuries such as bruises and sprained ankles during the evacuation about 9 p.m.

The passengers initially ran into a grassy area alongside the runway, then some walked to the terminal while others rode on airport vehicles.

With the halted plane blocking the runway, officials closed the airport to all incoming and outgoing flights.


NTSB: Drowsy pilots show need for regulation reforms

By Alan Levin, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Two airline pilots fell asleep while cruising over Hawaii last February, flying past their destination toward open ocean for 18 minutes before waking up and returning for a safe landing, federal accident investigators revealed Tuesday.
That incident and an accident in Traverse City, Mich., last year highlight the need for more comprehensive rules to stem the growing list of crashes attributed to the lengthy hours that pilots routinely work, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said. Crashes linked to fatigue have killed 249 people since 1997, according to NTSB records.

"It's an insidious issue," NTSB Chairman Mark Rosenker said. "Many times the pilots themselves don't recognize that they are fatigued when they get into that cockpit."

The NTSB voted to recommend that federal aviation regulators and airlines use fatigue studies to rewrite the rules for how long pilots can legally fly. Currently, federal law allows pilots to work up to 16 hours a day, including up to eight hours behind the controls, and loopholes allow longer days in some situations.

Air-traffic controllers frantically radioed Go Airlines Flight 1002 from Honolulu to Hilo, Hawaii, for 18 minutes on Feb. 13, but got no response from the pilots, said NTSB investigator Jana Price.

FIND MORE STORIES IN: Michigan Honolulu National Transportation Safety Board Hawaii Hilo Traverse City
In the safety board's first disclosure of details from the investigation, Price said both pilots "unintentionally fell asleep" as the Bombardier CRJ-200 jet flew at 21,000 feet. The jet carried 40 passengers.

The two pilots had been flying together for three arduous days "that involved early start times" and a "demanding" sequence of short flights, Price said. Since the incident, the captain had been diagnosed with severe obstructive sleep apnea, she said. Apnea causes people to repeatedly wake up during the night and has been linked to poor work performance and accidents.

In a separate investigation, the NTSB concluded that a regional airline crash last year in Traverse City was probably triggered by fatigue. Pinnacle Airlines Flight 4712 skidded off the end of a snowy runway on April 12, 2007, after landing in the early hours of the morning. None of the 49 passengers, two pilots and a flight attendant were injured.

The NTSB found that the pilots of the Bombardier CRJ-200 should never have attempted the landing.

The runway was too slick to land under the airline's rules, but the pilots failed to perform a basic landing calculation and missed other warning signs that the weather was deteriorating.

The accident happened after the pilots had worked 14 hours. The cockpit recorder overheard the pilots yawning and the captain made repeated references to being tired, the NTSB found.

The NTSB has been calling for reform of pilot work rules for decades. Several attempts to rewrite pilot work rules have failed in the face of opposition from airlines and pilot groups.


http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-06-10-NTSB-pilots-sleep_N.htm


Polish pilots' poor English almost led to crash

A Polish airliner came within seconds of colliding with another plane near Heathrow because its pilots had such poor English that they could not understand basic instructions from air traffic controllers. The Lot Boeing 737, carrying 95 passengers and crew, wandered the skies for almost half an hour as the pilots struggled to identify their position. A controller had to instruct another aircraft to change direction to avoid a collision.

A document seen by The Times suggests that only 15 out of 800 Polish pilots flying internationally have passed the test for the required standard of English.

The two pilots in the Heathrow incident had to rely on directions after positioning instruments went blank because of a co-pilot’s error. They repeatedly failed to comply with instructions as they tried to return to Heathrow. On the final approach the Boeing appeared to be heading for the wrong runway, prompting a controller to order other aircraft to leave the area.

The incident, described in a report by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), highlights the risks associated with having so many foreign pilots with only rudimentary English using British airports. English is the international language of aviation but many countries failed to comply with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) deadline of March this year for ensuring that their pilots were proficient in the language.

Poland has applied to the ICAO for an exemption until March 2011, the last possible date for compliance, after which pilots without the required level could be banned from international airspace. In a letter to the ICAO obtained by The Times, the Polish government’s civil aviation office suggests that only 15 pilots out of 800 Poles flying international routes have passed the appropriate English test.

The letter, sent on March 4, nine months after the Heathrow incident, states: “We haven’t had any accident caused by insufficient English level as well as [sic] we have not received any information from air traffic control agencies that Polish pilots were not able to communicate correctly. Therefore, potential risk of accident occurrence due to lack of English language proficiency is very improbable.”

That claim is contradicted by the AAIB’s investigation, which said: “The crew of Lot 282 were not able to communicate adequately the nature and extent of their problem.” The report added: “The commander, who was making the radio calls, was not able to understand some of the instructions.”

The AAIB found that an initial error by the co-pilot had been “compounded by the difficulty of obtaining information from the pilots because of their limited command of English”.

The Department for Transport confirmed that it had kept the Polish authorities informed of the investigation.

David Learmount, safety editor of Flight International magazine, said that it was very worrying that the pilots had not understood British controllers. “It could have been even worse if they had been trying to understand a French controller speaking to them in English,” he said.

“Countries which did not previously have many international pilots are now flooding the world with flights piloted by people who can’t speak English properly. For many pilots, learning English is much more difficult than learning to fly.”


http://travel.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/travel/news/article4116523.ece