-
Making the Brazilian ATR-72 Spin
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Note: This story was corrected on August 10th at 10:23 am, thanks to the help of a sharp-eyed reader.
Making an ATR-72 Spin
I wasn’t in Brazil on Friday afternoon, but I saw the post on Twitter or X (or whatever you call it) showing a Brazil ATR-72, Voepass Airlines flight 2283, rotating in a spin as it plunged to the ground near Sao Paulo from its 17,000-foot cruising altitude. All 61 people aboard perished in the ensuing crash and fire. A timeline from FlightRadar 24 indicates that the fall only lasted about a minute, so the aircraft was clearly out of control. Industry research shows Loss of Control in Flight (LOCI) continues to be responsible for more fatalities worldwide than any other kind of aircraft accident.
The big question is why the crew lost control of this airplane. The ADS-B data from FlightRadar 24 does offer a couple of possible clues. The ATR’s speed declined during the descent rather than increased, which means the aircraft’s wing was probably stalled. The ATR’s airfoil had exceeded its critical angle of attack and lacked sufficient lift to remain airborne. Add to this the rotation observed, and the only answer is a spin.
Can a Large Airplane Spin?
The simple answer is yes. If you induce rotation to almost any aircraft while the wing is stalled, it can spin, even an aircraft as large as the ATR-72. By the way, the largest of the ATR models, the 600, weighs nearly 51,000 pounds.
Of course, investigators will ask why the ATR’s wing was stalled. It could have been related to a failed engine or ice on the wings or tailplane. (more…)
-
How the FAA Let Remote Tower Technology Slip Right Through Its Fingers
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
In June 2023, the FAA published a 167-page document outlining the agency’s desire to replace dozens of 40-year-old airport control towers with new environmentally friendly brick-and-mortar structures. These towers are, of course, where hundreds of air traffic controllers ply their trade … ensuring the aircraft within their local airspace are safely separated from each other during landing and takeoff.
The FAA’s report was part of President Biden’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act enacted on November 15, 2021. That bill set aside a whopping $25 billion spread across five years to cover the cost of replacing those aging towers. The agency said it considered a number of alternatives about how to spend that $5 billion each year, rather than on brick and mortar buildings.
One alternative addressed only briefly before rejecting it was a relatively new concept called a Remote Tower, originally created by Saab in Europe in partnership with the Virginia-based VSATSLab Inc. The European technology giant has been successfully running Remote Towers in place of the traditional buildings in Europe for almost 10 years. One of Saab’s more well-known Remote Tower sites is at London City Airport. London also plans to create a virtual backup ATC facility at London Heathrow, the busiest airport in Europe.
A remote tower and its associated technology replace the traditional 60-70 foot glass domed control tower building you might see at your local airport, but it doesn’t eliminate any human air traffic controllers or their roles in keeping aircraft separated.
Max Trescott photo Inside a Remote Tower Operation
In place of a normal control tower building, the airport erects a small steel tower or even an 8-inch diameter pole perhaps 20-40 feet high, similar to a radio or cell phone tower. Dozens of high-definition cameras are attached to the new Remote Tower’s structure, each aimed at an arrival or departure path, as well as various ramps around the airport.
Using HD cameras, controllers can zoom in on any given point within the camera’s range, say an aircraft on final approach. The only way to accomplish that in a control tower today is if the controller picks up a pair of binoculars. The HD cameras also offer infrared capabilities to allow for better-than-human visuals, especially during bad weather or at night.
The next step in constructing a remote tower is locating the control room where the video feeds will terminate. Instead of the round glass room perched atop a standard control tower, imagine a semi-circular room located at ground level. Inside that room, the walls are lined with 14, 55-inch high-definition video screens hung next to each other with the wider portion of the screen running top to bottom.
After connecting the video feeds, the compression technology manages to consolidate 360 degrees of viewing area into a 220-degree spread across the video screens. That creates essentially the same view of the entire airport that a controller would normally see out the windows of the tower cab without the need to move their head more than 220 degrees. Another Remote Tower benefit is that each aircraft within visual range can be tagged with that aircraft’s tail number, just as it might if the controller were looking at a radar screen. (more…)
-
CFI of the Year Announced … And We Know Him!
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
I was lucky enough to win a pretty cool award a few years back … the Airbus Aerospace Journalist of the Year award for an aviation safety story I wrote. It was indeed a proud moment. But a fellow I know won something yesterday that I’d gladly trade if I could because I think his award is that significant.
Max Trescott, Mr. Garmin 1000 they sometimes call him, is the new 2008 Certified Flight Instructor of the Year by the FAA. He was already a Master CFI and a Master ground instructor and happens to be the author of a volume I need a copy of desperately …
G1000 Glass Cockpit Handbook. Max flies from Palo Alto Airport in California and also happens to be an aviation blogging buddy so this plug seemed like a natural pat on the back.
What I think makes Max’s CFI career all the more interesting is that he hasn’t been an instructor nearly as long as I, but he has been very busy. He passed his CFI rating flight test in September 2001 and is now a factory-trained FAA Industry Training Standards (FITS) instructor, a Cirrus Design instructor pilot, a Cessna 350/400 instructor and also an instructor in the national Cessna 350/400 recurrent training program.
Oh and I forgot one more. Max was also a previous winner of the FAA’s Western Pacific Region’s CFI of the Year award.
OK Max, we get it. You like teaching people to fly. Now if we just had a few more thousand like you around the country imagine how successful our industry might be.
Best of all, Max says he’s coming to the first annual aviation blogger conference I’ll be hosting at AirVenture this summer. Now that’s my kind of guy.
Nice job Max.
-
Airline Tries Clever Marketing Tactic … Being Nice to Customers
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Thanks to a really nice client that invited me to give a few in-person talks in New York and Fort Lauderdale, I had an opportunity recently to leave behind a truly miserable Chicago winter for a few days. Our client asked which airline I preferred and I had to think for a minute. Normally, I would have said Southwest because those folks are always fun to fly with and they tell me the truth when a problem pops up.
For once, I decided to try something new and mentioned I’d like to use JetBlue if it fit the schedule and the budget. I’d heard quite a bit about them, but never flown the airline before. And despite the chaos last winter that cost David Neeleman his job there, I still wanted to try.
A few weeks later, I found myself headed for terminal 2 at ORD, normally the worst departure point next to United’s terminal 1. At ORD, terminal 2 is where it seems like the City of Chicago sends the riff raff of passengers for Northwest, Continental and US Airways to their airplanes.
The last time, I flew Continental from ORD it took almost an hour to get through the security line because only two screeners were available for hundreds of people. That, of course, was not Continental’s fault, but it certainly does reflect on their image anyway.
This time, I was going to be ready and arrived at ORD 2 1/2 hours early. I walked up to the JetBlue counter and saw this screen welcoming me. OK, I know it’s a computer program, but some airlines simply tell me to shove my credit card in the slot so I felt like I was a step up. They gave me a nice seat on a new JetBlue EMB-190 for the trip to JFK. The lady took my bag and said thanks for flying JetBlue. Right away I wondered what these people were up to.
-
The GAO’s Credibility on Aviation and ATC; Not Much, Who Cares
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Believe it or not, one of the tough parts of writing a good blog is knowing when to keep your mouth shut. And yes, I know there are a few readers who can’t imagine I ever
keep my mouth shut, but I really do.
Case in point. I had an opportunity to attend the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) general aviation issues conference last fall in Naples Florida. Pretty nice duty when you can get it I must admit.
The conference was designed to focus our attention for two days on general aviation. We almost never mentioned the airlines from what I remember. But there was one session that included a very nice lady – Faye Morrison – from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) who spoke to the issue of Very Light Jets (VLJ). I’ve always had a soft spot for the GAO because I honestly believed they act as a sort of watch-dog on the government and we all know they need it.
Although Morrison’s talk was relatively short, she did hold up this dandy GAO report she’d help build about the future of VLJs. It became clear pretty quickly though that her summary would suffice when she said the report essentially said … “VLJs, don’t know (what it all means) and it depends (what happens in the industry).” Gee was I excited to hear that kind of in-depth analysis for lord knows how many of our tax dollars. It seemed like a blog post made in heaven, but I decided to sit on it. I would have probably just written something sarcastic anyway so I let it go.