-
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…)
-
ATC Overtime; The Conversation Continues
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
So tell me how you really feel!
Believe it or not, I didn’t buy everything that came from 800 Independence hook line and sinker, any more than I would totally believe something I hear from 1325 Massachusetts Avenue 100 percent.
I simply published paperwork that existed from FAA and the GAO and asked someone to set me straight if I missed the point. Obviously some of you think I did. And for the most part, these posts have proven to be solid learning experiences about your world for everyone of us.
That being said, I also took the time to connect with Laura Brown, the agency’s Deputy Asst. Administrator for Public Affairs to ask for some clarification about why the overtime language in the documents doesn’t seem to jive with what you readers are telling me. I also have a call in to the GAO folks to see if they can explain some of the gray areas to me in a way that will make sense to readers. I want to hear a few different sides to this.
But a few of you need to chill out a bit when I mention FAA I think. Just because I publish some prose that doesn’t seem to support everything you all believe all the time doesn’t mean I don’t empathize. If I didn’t have a sense that something was odd, this conversation about overtime would never have begun.
I’ll publish the conversation with Laura Brown by Monday and then you all can pipe in with your opinion on her thoughts about OT and continue the conversation. It should be interesting. I’m planning on adding some responses to the posts you all sent as well. That might take a little time since I have three dozen to get through.
-
FAA’s Bobby Sturgell says Controllers Volunteer for Overtime
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
As the Comedic Cuban troubadour Ricky Ricardo would often say to Lucille Ball, “it looks to me like someone has some splaining to do.”
For months I’ve been sitting here defending the air traffic controller workforce against FAA’s penal-colony work tactics of forced overtime.
I did this because I believe that, like tired pilots, tired controllers are more prone to mistakes. I still think we’ll see that the increase in controller errors has a relationship to the amount of time and the schedule these people work.
But now I find out that many FAA controllers are happily working overtime and six day weeks, even volunteering for the extra duty. FAA acting administrator Bobby Sturgell’s recent letter to Congressman Sam Graves said so, right there on page two paragraph five. So did the GAO report that came out on Wednesday.
NATCA’s Pat Forrey testified before the House subcommittee on Aviation about runway safety right alongside FAA’s Hank Krakowski yesterday as well.
Forrey said, in part, “Today there are 1,500 fewer fully-certified controllers than there were on 9/11 — leaving fewer eyes to watch more planes, and the result is increased controller fatigue (my emphasis).”
Forrey added, “NATCA is not alone in sounding the alarm on passenger safety. The NTSB and GAO have determined that the threat of controller fatigue is real. The increase of runway incursions is real too. There have been 12 serious A and B runway incursion the first four months of FY 2008 compared to 3 during the same time frame last year. The warnings of the GAO, the IG, and the NTSB should not go unheeded. NATCA stands by ready, willing and able to offer real solutions. We can only hope that the FAA is really listening.”
You had me at “the threat of runway incursions is real.” But come on folks.
You can’t have it both ways complaining on the one hand complaining about understaffed ATC facilities and overworked controllers while quite a few are grabbing the golden rings the agency is tossing out and exhausting themselves in the process.
-
Pilot Skill Level Seriously in Doubt
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Following close on the heels of Scott’s Monday post about a serious lack of stick and rudder skills comes this video of a BAE 146 landing at London City Airport. Attaching the word “hard,” to the word “landing” here almost seems an understatement. I
was waiting to see the mains leave the airplane.
What you’ll see here is a great example of no rudder control, no flare and someone trying to plant an airplane by shoving the control wheel forward. The result is predictable … a porpoising aircraft. This doesn’t work on a Cessna 172 and it doesn’t work on a 146.
These basic stick and rudder skills – or the lack of them – precisely illustrate Scott’s post I think.
But what do you say?
And in case you’re wondering what a more normal landing looks like at LCY, watch this clip of a Fokker 50 on approach. Granted there is no wind, but watch how close the aircraft on short final pass to the office building on the right. I’ve tried this one in the clouds and never saw the buildings. Just as well.