-
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.
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…)
-
Broken Airliners Seldom Mean Happy Endings
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
First I can tell you that I don’t have any idea what the Sam Hill happened in London the other day when the crew of that British Airways Boeing 777 crashed their airplane on the end of the runway during landing. There are plenty of rumors flying about and right now this is not the time or the place to speculate. I’ll leave that to others.
What I think is important – no, make that really important – is that despite the crisis that busted that airplane for good, there were injuries, but no deaths. I’ve been in the back of an airplane during a hard landing, so I’ll bet some of those injuries were probably not good, but again, no one died.
The people at British Airways – the pilots, the flight attendants, even the people who trained those people deserve a huge pat on the back along with a few atta boys – or girls – for doing what they were trained to do in a crisis.
All of us who have been through aircraft recurrent, or company recurrent training know that the one element that can never be added to the training is that sense of extreme urgency tied to unbelievable adrenaline flow that shows up only when the emergency is real. Their folks got everyone out of a broken airplane safely and we ought not to forget that.
Seeing what’s left of that 777 also reminded me of that old Timex watch commercial that used to run here in the states … “Takes a licking and keeps on ticking.” Let’s not forget to thank Boeing.
-
Flying in the Old Days
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Another editor for a world-famous aviation magazine told me not long ago that he actually read my Jetwhine piece about the classic airline menus from a few decades back. Actually I think they harkened back to another lifetime in this industry.
Beside being impressed with this man’s excellent taste in blogs, he also sounds like the kind of guy I need to hit up for lunch the next time I’m in the Frederick, MD area.
Of course there are always a few curiosity seekers and old folks who will find this video of great interest. Flying TWA goes way back in my memory banks because the old Boeing 707 you’ll see here was the first airliner I flew on at the ripe old age of nine. Those Boeings may have been environmentally unfriendly by today’s standards, but boy or boy when a 707 took off heavy, the rumble made the dirt those old Pratts spewed out almost worth it.
Enjoy.
Technorati tags: Boeing 707, flight training magazine, TWA, airlines, air travel, pilots
-
To Air Traffic Controllers, "a Deal" is an Ugly Phrase
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
To most people, the word deal implies something too good to miss … think, “Let’s Make a Deal,” or “No Big Deal.”
But in aviation, and air traffic control specifically, a deal is an ugly gremlin of a phrase that implies a problem – a big problem – to be avoided at all costs. To an air traffic controller, a deal means that at some point in time, the standard required separation – up, down, left or right – between two or more aircraft, or between an aircraft and a vehicle on the ground has been lost.
That’s not good.
Sometimes a deal, seems too inane to bear mentioning, like when the pilots of an airplane taxiing after landing see a truck crossing the runway half a mile down. If the airplane’s moving at 20 knots, it’s still technically a deal for the controller who let the truck invade the runway, but safety wasn’t really an issue.
But in other cases, the situation is much more serious, as we saw in Atlanta on Friday when a departing 757 missed a regional jet that crossed the runway in front of it on takeoff. Experts say they missed with about three seconds room to spare.
In either case, some air traffic controller was taken out of the control tower or radar room and made to answer for their mistake.
In the most simple case, their supervisor would probably counsel them to be more careful. In the most serious cases, the controllers are often suspended from work … that is if they haven’t decided to take time off on their own to cope with the anxiety of a close call.
Those kinds of life and death decisions are what we pay controllers for though, and we expect them to make those decisions correctly every time.
But too, as we would with a pilot, we should not simply be looking at the mistakes controllers make. We should be asking why the number of close calls is rising quickly … up 500 percent in the past few months alone.
As I mentioned on Friday, the numbers of controllers retiring is outpacing the training of their replacements, especially at the busiest airports. Beside the loss of experienced air traffic controllers, we are also losing the cream-of-the crop in trainers for the new people. That’s how controllers learn … on-the-job with someone looking over their shoulder while they learn. The promise of new technology to make controller’s more efficient is still just a dream and likely to remain so for some time to come because FAA leadership seems to be experiencing a service vacuum at present.