-
Making the Brazilian ATR-72 Spin
by
No Comments
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
No Comments
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…)
-
Enduring Designs: Return on Aircraft Investment
by
No Comments
Reading that the US Air Force will be requesting proposals from engine makers to propel the B-52’s active-duty service through 2050 didn’t surprise me. It continues the decades-long return on aircraft investment, its ability to continue its fundamental mission efficiently and economically. Not every aircraft so endures. Consider the approaching retirement of the B-52’s much younger compatriots, the B-1 and the billion-dollar B-2, which the Air Force wants to replace with the lookalike B-21 that will probably cost several billion per copy.
Boeing produced the B-52 for a decade, from its first flight in 1952 until 1962. It entered service in February 1955. The early models in 1956 cost $14.3 million ($133.6 million in 2018 dollars) and the H-model, the recipient of decades of military makeovers, cost new in 1962 $9.28 million ($77.92 in 2019 dollars). (Imagine that, a US weapon system getting cheaper!) Most likely, Boeing built today’s 76 active B-52s in 1962. Upon their 2050 retirement (if that indeed happens), you compute the return on their investment by 88 years.
This return sparked thoughts of other enduring designs that have returned an aircraft investment well beyond their original expectations. The DC-3 certainly tops this list. Since its first flight in 1937, it has earned its keep for 82 years and counting. And it will surely continue for decades, until parts for piston-pounding radials disappear, and the Basler Turbo Conversions remanufactures the airframe as a turboprop BT-67.
The Beechcraft Model 18 is another enduring design that first flew in 1937. Like the DC-3, most examples earning their keep today were manufactured during and after World War II. Surely, the remaining spare parts for its Pratt & Whitney R-985 radials are counting down its last days. Lacking the multipurpose special mission utility of the DC-3/BT-67, mounting new powerplants would be an investment with no meaningful return.
A chronological peer of Boeing’s enduring design is Cessna’s 172 Skyhawk. Making its first flight it 1955, Cessna introduced it in 1956, and it continues to make new ones today. There is, perhaps, no better measure of the return on its investment than 63 years of service, and counting. And unlike the other enduring designs here mentioned, representatives from almost every year of its existence, from the first 172 on, are still flying. We pilots should be so lucky. — Scott Spangler, Editor
-
Malaysian Flight 370: Five Years Later
by
No Comments
On March 8, 2014, a Boeing 777 with 239 people went missing on a flight between Kuala Lumpur and Beijing. As details emerged within hours of the airplane’s last communication with air traffic control, it became clear that Malaysian Airlines 370 (MH370) was lost … literally; no one knew where the airplane went once it disappeared from radar about 40 minutes after takeoff from Kuala Lumpur.
Because the Boeing’s transponder also ceased functioning, tracking the airplane by air traffic control became impossible.
Five years after the Boeing disappeared, setting off the longest and costliest search ever undertaken for a commercial airplane, the question of what happened remains unanswered: was it hijacked, brought down by a mechanical problem or crashed by a suicidal pilot? We may never know, but away from the spotlight on the investigation, the aviation industry has been refining the technology to ensure that an airliner never vanishes again.
Over the next three years, airlines will begin plugging into a satellite-based system that will track their planes at all times, anywhere on Earth.
In 2014 it was not unusual for airlines to have little direct contact with some of their airplanes for extended periods of time, especially when they were flying over open water where traditional ground communications and radar don’t work well. To their credit, the airlines operate airplanes that are so reliable, that being out of touch for a sustained period of time has never been a real problem.
-
Enlisted Pilots: Has Their Time Come Again?
by
No Comments
With retention of active duty aviators and recruitment of qualified newcomers to fill empty cockpits a growing challenge for America’s armed forces, might it be time to reopen the flight training door to enlisted pilots who meet the physical and physiological requirements?
To be a military pilot today, applicants must be officers, which require a four-year college degree. Is that an essential requirement? Today’s officer pilots hold degrees in almost every discipline from anthropology to zoology. How does this knowledge make modern military pilot training easier?
To address its pilot shortage, in 2018, the US Air Force studied the return of enlisted pilots and appointing them warrant officers. “We have enlisted airmen in our Guard and reserve component who have private pilot’s licenses and fly for the airlines. So it’s not a matter of can they do it, or having the smarts or the capability, it’s just a matter of us, as an Air Force, deciding that that’s a route that we want to take,” said Chief Master Sgt. Kaleth O. Wright, the 18th Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force in a Military.Com story.
The pilot shortage created by World War II led Congress to authorize an enlisted pilot training program in 1941. They received the same training as officers and graduated as staff sergeant pilots. The program trained 2,567 sergeant pilots (among them were a couple you might have heard of, Bob Hoover (here in a P-38), Carroll Shelby, and Chuck Yeager). Of that number, 332 sergeants served overseas and 217 sergeants flew combat.
In 1942, the Flight Officer Act created the warrant officer rank of flight officer, which replaced the original program. Sergeant pilots elevated to this rank enjoyed the privileges of a second lieutenant. This program essentially continues in the Army today, with warrant officers being the go-to helicopter aviators. And there seems to be no reason it wouldn’t work in the other services, if they can overcome tradition with progress.
The Sea Services, the US Navy and US Marine Corps, launches its enlisted aviator program in 1916. With America’s enlistment in the Great War, in March 1917 a recruiting program sought 200 enlisted personnel specifically for aviation duty. Of that number, 33 of them completed their training in France, and a few more in Italy. Like the initial enlisted aviators, the World War I pilots flew as first or second-class petty officers. Most of them became commissioned officers.
In October 1919, the Bureau of Navigation said, “In the future, it will be the policy of the Bureau to select a certain number of warrant officers and enlisted men for flight training and duty as pilots of large heavier-than-air craft and directional pilots of dirigibles.” The following year they were designated Naval Aviation Pilots. NAP No. 1 was Harold H. “Kiddy” Karr, Quartermaster Chief (Aviation) (NAP). Like commissioned aviators, they wore the Navy’s gold wings on their upper left chest.
During the years between the world wars, the Navy had an enlisted pilot requirement of 30 percent. The depression made this goal challenging, and the Navy asked Congress to make it 20 percent. With the depression deepening and budget cuts, the Navy trained no NAPs between 1932 and 1936. After that, the Navy met its 20-percent goal.
The number of NAPs increased greatly with World War II, and the need for more officers led many of them (some estimates are up to 95 percent) received temporary officer commissions and designations as Naval Aviators, which can only be bestowed upon commissioned officers.
One downside to being an enlisted pilot was serving two masters. In addition to flying, they had to meet the responsibilities of their rank. That’s why George W. Webber, Seaman Second Class (NAP), a pilot with Scouting Squadron 3 not only flew off the carrier Lexington, he also had to work in the galley helping the ship’s cooks. That changed when the Lexington’s CO, then Captain Ernest J. King (later Fleet Admiral King, commander in chief and chief of naval operations in World War II), found out that one of his carrier pilots was mess cooking.
Life was the same for the Marine NAPs. During the Battle of Guadalcanal in 1943, Marine Air Group 14 couldn’t find two of its NAPs, both of whom flew the SBD, Douglas’s Dauntless dive bomber. Sergeants Ollie Michael (left) and Rohe C. Jones had been ordered to dig latrines on New Caledonia. They were ordered back to their cockpits immediately. Michael is credited with sinking three Japanese ships in November and December 1943. Jones was killed during his third combat tour. Another Marine NAP, Ken Walsh (above), who earned his wings as a private, later received a commission and the Medal of Honor in 1943, was the fourth-ranking ace with 21 kills.
The Navy’s enlisted flight training program ended with World War II, and Congress concluded its requirement for enlisted pilots in 1948. Although the program ended, NAPs in the Navy, Marine Corps, and US Coast Guard, continued to fly for the rest of their careers. With the postwar reductions, many of them had to surrender the temporary officer commissions given to them during the conflict. The last four Marine NAPs retired on the same day, February 1, 1973. The Navy’s last NAP, Master Chief Air Traffic Controller Robert K. “NAP” Jones, retired from active duty on January 31, 1981.
Needing pilots and naval flight officer in the patrol, reconnaissance, and helicopter communities, the Navy established a chief warrant officer program in 2006, but it didn’t last long before the Navy terminated the program. How the military will resolve this ongoing problem will be interesting to watch, especially as the airlines sap its pilot ranks while the demand for those who can fly an aircraft (either in first-person or remotely) continues to increase. — Scott Spangler, Editor