-
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…)
-
Learn-to-Fly Day Coming to an Airport near you … I Hope
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Despite my buddy Scott Spangler’s somewhat guarded endorsement of the international Learn-to-Fly Day scheduled for May 15th, I’m jumping on the bandwagon next Saturday at our local flying club in Chicago. Events are taking place in 147 cities across the nation.
Based at KPWK just north of O’Hare International, the Leading Edge Flying Club is eagerly anticipating dozens of folks showing up to hear the club president and myself (I’m the training officer) tell a few juicy stories to whet the appetite of these potential pilots.
We’re also going to stuff them full of a few of the club’s famous Chicago hotdogs and let them climb all over our glass-paneled Cirrus SR-20, Diamond DA-40 and the Piper Archer and ask all the tough questions like how much, how long and whether flying is really any fun.
Most of all, we’re going to socialize with them, give them a real opportunity to meet other pilots of all categories and hopefully walk away believing they too can learn to fly. Our club has made a large investment in the social side of flying because we all believe that ability to talk to people who have walked before in a new pilot’s shoes is the missing element in keeping a new pilot’s enthusiasm soaring.
-
California Requires Pro Training Standards That Don’t Involve Stick & Rudder Education
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
On October 11, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 48, the California Private Postsecondary Education Act of 2009. To summarize the act’s 57 pages of tiny type, it gives students a financial parachute should the private school they attend run out of gas or suffer an operational or structural failure.
Most public and private schools accredited by agencies recognized by the Department of Education are not affected by new California requirements because they are imposed by the accrediting agency, all of which charge hefty fees for the service. The Act is for schools with no outside oversight of their business operations.
Which might be why the proposed regs that put the Act to work lift the exemption once enjoyed by FAA-approved flight schools. If approved, says National Air Transportation Association, to operate in the state, schools that train commercial pilots must pay a $5,000 fee and earn approval from the Bureau of Private Postsecondary Education, just like every other private school that educates people for a profession.
This application for approval requires third-party audited financial statements showing that the school has at least a 1:1 asset to debit ratio and requires it to pay 0.75 percent of its annual revenue to the California Student Tuition Recovery Fund, along with with other admin and recordkeeping requirements.
Understandably, this doesn’t sit well with flight schools. NATA President Jim Coyne wrote Governor Schwarzenegger a letter urging him to reconsider the flight school requirements:
-
Adventure and the Future of Flying
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Celebrating her birthday at our favorite brewpub, my wife was spending part of the quarter-billion dollar Powerball lottery prize just before the drawing that gave it to a Missouri convenience store worker instead of her and a pool of coworkers.
Sharing the winnings with me she asked if I would start flying again and what airplanes I would buy, saying “You could have one for aerobatics, an SNJ, and one that would take us to see the grandkids.” Being a pragmatic realist, not to mention persistently frugal (or, as my wife says, “stubborn and cheap”), I took a sip and seriously considered an answer.
Answering her first question was more difficult. Everyone flies for a different reason. For me, having an autopilot fly me from Point A to B is boring for the same reason airline travel is boring. Seth Stevenson said it best in a recent New York Times Op-Ed piece. The Icelandic volcano caused travelers to find alternatives, which was good, “because flying is an empty, soulless way to traverse the planet, the best flights are in fact the ones you forget immediately after hitting the tarmac.”
Most flying today is no different than taking the bus, where the other passengers are the “adventure.” GA is like taking the car, and you get to pick your traveling companions. Cue the memories of childhood road trips and your anticipation for the next one.Taking another sip, it struck me that perhaps this lack of adventure is aviation’s missing growth hormone.