-
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…)
-
More Flap About NWA 188
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
My story a few weeks ago about the two guys flying past MSP and the penalty they incurred for abandoning their post for over an hour seemed like a no-brainer to me.
The two pilots were distracted for some reason we were unaware of at (Photo: Fokker Aircraft) the time and blew past the Top of Descent (TOD) point, that spot where a Flight Management System (FMS) tells the crew, “In case you weren’t paying attention, we need to start down now in order to be in a position to land.” In some major cities, it’s not at all uncommon to hear that command 100 miles from touchdown.
These guys missed that message, and quite a few others too as they blew 150 miles past MSP. The only real questions was what these two professional aviators were up to that so distracted them from their primary job of flying the airplane. Apparently they were playing on their laptops. What really surprised me more than anything else after the Feds pulled the licenses of these two yahoos, were some of the reactions I read here and at other blogs.
Some said the FAA was being too tough on these guys who, until that moment had spotless records. There were even testimonials flying around that I posted here and that my pal Max Trescott ran again the other day. “Please give these guys a break. They’re family men,” one note said. “The local parishoners are behind them,” said another, as if this could or should excuse the conduct of these two.
This week though, the pilots began pointing fingers elsewhere, first at the Denver and Minneapolis Center controllers along the route. There might well have been a controller briefing screw-up somewhere along the way between some sectors with all the craziness as ATC tried to raise the crew.
But air traffic control wasn’t in charge of the airplane. The captain, Tim Cheney was, or should have been I guess. The regs say the person in the left seat is ALWAYS the final authority when things go wrong. Sorry, no finger-poking at ATC this time!The crew broke ranks when the first officer decided he’d rather not go down with the ship. He claimed the captain should really take most of the rap since he really was in charge anyway.
-
A Rare Breed: Students Who Finish Training
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
To maintain my face-to-face social skills and keep my mind nimble I am a substitute teacher for the local school district. Getting an early morning call from the high school offers the added treat of hearing how its principal is progressing toward his private pilot certificate.
He started training just before the 2008-2009 school year ended last June. Just before Thanksgiving he was halfway through his checkride; the weather turned nasty during the oral. He was hoping to fly over the weekend, and the weather was good, so I’m eagerly awaiting my next call so I can learn the outcome.
Little different from others I have talked to, his trials, tribulations, and well-earned joy at overcoming obstacles and surmounting learning plateaus are more poignant and riveting than any contrived TV reality show. Becoming a pilot might make a good reality show, but it would not inspire many to crash the airport party.
-
Should Business Aviation Just Say No?
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
After reading “Fly the Sleazy Skies,” an editorial in the November 26 New York Times, my first reaction was to say unkind things about politicians. In public they say bad things about business aviation, and then they get to eat their cake when the Federal Election Commission gives them a loophole that allows them to accept discounted use of a company’s corporate jet.
As pointed out in the editorial, after the Jack Abramoff corruption scandals the Senate said its members had to pay the full charter rate for corporate aircraft use, and the House banned it all together. Then the FEC interpreted this to be effective only when the politician was traveling as a candidate, not when he was on party committee business. The FEC is supposedly independent, but it was created by the Congress.
After my ire equalized, it struck me that it takes two to play this game of favors, a politician who needs to go somewhere, and a corporation looking to gain favor by providing corporate travel at a discount. And given the current state of corporate ethics…
Here’s a wild idea that will never grow wings, but wouldn’t it be nice if the corporate czars who seek favors through use of the aerial chariot so publicly criticized by politicians just said no when those same pols wanted to avoid airline travel? It wouldn’t be pretty, or easy, but I’ll bet it wouldn’t take long before the politicians were speaking about business aviation in kinder tones and, maybe, actually doing something to make it better. — Scott Spangler
Technorati Tags: Corporate jets,business aviation,federal election commission,charter flight,airline avoidance