-
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…)
-
NPRM Points to Flight Training’s Future
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
In the August 31, 2009 Federal Register, the FAA published Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 09-08, Pilot in Command Proficiency Check and Other Changes to the Pilot and Pilot School Certification Rules.
Its seemingly disparate proposals regarding flight school classrooms and online ground schools, concurrent private pilot and instrument-rating checkrides, trading complex airplane training for advanced instrument instruction, and type-specific PIC proficiency checks for VLJ pilots together paint a clear picture of the coming future of pilot training and certification.
Few would argue that technology has changed the face of aviation, from training to actually flying from Point A to Point B. Each of the NPRM’s proposals are related except, maybe, for the issuance of a U.S. pilot certificate to those who’ve earned their pilot license in another nation.
It seems clear that these changes are but the next step in the FAA’s effort to keep up with technology, make efficient use of training tools and time, and do its regulatory best to ensure the safety of flight. It’s a trend that will likely extend to all aspects of general aviation. As always, today’s pilots will have to adapt the most, especially those who fly behind the latest technology.
-
9/11: Lost for Words
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Yes, it does happen … a time when I simply don’t know what to say. Or perhaps it is my age showing and I realize that there are times it is better to say nothing than to manufacture prose that comes off feeling contrived. Today, September 11th felt like one of those days to me.
I remember like it was yesterday. It was the first few days of First Grade for my daughter so looking at a high schooler now makes me realize how long ago that was. It was a terrible day for those of us who were glued to the TV. For me it began about the time the second aircraft hit and lasted until long after both buildings had crashed to the ground.
It was a tragic day in our history for sure because of the huge loss of life. And life is something that we as a people, at least, do value.
I decided a more fitting tribute to those who gave so much eight years ago would be listening in on a few other industry writers who I think said it all and did so much better than I.
Here are their names and the links to their blogs.
One I’d like to begin with is at John Carr’s place, The Main Bang. John reprinted a wonderful speech given by then NATCA Executive Vice President Ruth Marlin to commemorate the first anniversary of 9/11. Ruth is currently in a heated race for controller’s union president with Paul Rinaldi.
At Flightbloggger, Jon Ostrower was more successful than I at at finding some words of meaning although his struggle is clear.
Brett Snyder, the Cranky Flier posted not only the names of all the crew members who lost their lives aboard the four aircraft that clear September morning, but a haunting still photo of the Pentagon’s remembrance memorial.
The slogan “We Must Never Forget,” to me seems somewhat awkwardly placed today. How could we ever forget September 11th, anymore than December 7th, 1941. But we must go on.
Rob Mark
Technorati tags: Cranky Flier, flightblogger, The Main Bank, Ruth Marlin, Paul Rinaldi, John Carr, Brett Snyder, Jon Ostrower, NATCA -
Sonex Onex Overshadowed by R&D Stars
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Unveiling the projects gestating in the Sonex R&D department, the Hornet’s Nest, during EAA AirVenture Oshkosh, the SubSonex jet and E-Flight Power System (covered last week in Jet & ESA Fly From Sonex Hornet’s Nest) got all the attention, says Sonex Aircraft’s Mark Schaible, “but what we’re really excited about is the Onex, pronounced One-X.”
An aerobatic single-seater with folding wings powered by an 80-hp AeroVee engine, the three-view shows both nosewheel and taildragger configurations. Design limits are +6 and -3 gs at its 850-pound maximum gross weight. It weighs 540 pounds empty and carries 14 gallons of fuel. It is 16-foot-5 long, has an 18-foot-9 wingspan, stalls at 45 mph, redlines at 216 mph, and sport pilots can fly it, says Sonex CEO Jeremy Monnett.
Should the kit come to market, Jeremy says the single-seater will cost less than the two-seat Sonex and Waiex kits, which builders can complete for around $25,000. “If the design team accomplishes our primary goals…then we could expect a completed Onex to run right around $20K, including propeller, instruments, upholstery, engine, engine accessories, and complete airframe kit.”