-
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…)
-
Backyard Flyer Fits Pilots of All Sizes
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
From AirVenture 2008 – As promised in a recent post (Backyard Flying: Fun & Cheap), I ambled down to the lightplane area at the south end of the EAA AirVenture site to try on Valley Engineering’s Backyard Flyer. It fit!
To most people that may not be a big deal, but for a long time I’ve represented what is only now a growing part of the population–pilots taller than 5-foot-10 who weigh more than the 170-pound FAA standard. Call me the 99th percentile. I’m 6-foot-5 with a 38-inch inseam and sleeve. On the scale I’m a Part 103 legal ultralight–254 pounds empty–and I wear size 15 shoes, when I can find them.
If I’m lucky, during the 30 some odd years I’ve been a pilot, if I fit in one of 10 new airplanes I try to fly, I’m lucky. So, finding a new airplane I fit into is a big deal. And finding one that fits that costs $17,500 ready to fly, with a BRS chute, I’m in happy flying heaven.
-
Flight Instructors: There’s Always More to Learn
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
From AirVenture 2008 – If I say that most CFIs make lousy business people, I’m unlikely to offend too many people … some for sure, just not too many I’ll wager. The reason is simple. Most CFIs do make lousy business people because teaching is often secondary to their desire to fly. That hurts us all and I’m certainly not the first person to connect flight instructors to a lack of marketing skills.
At AirVenture this week I realized something else. Most of us CFIs aren’t very savvy about public relations either.
So I’m trying to fix that right now by waving the flag, so to speak, about one of our own who was tonight recognized by my friend Bobby Sturgell, the FAA’s acting administrator, as being one of the best of the best as a flight instructor.
Max Trescott, a guy we’ve talked to before, a man who embarasses the heck out of me because he runs such a successful independent flight instruction business, received the CFI of the Year award at AirVenture 2008.
There is only one thing to say. Congratulations Max. You’re a credit to the profession. He and all the other CFI winners over the years are pilots we can and should look up to.
And another thing Max … you really do get the posture thing! Another lesson for us all.
Technorati tags: CFI of the Year, Max Trescott, Bobby Sturgell, FAA, Flight Training, Learning to fly, Jetwhine.com, light sport aircraft -
Martin Jetpack Draws Thousands of AirVenture Dreamers
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
From AirVenture 2008 – Given the competition, most product announcements at EAA AirVenture draw fair to middling crowds. That’s what I expected for the AeroShell Square debut of what the Martin Aircraft Company calls “the world’s first practical jetpack.”
Like many of my generation, I grew up with the Bell Rocket Belt (which carried 30 seconds of caustic rocket fuel and had a nasty habit of breaking the pilot’s legs on hard landings). When facing traffic and other frustrating situations I dreamed of jetting away from them like James Bond in Thunderball.
Apparently, I’m not the only one. The crowd awaiting the press event stretched across AeroShell Square as far as I could see from my 6-foot-5 vantage point. I’d guess there were 8,000 to 10,000 people there, but there might have been more on the other side of the Boeing Dreamlifter.
We were a pretty patient crowd, too. The event was supposed to start at 9:30, but it started about 45 minutes late because we had to move, twice, to let the Dreamlifter by, and again to wedge Glacier Girl into her AeroShell Square display tiedown. Moving that many people who’ve been standing in the sun for a half hour or more is just about as simple as solving a Rubik’s Cube. (more…)