-
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…)
-
DayJet’s Bruce Holmes Speaks to Service Pullback
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Although this interview DayJet’s Bruce Holmes gave the Atlantic.com’s James Fallows has the smell of fluff at a time when customers and industry pundits are clamoring for considerably more substance, it is the best out there about the current inner workings of this major Eclipse operator right now.
Holmes said he does not expect the pull back to affect the quality of the service the company provides although I doubt anyone is certain how that will be possible.
It’s worth reading.
Our Flight Tracker today showed no activity for DayJet.
-
FAA’s Bobby Sturgell Gets a Little Good PR
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
When a senior executive, especially one in the current Bush White House is in trouble, there’s nothing like a little good PR to help balance things out. Trouble is, it can be pretty tough to convince a reporter – especially one for a national newspaper – to take the time to say good things about a politician when almost everyone knows it’s fluff. You know those fluff stories … when the poor beaten upon politician is shown to be a real human like the rest of us by holding puppies and kittens or playing with kids.
So when the Washington Post’s Christy Goodman wrote the glowing piece on FAA’s Bobby Sturgell – on Sunday no less – you know that someone at the Post must have owed someone at the DOT or the FAA a favor big time. But a good public affairs person at FAA or DOT gets paid precisely to make the case for these kinds of stories.
While I appreciate the fact that Bobby was a Navy pilot able to plunk an airplane down on a moving aircraft carrier at night in IFR weather – how many of us can do that? – he is still not the person to run the agency even in good times. While I’m sure he reads books to his son at night when does get home – I love a dad that does that actually – it has nothing to do with his qualifications to run an agency that is as screwed up as the FAA.
Right now, FAA is living through a nightmare of the worst credibility gap in its 50-year history, a mess in which our friends at the airlines and business aviation, not to mention the agency’s own employees like controllers and inspectors are being beaten up severely for much of what is the agency’s fault to begin with. And Sturgell has been at the helm during the worst of it.
Bobby. You’re a nice guy I can tell from Christy’s story … really.
But FAA has problems that are way beyond what you can do to fix them on your own. As a PR guy, let me tell you too that Bush appointee Mary Peters support for your nomination really isn’t helping your case either.
The beginning of a fix to the FAA won’t even start – I should have said maybe start – until the current White House tenant leaves next January.
In all honesty, none of the candidates – Republican or Democrat – has said much of anything about where aviation fits into their agenda either. That should make everyone in this industry more than a little nervous.
Technorati tags: Bobby Sturgell, FAA Public Affairs, DOT Secretary Mary Peters, NATCA, ATC, air traffic controllers, Washington Post, Christy Goodman, Jetwhine, air travel -
On the Record – Max Trescott … CFI, Entrepreneur
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
Are you serious about a flying career? Then you’ve probably already heard someone speak to the value of a Flight Instructor rating because it offers an opportunity to build flight time until you get hired by the airlines or with a corporation. Almost without question though, if a pilot mentions teaching people to fly for a living, the laughter is bound to be loud. That’s because many of the folks who work hard for their CFI only make the effort because they want to fly, not teach.
With the severely reduced experience standards required at the regional airlines, there will be even fewer pilots choosing a flight instructor rating, especially of course, those who never wanted to teach in the first place.
So first a disclaimer.
If you have absolutely no interest in learning why a career as a professional flight instructor is worth pursuing, stop reading now. If you’re not even remotely curious about why a great flight instructor needs to also think like a business owner/operator, click that little red “x” in the upper right corner of your screen now because I can guarantee you’re going to be bored.
But, if you’re even the least bit snoopy about how one flight instructor I know – Max Trescott – has managed to make teaching people how to fly – and writing about teaching people to fly – a business he enjoys and is paid well for, read on. Who knows, you might just walk away with a fresh opinion about teaching.
And in answer to the question I know I’ll receive, why Max? Because being the 2008 National Flight Instructor of the Year counts for quite a bit in my book. Max is the fourth one I’ve had the pleasure of knowing and honestly, some of their enthusiasm is rubbing off on me. He’s also a NAFI-designated Master CFI.