-
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…)
-
LSA Trainers Can Cut Flight School Fuel Costs, Increase Student Pool
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
On the ground and in the air, ever increasing fuel costs are eviscerating the disposable income of wannabe pilots and the profit margins of flight schools who teach them to fly. Looking forward, many schools are wringing their hands and searching for viable solutions. May I suggest the light-sport aircraft.
Today’s typical trainer is a decades old four-seater. Running full rich most of the time, with a lot of power changes, their 150 to 180-hp engines are burning 100LL 10 gph, give or take a bit. At $5 a gallon, give or take a bit, that makes President U.S. Grant every student’s pocketbook passenger.
Most fixed-wing special light-sport aircraft fly on 100-hp Rotax or Continental O-200. In the same thirsty training environment, they sip 4 to 5 gph, taking that $50 bill twice as far. As a bonus, an appropriately equipped LSA can expand the pool of possible students because it can serve the needs of both sport and private pilot candidates.
-
United Airlines’ Collateral Damage
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
If I were a United Shareholder …
Still trying to recover its corporate composure after a stinging slap in the face last week from Continental, United Airlines is now turning its focus on US Airways as a potential partner to reach the holy grail of corporate success … increased shareholder value.
Continental would have been a good fit, at least for United. Luckily for Continental, their managers were smart enough to run while they still had the chance however, because I think they smelled the blood in the water.
Rumors floating around the industry about this new US Airways merger run the gamut … that a desperate United, on the verge of another bankruptcy filing, is seeking a leadership bailout from a more stable carrier or that United’s employee groups will do everything under their power to oppose this joint venture because they already see another train wreck ahead … and they should know.
Employee relations have been terrible at United for almost as long as I can remember, certainly back before the 1985 pilot strike when the airline hired a few hundred new pilots in the face of those on the picket line, a decidedly poor decision when you have a collective bargaining agreement in place.
Employee chaos isn’t limited to pilots, although they often seem to garner most of the publicity. Mechanics watching many of their jobs being outsourced are angry and flight attendants still remember they were excluded from the Employee Stock Option Plan a few decades ago.
Left Holding the Bag
But if I were a United shareholder I’d be asking why those folks at Continental left us standing at the altar.
Here’s are a few thoughts.
-
Jetwhine Editor Kindled; Escapes Unharmed
by
[sc name=”post_comments” ][/sc]
I had a call from one of my graduate school professors a few weeks ago who wanted to know how my book was doing. You remember that book McGraw Hill published last summer … a Professional Pilot Career Guide? The book is a dandy volume for anyone struggling with the tough career questions that will help them decide whether a cockpit career is for them. I’m told the book looks and reads great. Of course the marketing help from McGraw Hill has been pretty dismal so when I heard about a new delivery method for my book I was all ears.
Have you been Kindled my professor asks? Little did I know that I had indeed been Kindled without my knowledge. So perhaps McGraw Hill isn’t as bad as I thought … but I think the jury is still out on that one.
The Kindle is Amazon’s new electronic book reader. The design offers a bright screen that makes the text appear as if it was actually printed on paper. In fact, Amazon calls the product inside the machine electronic paper. The kindle weighs in at about half a pound and is capable of holding as many as 200 books, although obviously there is only one volume I can think of that should come installed.
The Kindle is wireless so adding new books is a snap. And with only 115,000 titles in the Kindle format, I’m pretty honored to be running in the same circle as some of those folks on the NY Times best seller list.
The Kindle also lets you stay in touch with your favorite blogs via an RSS feed. That means there are no more excuses for not reading your daily dose of Jetwhine.
I’m told that when you solve one problem and you often create another. That’s one of Amazon’s big problems.
The Kindle is pricey, $399 in most places which leads to the next problem. The darned things are almost impossible to find anywhere.
But if you do find one, let me know what you think. In the meantime, I’m going to try a little PR magic on the people at Amazon. Maybe they’ll let me test one for a year or so.