Month: May 2020

Air travel won’t return to pre-crisis levels until 2023, IATA chief warns

•     The trade group’s chief, Alexandre de Juniac, said that demand for air travel had dropped more than 90% in Europe and the U.S. since the start of the pandemic.
•     He warned that recovery will be even slower if lockdowns and travel restrictions are extended.

Hoping to see inter-Europe flights resume this summer, IATA chief says

The impact on air travel from the coronavirus will be felt for many years to come, according to the International Air Transport Association, which estimates that passenger traffic won’t rebound to pre-crisis levels until at least 2023.

The trade association for the world’s airlines said that demand for air travel had dropped more than 90% in Europe and the U.S. since the start of the pandemic, and warned that recovery will be even slower if lockdowns and travel restrictions are extended.

“We are asking governments to have a phased approach to restart the industry and to fly again,” Alexandre de Juniac, the IATA’s director general and CEO, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Thursday. De Juniac is hopeful that some flying will resume by the summer.

“We are aiming at reopening and boosting the domestic market by end of the second quarter, and opening the regional or continental markets – such as Europe, North America or Asia-Pacific – by the third quarter, and intercontinental in the fall,” he said.

“So for summer we hope that you will see flights within Europe coming back, with I hope interesting prices and very safe processes of control.”

The European Union’s external borders remain closed to non-EU nationals until mid-June. The European Commission has recommended a phased approach for its member states to reopen borders that would start with countries with low levels of coronavirus infections.

Q2 will look ‘similarly bleak’ for Dubai Airports amid virus outbreak: CEO

The comments from the IATA com as travel groups are desperate to bring operations back to life and some are already rolling out plans to do so.

United Airlines has expressed its aims to schedule Europe and China routes in June, Dubai’s flagship Emirates Airline will recommence nine outbound routes starting May 21 and European low-cost carrier Ryanair expects to have 40% of its flights running by July 1. Budget carrier Wizz Air will restart routes from London’s Luton Airport starting June 16, Lufthansa is planning service expansion in June and IAG will resume some flights in July, among others.

Mandatory quarantine ‘useless’

But any hopes for a boost to the industry with some resumed travel will be dashed if governments institute mandatory 14-day quarantine periods for travelers upon arrival, de Juniac warned.

“We are advocating with governments not to implement quarantine measures that will retain people for two weeks that will arrive anywhere,” he said.

“We think that it is useless provided we have implemented the health and sanitary controls that we are discussing with governments. It is absolutely key for the tourist industry which is so important for so many countries in Europe.”

Scores of countries including Australia, New Zealand, China, Spain and potentially the U.K. are requiring international travelers to quarantine for two weeks upon arrival, with varying degrees of enforcement: in Australia, arrivals are escorted to a hotel where they must remain for 14 days, while in other countries they are expected to “self-quarantine” at home. Hong Kong issued state-monitored tracking bracelets that arrivals must wear to ensure they do not leave their area of quarantine. Such policies will no doubt deter many people from wanting to travel.

De Juniac believes quarantine periods are simply not necessary as long as airlines and airports uphold stringent sanitation and monitoring practices.

“Is it possible to have an aircraft full and without risk of contamination? Our answer is yes,” de Juniac said, “provided we implement control and sanitary processes for passengers just before the flight – by asking for temperature control, by the obligation to wear a mask, by cleaning the aircraft properly and disinfecting properly, by limiting the distribution of food to prepackaged food, by limiting cabin luggage to one luggage to avoid disembarking and embarking process to be too overcrowded.”

With such a multilayered approach, he argued, “you limit the risk of contamination. … And then the quarantine is not useful from our point of view in this case.”

Looking at the nature of flying – numerous people packed into a tight space, loading and picking up luggage, using the airplane toilets – it’s hard to imagine that any sort of virus spread or contamination could be entirely avoided.

But the IATA chief was adamant, citing on-board studies carried out “that demonstrate that the risk of contamination is absolutely minimal even when you don’t have special equipment.”

He added that air filters in planes ensure safe ventilation, that sitting behind seat backs rather than face to face with other passengers reduces droplet spread and that mandatory masks will further reduce contamination.

“So if you have special equipment, special controls, special cleaning, you reduce the risk to something which will never be zero but will be negligible. That is our strong conviction based on studies, on the equipment we are using – and on something which is even more important, that is safety, which is the key priority of this industry,” he said.

De Juniac stressed that passengers’ safety came first, and that resumption of activity was ultimately up to government decisions.

“I think the travelers are expecting us to implement a safe process of sanitary and health control for passengers. We are working with governments on that,” he added.

“It will be possible to fly safely at least in Europe we hope, and then it depends on government decisions to lift travel restrictions and border closures.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/14/coronavirus-air-travel-wont-return-to-pre-crisis-levels-until-2023-iata-chief-warns.html

Airlines have instructed flight crews to not let masks lead to in-flight disruptions

Passengers are required to wear masks during travel. But crew members are being told to avoid confrontation in the air.

U.S. airlines have all rolled out new policies requiring travelers to wear masks when they board and fly in an effort to keep passengers and employees as safe as possible from the coronavirus.

But crew members are being told to avoid escalating a situation once in the air if a passenger refuses to keep the mask on. There are exceptions for those who are very young or who have a medical condition.

In a memo sent to American Airlines pilots Monday, the day the mask policy went into effect, the carrier said enforcement of the requirement around face coverings would depend on where a customer is. At the gate, for example, travelers can be prevented from boarding if they are not wearing a mask.

“Once on board and off the gate, the face covering policy will become more lenient,” the communication says. “The flight attendant’s role is informational, not enforcement, with respect to the face covering policy. The flight attendants are instructed not to escalate the issue if the passenger refuses to wear a face covering and to consider options, such as reseating if other passengers are involved, to defuse the situation.”

Dennis Tajer, spokesman for the Allied Pilots Association, which represents American Airlines pilots, said the policy undermines the airline’s mask requirement.

“‘Lenient’ and ‘mandate’ don’t go together; they’re not a pairing that survive,” said Tajer, a captain for the airline.

He said it may not always be possible to move a noncompliant passenger to a seat with space around it, and pointed out that in some cities, someone could be asked to leave a grocery store for not complying with mask rules.

“I can’t ask you to leave the airplane when we’re in flight,” he said.

United Airlines says its mandatory face-covering policy is enforced first at the gate when passengers board, then “flight attendants inform and remind customers of the policy during flight in ways that are similar to our other safety policies.”

Passengers who refuse to wear a mask at the gate will be pulled aside by a customer service agent to discuss options, including moving to a new seat where they can stay a safe distance from other passengers. An airline statement said an “isolated situation where a customer may be denied boarding as a last resort” could be possible.

The expectation is for passengers to continue wearing masks during the flight except while eating or drinking.

“If for some reason this policy causes a disturbance onboard, we’ve counseled our flight attendants to use their de-escalation skills, and they do have the flexibility to re-seat customers on the aircraft as needed,” the statement says.

In a statement to The Washington Post, JetBlue said that under the new policy, its crew members will be “sensitive to all situations, using their best judgement to maintain compliance while upholding our service standards and will try to de-escalate issues onboard to the best of their ability.” The statement also noted that customers who choose not to follow the mask policy will be reviewed for future travel on the airline.

And Southwest Airlines said in a statement that while workers would provide a mask to passengers and “strongly encourage” that they comply with the policy, the carrier was not in a position to deny boarding to someone solely because they refused to wear a mask.

“While our employees are not expected to control the personal behaviors of customers, employees and crews will respectfully request that customers abide by the policy, and we have existing guidelines for managing any issue that escalates,” the statement said.

Reuters first reported on the airline guidance to crews this week.

Unions for pilots and flight attendants have urged authorities such as the Federal Aviation Administration and lawmakers to mandate measures including wearing masks to make sure that rules are consistent across the industry – and to give airlines and their employees firmer ground to stand on if travelers don’t want to comply.

“We have called for federal guidance from the government so that this is clear and consistent across the industry and we set clear conditions for people who want to fly on airplanes right now,” Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, which represents nearly 50,000 flight attendants at 19 airlines, told CNN. “The fact of the matter is that there is no way to appropriately socially distance on an airplane, and therefore everyone needs to be wearing masks.”

She said flight attendants are used to having to deescalate situations in the air all the time, so the airlines’ direction is not unheard of. In a separate statement, Nelson said that airlines were putting new policies into place “on the fly with essentially no coordination or direction from the federal government.”

“We need a federal plan of action to implement safety measures on masks, social distancing, cleaning, and more,” Nelson said in the statement. “Safety, health and our entire economy is on the line. We need federal requirements that mitigate risk during this pandemic and put the safety of crews and the traveling public first.”

The FAA said in a statement that it would keep engaging with partners in talks about protecting the health and safety of passengers and crew. The agency pointed to a recent safety alert that included guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on wearing cloth face coverings.

“Although the FAA’s statutory authority is to regulate the safe operation of civil aircraft, we are lending aviation expertise to federal public health agencies and airlines as they issue guidance for crew members, including health monitoring, screening protocols and aircraft cleaning,” the statement said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2020/05/14/airlines-have-instructed-flight-crews-not-let-masks-lead-in-flight-disruptions/

Face masks on the fly: Las Vegas airport adds PPE vending machines

Travelers flying in and out of Las Vegas can pick up a variety of items including forgotten toiletries and designer cupcakes at two dozen vending machines scattered throughout McCarran International Airport.

New to the lineup this week: three machines selling personal protective equipment including face masks, gloves, hand sanitizer and wipes.

The airport said it is the first in the U.S. to install the machines from vending machine operator Prepango, though Tulsa International Airport has added masks to existing vending machines and many airports are selling masks, sanitizers and related goods in their retail stores. The machines were installed in Las Vegas on Wednesday.

The move comes as all major U.S. airlines and an increasing number of airports now require passengers to wear masks or other face coverings during the coronavirus pandemic.

“With all the changes that have been happening rapidly … it’s not unthinkable that someone can show up at the airport and forget one of these items that are now almost essential for travel,” said Christine Crews, spokeswoman for McCarran.
McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas has added vending machines selling personal protective equipment including face masks, gloves, sanitizer and wipes.

She said sample prices include $4.25 for 50mL (about 1.7 ounces) of liquid hand sanitizer, a 10-pack of alcohol wipes for $5.25 and $7.50 for a pack of three disposable masks or $14.50 for a reusable cloth mask.

Some airlines have said they will provide face masks to passengers who don’t bring their own. Allegiant, which is big in Las Vegas and is headquartered there, is handing out kits that include a mask and wipes.

Las Vegas, like airports around the country, has seen passenger traffic plummet since the coronavirus outbreak began earlier this year and travel came to a halt. In March alone, 2.3 million fewer passengers traveled through the airport, a 53% decline.

In 2019, more than 51 million passengers, a record, flew in and out of the gambling and entertainment hot spot.

The marquee attraction, casino resorts on the Las Vegas Strip, have been closed since mid-March. No reopening dates have been announced by casino operators, but most plan to gradually reopen their hotels, resorts and restaurants. MGM Resorts, which has a dozen properties on The Strip, has said passengers will be encouraged to wear masks.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2020/05/14/las-vegas-airport-adds-vending-machines-selling-face-masks-sanitizer/5194744002/

US pilot jailed in Singapore for breaking coronavirus quarantine

SINGAPORE – An American cargo pilot who admitted to “poor judgment” in breaking a quarantine order to buy medical supplies became the first foreigner imprisoned in Singapore for breaching its restrictions meant to curb the coronavirus, his lawyer said Friday.

FedEx pilot Brian Dugan Yeargan, 44, of Alaska, was sentenced to four weeks Wednesday after he pleaded guilty to leaving his hotel room for three hours to buy masks and a thermometer, defense lawyer Ronnie Tan said.

Singapore has one of the largest outbreaks in Asia, with 26,000 cases. More than 90% of those infected are foreign workers living in crowded dormitories, while the government recently began easing restrictions for the local population.

The tiny city-state has strict penalties for those who breach quarantine rules, don’t masks in public or fail to adhere to social distancing measures. Quarantine violators face up to six months in jail, a fine of up to Singapore $10,000 ($7,000) or both.

Tan said Yeargan and his two co-pilots were taken to an airport hotel to serve 14-day quarantines upon arriving from Sydney on April 3. It was required because they stated in their health declarations they had visited China, Hong Kong, Macau, Japan and the United States in the two-week period before their arrival, Tan said.

Health officials checking on Yeargan found him missing from his room on April 5. Yeargan told the court he took the metro downtown to buy a thermometer and a few boxes of masks before he was to fly home on April 6.

Tan said Yeargan needed the items because they were in short supply back home and his wife has been ill. Yeargan’s wife had breathing difficulties but tested negative for the coronavirus in March, he said.

Tan said Yeargan lost his daughter in a tragic incident four years ago and the possibility of another death frightened him. Yeargan told the court his two co-pilots had flown out on April 6 as scheduled but he has been held back in his room. He also said he has to give up an assignment to fly a humanitarian aid mission to COVID-19-hit countries for the U.S. Air Force due to his blunder in Singapore.

“In his address in court, Yeargan said he was sorry, he made a poor judgment and that he shouldn’t have gone out,” Tan said. The American also said he has “the highest regard for the Singapore people and its laws,” Tan added.

The court said in its ruling Yeargan should have asked someone to obtain the items for him.

Tan said Yeargan was relieved as prosecutors had sought a sentence of up to eight weeks. He said he will apply for a remission for good behavior, which could see the American ending his sentence in three weeks.

The Anchorage Daily News reported Yeargan is from the Eagle River community and serves with the Alaska Air National Guard. It said he last spoke to his parents on Mother’s Day. “He’s taking care of himself,” Jim Yeargan was quoted as saying.

FedEx spokeswoman Davina Cole told the newspaper the company adhered to all regulations from government authorities related to containing the virus.

Yeargan was the first foreigner sentenced for violating quarantine orders, but several Singaporeans have been jailed for between five and six weeks for leaving their homes.

Singapore imposed a partial lockdown on April 7 and loosened restrictions Tuesday, with food manufacturers, barbers and laundry shops opening doors three weeks before the lockdown ends June 1.

https://nypost.com/2020/05/15/us-pilot-jailed-in-singapore-for-breaking-coronavirus-quarantine/

A Checklist for Circumstances Not Covered by Procedures

• Remain calm and do not rush:
• Fly the aircraft.
• Maintain controlled flight — attitude, speed, altitude.
• Avoid terrain.
• Vacate bad weather.
• Check fuel.
• Talk with your crew and with ATC.
• Manage the immediate threat.

DECIDE Model

• D – Detect. Gather all facts and information about the event — what still works and what does not.
• E- Estimate. Assess and form an understanding of the situation.
• Have you seen something similar?
• Consider possible solutions.
• C –Choose– Choose the safest practical solution.
• I- Identify -the actions necessary to carry out the safest option.
• Have you done this before?
• What are the expected outcomes?
• D – Do. Act by carrying out the safest option.
• E –Evaluate. Evaluate the changes due to the action.
• Reassess the situation.
• Revise the plan if necessary.
• Review the situation.
• Return to the emergency checklist.

DADA Model.

• D- DETECT. See, hear or feel cues Instrument displays Pattern recognition.
• A-ASSESS. Compare with something familiar. Form a mental model. Pattern match.
• D –DECIDE. Evaluate the relative importance of the information.
• Review patterns and mental models.
• Identify suitable action — a pattern or mental model.
• A -ACT -Monitor Review the situation. Plan ahead.

Elements of Airmanship

Airmanship is the consistent use of good judgment and well-developed skills to accomplish flight objectives.

This consistency is founded on a cornerstone of uncompromising flight discipline and is developed through systematic skill acquisition and proficiency.

A high state of situational awareness completes the airmanship picture and is obtained through knowledge of one’s self, aircraft, environment, team and risk.

Discipline.

Adhere to SOPs and rules.

Control your attitude.

Don’t take chances in order to impress others or make flying more exciting. Focus on immediate safety issues and prioritize tasks.

Think ahead and plan for problems that could occur.

Skill and Proficiency.

Practice perceptual-motor and cognitive skills.

Practice under high stress, time pressure and high workload.

Take recurrent training seriously.

Practice recognizing when you have lost Situational Awareness.

Study decision making; look at good and bad decisions, others have made. Practice communicating with a variety of people.

Know how to assess yourself and the team.

Practice abnormal situations.

Knowledge.

Know your aircraft, environment, risks, mission, self and team:

Understand all systems of the aircraft.

Know the limits of the aircraft.

Be aware of risks associated with manoeuvres.

Review emergency procedures for the aircraft.

Review the flight plan.

Review flight conditions.

Know your own limitations.

Know the capabilities of other crewmembers.

Ask for help if you do not know something.

Situational awareness.

Gather, interpret and plan:

Gather as much information related to the flight as possible.

Understand which information is important and which is not.

Plan ahead and create a mental model of what should occur.

Constantly search for new relevant information.

Update your mental model based on new information.

Manage stressors that may affect situational awareness.

Judgment.

Evaluate and decide:

Know how much time you have to make a decision.

Eliminate as much uncertainty as possible.

Use discipline, skill and proficiency, knowledge and situational awareness to evaluate the consequences of your decision.

Ask others for input if time permits.

Fully commit to your decision.

Golden Rules in Aviation

 

During an abnormal condition or an emergency condition PF/PM task sharing should be adapted to the situation (in accordance with the aircraft operating manual or quick reference handbook.

Golden Rule 1-Aviate.

The PF must fly the aircraft (pitch attitude, thrust sideslip, heading) to stabilize the aircraft’s pitch attitude, bank angle, vertical flight path and horizontal flight path.

The   PM must back up the PF (by monitoring and making call outs till aircraft stabilised).

Golden Rule 2-Navigate.

Upon the PF’s command, the PM should restore the desired mode for lateral navigation and/or vertical navigation (selected mode or FMS lateral navigation), being aware of terrain and altitude.

Know where you are.

Know where you should be.

Know where the terrain and obstacles are.

Golden Rule 3-Communicate.

After the aircraft is stabilized and the abnormal condition or emergency condition has been identified, the PF should inform air traffic control (ATC) of the situation and of his/her intentions.

Golden Rule 4-Manage.

The next priority is management of the aircraft systems and performance of the applicable abnormal procedures or emergency procedures.

Some of the Challenges of Monsoon Flying

Heavy rainfall, en route icing, moving cloud, severe turbulence, strong gusty winds, severe thunderstorms, and lightning inside the cloud… These are only some of the challenging scenarios that a pilot has to contend with while flying during a monsoon.

Many a time, these scenarios are beyond the range of the weather radar installed on board the aircraft. The pilot is expected to ‘fly around’ these types of severe weather to ensure safety of not just the passengers and crew but also the aircraft.

In meteorology, monsoon signifies directional shifting of winds from one season to another. In summer, warm and moist wind blows in from the ocean towards the land (South-West monsoon). During the winter months this is reversed: cold and dry wind originating from land blows into the sea (North-East monsoon).

Together, they involve a change of 180 degree in the wind direction. And herein lies the trigger to the entire chain of risky weather events ranging in type and severity from location to location.
The presence of a low-pressure area (a weather system over sea or land, signifying active monsoon conditions) could throw up its own challenges.

The corridors along the coasts — South Gujarat to Kochi on the West Coast and Kolkata to north of Chennai on the East Coast –are very challenging for a variety of reasons, including proximity to the sea and associated weather events that they can throw up.

Also, during a monsoon, avoiding the clouds can be challenging. “At high altitudes, they are very destructive and dangerous. Once you enter them, it is very difficult to save yourself,” he says.
While taking off/landing, it is generally the high winds that engages the attention of a pilot. It becomes difficult to control the aircraft. “A thunderstorm is generally associated with strong and variable winds. It can be extremely tough here

In general, heavy rain is known to affect depth and distance perception. Rain on the wind-shield creates refraction effects that can lead a pilot to believe that the aircraft is too high, with the risk of an unwarranted nose-down correction and flight below the desired flight path.

Rain at night increases the apparent brilliance of the Approach Light System making the runway appear to be closer than it really is. The risk is that a pilot will land short of the runway threshold. Runway surface conditions can also induce illusions. As a wet runway reflects very little light, a pilot may think that the aircraft is further away, contributing to the risk of a late flare and hard landing.
Flying in haze too creates the impression that the runway is further away, inducing a tendency to shallow the glide path.

Mangalore, Kozhikode and airfields in the North-East are sectors that one needs to be very careful while flying in. Apart from bouts of very heavy rain, almost all the runways are sub-standard and do not conform to minimum ICAO Standards.

The most important manoeuvre on approach to landing is a go-around. Every approach during heavy rain should be done with a “think Go Around” commitment. Accidents happen mainly because of what is called “Press-on-itis.” Once a bit of the runway is sighted, pilots lose focus on whether they are in a stabilised condition for a safe landing or not. There are SOPs but what is very important is proper training.

Heavy rain combined with high crosswinds pose the maximum danger during take-off and landing.

 

 

 

The Air Traffic controller’s Perspective on  Runway Incursion Hazards and Mitigation Options.

Communication Hazards.

• Unclear communication from the pilot to the ATC
• Ambiguous communication
• Lack of standard phraseology, including: speed of delivery, accents, # of instructions per transmission
• Low level of aviation language proficiency
• Frequency congestion
• Call sign confusion
• Read back errors
• Assumption that flight crews and airport personnel have certain familiarity with airport
• Simultaneous communication required for coordination between local, ground and radar controllers
• Multiple tower / ground frequencies becoming commonplace at many large airports
• Instances where 1 controller is responsible for traffic on multiple frequencies

Communication Mitigation

• Provide awareness and refresher training, that includes
  • Situations requiring mandatory read back
  • Ensuring what is said or heard is really what is said or heard not what you or the pilot expected to hear
  • Clarifying/avoiding similar sounding call-signs
  • Not assuming that pilots are familiar with local operations
• Establish outreach programs that include
  • Providing runway safety materials to foster collaboration
  • Encouraging the use of standard phraseology between controllers and pilots
  • Airfield vehicular tours to familiarize controllers with aerodrome signage, markings and taxiway/runway layout from a pilot’s perspective
• Minimize single controller communication coordination between local, ground and radar controllers
• Manage the use of multiple tower / ground frequencies
• Minimize the occurrences where 1 controller is responsible for traffic on multiple frequencies

Construction Hazards

Hazards appear when part of the airport becomes non-operational

• Potential capacity constraints that increase controller workload
• Potential need to manage and coordinate increased number of runway crossings
• The more crossing possibilities, the higher the incursion risk
• Added vehicular traffic on runway and taxiway surfaces
• Possible increased use of intersection takeoffs
• Potential impact on RFF procedures.

Construction Mitigations

• Manage movement numbers during capacity constraints
• Manage and coordinate increased number of runway crossings
• Develop SOPs for use during airport works including
• Using intersection departures
• RFF procedures
• Providing information to pilots on available runway lengths
• Develop memory aids to prevent departures and landings on closed or shortened runways

Airport Design Hazards

• Operations to closely spaced parallel runways
• Monitoring adherence to hold short clearances, particularly for high-speed turnoffs after landing
• Potential for separation issues related to runway confusion
• Simultaneous operations to intersecting runways
• Increased coordination required when multiple tower / ground frequencies are in use

Airport Design Mitigation

• Identify and publish hotspots
• Develop controller awareness of high risk areas
• Intersecting runway operations
• Land and Hold Short Operations
• Timing (when runway occupancy time is contrary to controller expectations)
• Runway Crossings.
• There is a correlation between the number of runway crossings and runway incursions consider increasing the use of end around taxiways.
• Blind spots/low visibility
• Reports clear of runway
• Use of Surface surveillance equipment including CCTV if needed
• Closely spaced parallel runways operations
• Monitoring adherence to hold short clearances, particularly for high-speed turnoffs after landing
• Awareness of separation issues related to runway confusion
• Simultaneous operations to intersecting runways
• Implement coordination procedures when multiple tower / ground frequencies are in use

 

Visibility Hazards

• Not only due to fog, but also glare/snow/ reflection/water/sand
• Certain movement areas are “blind spots” and are not visible from the control tower.

Visibility Mitigation

• Identify “blind spots” and their hazards
• Develop mitigation procedures
• Utilize low visibility procedures
• Manage traffic levels
• To maintain situation awareness
• To avoid frequency overload

 

Operational Hazards

• Hub” route networks create peaks in controller workload
• Managing contingencies related to:
• Runway / taxiway closures
• Inoperative approach aids
• Technical issues experienced by flight crews
• Weather phenomena
• Environmental factors:
• Distractions, false/nuisance alerts
• Sight lines
• Complex airport operations and configuration changes
• Traffic volume
• Shift work and fatigue-related performance effects
• Use of complex/non-standard taxi instructions
• Inadequate airport diagrams

Operational Mitigation

• Options to enhance situational awareness
• Implement CRM training
• Foster a culture of teamwork. Awareness of other controllers’ activities.
• Develop memory aids
• Visual indicators for runway closures, intersection departures, etc
• Position Relief Procedures and Checklists to highlight any high risk situations
• Staffing
• Provide adequate numbers to manage traffic surges
• Prevent split attention/multi-tasking particularly during periods of low-level traffic
• Re-Current training
• Focus on local operations and runway safety issues
• Tower cab & equipment configuration
• Perform human factors assessment of cab environment
• Foster a Safety Culture
• Implement SMS

 

Signage

• Report unserviceable signage
• Advise flight crews of unserviceable signage
• Amend affected procedures when signage is unserviceable

FINAL INVESTIGATION REPORT ON ACCIDENT TO Bell 212 HELICOPTER  AT (TUKAWADE) THANE ON 29/09/2013

 The helicopter departed from Juhu airport for Aurangabad at 07:47 IST with 05 persons on board.  The flight plan was filed to fly the route under VFR conditions at 2000 feet AGL with endurance of 02:30 hours. As per ATC, the helicopter changed over the frequency from Juhu to approach control at 05 NM. Juhu ATC passed the ETA 09:30 IST to the control tower. At 09:18 IST, Juhu ATC received call from FIC stating, Helicopter is not in contact. Later WSO, Mumbai informed to Juhu ATC that the helicopter had crashed near Murbad and the same information was passed to Operator at 1010 hrs. IST. At the same time, message was received that the helicopter crashed at 0820 hrs. IST. The location of accident was at around 49 NM from Juhu airport and 104 NM prior to Aurangabad.

 

All the occupants received fatal injuries. The accident occurred in day light conditions.

PIC -52 Years old-Total Experience-Helicopters -3700 Hrs. Total Experience Bell 212-1432 Hrs-PIC on Bell 212-406 Hrs.

Co Pilot-30 Years Old- Total Flying Experience-1727 Hrs. Total Experience on Bell 212-451 Hrs-PIC –Nil.

The CEO of the company is from finance background. The Chief Pilot of the Company is a non-flying pilot though he has got very good experience of helicopter flying.

The Company did not have any permanent contract for the leasing of helicopters from April, 2013. The flying was very limited. There was limited flying and as per the company there was no DGCA approved examiner available on type of helicopter. Bell 212 has been accepted as a variant of the Bell 412 by DGCA and the recurrent checks were carried out at HATSOFF, Bangalore whenever an external examiner was not available.

The helicopter was under flyable storage since 29.5.2013. De-preservation of flyable storage was carried out on 8.8.2013 followed by 90 days/ 100 hrs. Flyable storage inspection was again carried out on 14.8.2013 at 23575:30 hrs. And was repeated periodically till 28.09.2013.

No flight check was conducted prior to releasing the helicopter for the positioning flight as this was not required as per the Company’s approved maintenance schedule.

The CVR readout has the following transmissions by the crew to the engineer on board:

o “Radar should give us something where are we entering.” o “It is not painting yar.” o “…… your radar is not working weather radar.” o “From start it was not working.” o “It was not painting. It is not painting at all.”

The CVR readout of the flight reveals that the Weather Radar was not working during the flight.

The following are the relevant portion of the CVR transcript indicating that the crew was aware of poor visibility conditions immediately after take-off.

“How is the weather?” “Give me wiper yar shortly.” “Because here the clouding is there.” “Now I can’t really make out where are we are. Where are we are.”

The following portion of CVR transcript

PF OK now concentrate on instruments ha. I am on instruments, PNF OK Reduce speed. Right is clear, Now can we descent down a little?  PF No, I will not. PNF Just fly orbit……. You want to turn back? PF No, PNF your rate of descent … rate of descent … rate of descent. PF Mine is OK,I have controls, PNF We are going down We are going down. PF We are not going down.. Hold on. Leave the controls.

Almost immediately thereafter, as Spatial Disorientation had set in, it resulted in the crash.

Further the following CVR transcript indicates that the PIC was

not very much familiar with the track/ terrain.

“Am I steering correctly?”

“Is this my track?”

“What am I supposed to track now?”

“Have we crossed Thane now?”

From the CVR read out it is clear that:

 They experienced poor visibility right from the beginning.

 The pilot was not very familiar with the terrain.

 The radar was unserviceable.

The flight was continued in poor visibility and without adequate terrain clearance. The pilot tried to maintain ground contact, resulting in not having safe ground clearance. The last contact with the helicopter was at 0243 UTC  (25mins 32secs after take-off).

The pilot encountered IMC conditions at 0245 UTC (approximately 27mins after take-off) and decided to fly on instruments.

At approximately 0248 UTC, complete Spatial Disorientation set in, resulting in the fatal crash.

ELT functional check was carried out on 28.9.2013. The ELT antenna got detached during the accident from the ELT therefore, though the ELT was functional (blinking) but the signal was not transmitted /captured by the designated organizations.

 

 

Analysis by ASMSI

The analysis of the accident by ASMSI is based on the Inquiry Report of the Accident placed on DGCA website. In order not to burden the readers with too much of material, only the relevant portion from the report has been included as covered above.

The Operator was the only operator of Bell 212 in the country. No type examiner was available on Bell 212.The PC, other tests and Recurrent Training were being done on the Bell 412 Simulator as approved by DGCA. This has a bearing on the skill levels of the Pilots since there is considerable difference between the handling and operating the Helicopters under different flying conditions.

The Operator is headed by a CEO with financial background and obviously has very little knowledge about the Operating environments of the Helicopter Operations. The Chief Pilot of the Company, though highly experienced helicopter Pilot, was not flying any type of helicopter in the Company and as such was not in an authoritative position to assert himself in a professional manner, in ensuring conducive flying and safety environments in the Company. This has a bearing on the safety and efficiency of the operations being conducted by Company.

The Operator had 3 helicopters and 8 Pilots but no contracts for generating revenue for the Company for quite some time. Flying was very limited and the Operator must be going through financial stress. The stress on the Pilots, AME’s, Technicians and in fact on all the Company personnel including CEO must be tremendous. The Operator must have pulled out all the stops to ensure positioning of the Bell 212 to Nagpur where they had received a contract for 30 days.

Since there was no flying in the Company, Bell 212 which was on preservation for a long period of time, with of course regular maintenance, must have been hurriedly prepared and made ready for the ferry. Even a Flight check to ensure that the helicopter was fully serviceable was not carried out before departing for the positioning. The Pilots in their exuberance to undertake the task, seem to have overlooked the need for a thorough inspection and Flight Check to ascertain the airworthiness of the Helicopter.

Both the Pilots were well experienced. However due to large difference in their age, experience and status (Power Distance/Cockpit Gradient/Authority Gradient), the Co Pilot was inhibited to give inputs and assert himself when the situation demanded. Hence even after noticing the confusion in the mind of the Pilot (CVR Readings), the Co Pilot was not able to assert himself to advise the Captain to return or find a suitable place to land.

The Weather Radar was found to be unserviceable during flight as is evident from the CVR readings. It appears that the Pilots never checked the serviceability of the Radar during ground run. If they had checked the Radar during ground run, its unserviceability would have come to their notice and necessary rectification of the Radar would have been undertaken. It also highlights the importance of a Flight Check if the helicopter has been released for flying after long period of preservation.

The Pilots were not familiar with the terrain most of which is hilly, high ground and likely adverse weather conditions in their route. The Pilots did not take the weather clues of degraded visibility and low clouds into consideration and continued the flight hoping for better weather conditions. The Captain was forced to fly with ground contact since he had non-functional Radar and may be not confident to fly through clouds or undercast.

The low cloud base and poor visibility must have forced the Pilots to fly at lower heights close to the ground so as to remain in contact with ground. The terrain and ground was undulating and the pilots must have been changing their height and direction frequently to avoid high features and weather. Under such conditions, the Pilots seem to have panicked, got disorientated and crashed.

There appears to be lack of Planning and Preparation of the Flight, Knowledge about the Terrain, Weather, Spatial Disorientation, Controlled Flight into Terrain, Situational Awareness, Crew Resource Management, Decision Making, Supervision and Monitoring.

Lessons Learnt

• Planning and Preparation for the Flight is absolutely essential for the safe and efficient conduct of the Flight. During planning and preparation, the Pilots must have very good knowledge of the Terrain (including knowledge of the Electric, Telephone Cables, Pylons, Towers, Trolley cables particularly in the hills and other obstructions, Minimum Safe Altitude, Enroute Altitude, Minimum Descent Altitude, Minimum off Route Altitude and obstructions around and in the approach path of the Airfield/Helipad.
• The next important consideration is weather. It is essential that the Pilots are well informed about weather conditions at the departure and arrival airport/helipad and enroute, the season in which they are operating and the likelihood of generally rough weather in the hilly terrain. The Pilots must learn to respect the weather and should remain alert and vigilant to monitor the weather cues and take decision in time to return, divert or land before the return route/passage closes.
• Low clouds, rain, fog, poor visibility and hilly/high ground terrain are deadly combination. Keep this aspect in mind, always.
• Please do not succumb to any kind of pressure whether it is Company pressure, Commercial pressure, VIP or passenger pressure or self-imposed pressure. Unfortunately most of us tend to take wrong decision under pressure. Pressures will always be there. Pilots must learn to handle pressure without succumbing to it. Remember most of the fatal accidents are caused due to wrong decision making by the Pilots under pressure. Always carry out proper risk assessment and undertake the flight in a professional manner.
• The Co Pilots have to be fully prepared for the Flight, carry out thorough Pre Flight Planning, Preparation, have good knowledge, be alert, vigilant, situationally aware, fully involved with the progress of the flight and assertive if the situation demands to caution the Pilot. They should be an asset in the cockpit and not a dead weight or liability.
• Pre Flight briefing must be carried out by the Captain covering all the aspects of the flight, likely threat to the safety and efficiency of the flight and role of each crew member in normal as well as emergency situation.
• Regardless of the pressures, no compromise should be made on the full airworthiness of the Helicopter. Short cuts can lead to catastrophic consequences.

If the Helicopter has not flown for a long period, a proper ground run and Flight Check are essential requirements to ascertain the Airworthiness of the Helicopter and should not be overlooked. Pre Flight Checks must be carried out meticulously and all the equipment should be checked for its proper functioning. If unserviceability of any critical equipment for the safety of the flight over particular terrain or weather conditions is observed, the Pilots should not hesitate to abandon the mission and return/divert or land.

• The CEO of the Company should be appointed with due care since he has an important role in promoting safety and efficiency of the conduct of operations in the Company. If CEO is not from Aviation background than the Company should have an Accountable Executive who is knowledgeable about the Aviation and is accountable to DGCA for ensuring safe flying environments in his Company. He should be fully involved in the conduct of flying operations of the Company and should conduct close monitoring and supervision through Chief Pilot or Chief Operating Officer.
• There is no place for ego, overconfidence, unprofessional attitude, resigning to fate and show off to impress others. Self-styled Rambos are a serious threat to safety, reputation and survival of the company. Always be a thorough professional, carry out proper Risk Assessment and always err on the positive side.
• Mind Set, get theiritis, homeitis and mission accomplishment at all cost are serious threat to safety. All the Pilots must keep these aspects in mind to remain safe.