Aviation Industry Cutbacks and Air Safety

Is air safety being threatened by cutbacks in the aviation industry?  Respondents to a recent survey seem to think so.

Ascend, an aerospace information consultancy, just released a summary of the results of a very recent  survey.  Respondents to the survey, who  were described as nearly 200 'aviation insiders' in over 40 countries, were asked to rank a list of safety threats in order of importance, from 1 (least important) to 10 (most important).  According to Ascend, these  insiders rated the top five threats this way:

• Airline management experience/attitudes/culture +8
• Shortage of experienced personnel +7
• Airline financial health +7
• Fatigue/difficult work practices +7
• Complacency +6

A press release about the Ascend survey results notes:

The results come shortly after Captain Chesley Sullenberger’s comments that cost cutting practices, putting pressure on airline staff, are threatening safety. Speaking about his successful landing of US Airways flight 1549 in New York’s Hudson river, he said, “One way of looking at this might be that, for 42 years, I’ve been making regular deposits in this bank of experience: education and training. And on January 15th the balance was sufficient so that I could make a very large withdrawal.” Sullenberger is alarmed at practices, which he fears threaten that bank.

Ascend Safety director Paul Hayes agrees with the sentiment. “Industry cutbacks are causing concerns. Aviation personnel are aware that they are working harder for less money, and they link this with increased risks to safety,” he says.

At the same time, however, the majority of those who responded to the Ascend survey also said that aviation safety has improved over the past five years (52%), and that it will continue to improve over the next five years (58%).

And what will drive that improvement?

More than half of respondents to the Ascend air safety survey listed "Increased adoption of available safety equipment" (52%), and "New technology (Ground/ATC)" (51%) as among the top three drivers of continued improvements to air safety. Nearly as many chose "New technology (aircraft)" and "Management accountable for safety" (47% for each).

Hayes points out that "respondents overwhelmingly placed responsibility for continued improvement with management. They feared that inexperience, fatigue and complacency threaten the value of safety improvements."

"It’s important for aviation management to take these views onboard and respond accordingly, seeking to balance economic challenges with appropriate levels of safety training and sound work practices," says Hayes.

Here is a link to some charts illustrating some of the Ascend survey data.

AirTran pilot's puzzling suspension

Yesterday the AirTran Airways pilots' union issued a press release strongly condemning what they called the "wrongful suspension" of a pilot. The National Pilots Association (NPA), the independent union that represents AirTran pilots, also asked the public "to join them in demanding that [the suspended pilot] be reinstated immediately and paid in full." The suspended pilot's offense? --  appearing in uniform at a circus.

The NPA press release explains:

...[M]anagement's position is that the pilot was in violation of AirTran's flight operations manual and would face possible discipline for wearing his uniform while dropping off his wife and two young children at a circus in Atlanta on February 21, 2009. The NPA sponsored a family day at the circus, and the pilot was on his way to work when he stopped at Philips Arena to help his wife with their kids.

"He was wearing his uniform so that he could get to work on time," said First Officer Tim Baker, spokesman for the NPA. "The circus started at 3 p.m., and he had to be at work at 4:30 p.m. He was leaving on a four day trip and wanted to spend as much time with the kids as possible. He will soon be deployed overseas and is focused on spending time with his family. He only stayed at the circus for a few minutes. The rules even state that he can wear his uniform to and from work."

The press release went on to note that the man who was suspended also is a pilot in the Air Force Reserves, where he has served for thirteen years.

AirTran Airways shot back almost immediately with its own statement to the press:

The suspended pilot wore his uniform to a non-work, NPA union-sponsored event in clear violation of the Flight Operations Manual and the collective bargaining agreement.

This policy has been clearly communicated to the airline's 1,700 pilots and is standard practice throughout the aviation and other industries.

The NPA union leadership had the opportunity to avoid this suspension on several occasions, and they chose not to.

AirTran Airways is dedicated to dealing equitably with all Crew Members, and to exempt pilots from the policy would be unfair to our other hard-working Crew Members.

The airline has no further comment on this issue and will not conduct labor relations through the media.

NPA President Linden Hillman said, "It is intolerable for our pilots to be exposed to this type of intimidation. We have tried to resolve this issue directly with management. However, we continue to find management unreasonable. It would be nice to see management focused on returning to profitability, instead of threatening their hardworking crewmembers. You don't see other airlines treating their employees like this."

I have to admit, this is one of those stories that has me scratching my head. I can't help but think there are a few more pieces to this odd story that have not been revealed publicly.

Who 'told on' the pilot? Did someone take his picture in uniform at the circus (and pass it along to management)? Did he do something at the circus that reflected poorly on his employer?

And what about those "other hard-working Crew Members" mentioned in the airline's press statement? Who are they, and what was it about the pilot's brief appearance at the circus that was "unfair" to them?

Or is this just a power play?  After all, relations between AirTran Airways and its pilots have been anything but harmonious for quite some time.

Since 2004, the pilots have been in contract negotiations with AirTran. Those negotiations have proceeded -- if that is the right word -- in fits and starts and often have been contentious.

Meanwhile, the NPA leadership voted unanimously last month to approve a merger agreement with the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA). Voting on that measure by the full membership is currently underway, and is due to wind up by April 10. Should the membership approve the deal, the merger with ALPA would go into effect on May 1, 2009.

If the pilots become a part of ALPA, they will be able to draw upon ALPA's considerable resources during the next round of contract negotiations. So I'm wondering: is the suspension of the pilot who stopped by the circus in his uniform simply a move by AirTran to show some muscle?

If any readers would like to fill in the missing details of this story, or opine about the motivations behind this very public snit, you are welcome to leave a comment.

UPDATE Apr. 11, 2009:  AirTran pilots plan to picket on Monday, Apr. 13, 2009 outside the North Terminal of Atlanta’s airport in protest of what it claims is “a pattern of threats and intimidation” by the airline against the pilots, according to the Atlanta Business Chronicle, which reports:

The union said in a statement its members have been “energized by the recent suspension of one of our pilots” in what the union calls “a blatant attempt” to intimidate the pilots.

And by the way, the AirTran Airways pilots voted 'overwhelmingly' to merge their union with the Air Line Pilots Association.

American Eagle Airlines to furlough 75 pilots

Pilots at American Eagle Airlines have been notified by management of plans to furlough 75 pilots during the next few months, due to "over-staffing" in conjunction with reduced flying.  The regional carrier plans to furlough a group of 35 pilots on May 1, 2009, followed by an additional 40 on June 1, 2009.

American Eagle pilots are represented by the Air Line Pilots Association. Their current contract was ratified in late 2008.

ALPA past president named to head FAA

A short time ago, the Obama administration announced the nomination of J. Randolph "Randy" Babbitt to serve as the new Administrator of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Babbitt's candidacy for the post has been rumored for some time; today it's official.

Randy Babbitt, who attended the University of Georgia and the University of Miami, began his aviation career as a pilot for Eastern Airlines. He flew for more than 25 years, and is a past President of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA).

Babbitt must now be confirmed for the FAA Administrator post by the U.S. Senate.

UPDATE: The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) just issued the following statement regarding Randy Babbitt's nomination as FAA Administrator:

The president of the world’s largest pilots union today heralded the Obama administration’s nomination of Capt. J. Randolph Babbitt as the next FAA Administrator, calling him “a powerful leader who promises to direct the FAA with staunch determination and a deep understanding of the aviation industry.”

“I speak for ALPA’s more than 52,000 airline pilots in welcoming this news as critical progress to ensure that the U.S. air transportation system sets the world standard for safety and efficiency now and in the future,” said Capt. John Prater, ALPA's president. “Capt. Babbitt’s decisive leadership will position the FAA to take aggressive action to modernize our country’s antiquated airspace in the face of air traffic demand that is sure to escalate as the economy improves.”

Babbitt’s keen understanding of the airline industry is rooted in his experience as an airline pilot, union president, aviation consultant, and a member of numerous government and industry advisory committees. He began his career with Eastern Airlines and served two terms as president of ALPA. In 1993, Babbitt served the country as a Presidential appointee for the National Commission to Ensure a Strong Competitive Airline Industry. He was also a Presidential appointee to the FAA Management Advisory Council, created by the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996.

In 2008, Babbitt was named by then U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters to an independent review team of aviation and safety experts tasked with evaluating and crafting recommendations to improve the FAA’s implementation of the aviation safety system and its safety culture.

“Capt. Babbitt knows what it’s like to serve as the pilot in command of an airliner and is intimately familiar with all aspects of the regulatory and industry framework,” said Prater. “He will develop a flight plan to guide the FAA into the future.”

ALPA is the world’s largest non-governmental safety organization. “ALPA’s leaders and hundreds of safety representatives eagerly await the opportunity to roll up our sleeves alongside Capt. Babbitt and his team and get down to the business of moving our aviation system forward for the benefit of all who depend on it,” concluded Prater.

The Colgan Air accident: Don't draw conclusions from incomplete information

Yesterday the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a factual update about last month's Colgan Air Dash 8-Q400 accident near Buffalo. The NTSB update provided fodder for a new round of speculation by the news media regarding what may have caused Flight 3407 to crash on February 12, 2009. Last month those stories focused on icing; now the media spotlight has shifted to actions by the crew.

But hey, folks: we still have only bits and pieces of the story. The investigation is still underway, and -- more to the point -- it is only in its early stages. The NTSB is still collecting and collating a massive amount of data - about the aircraft and its systems; about the crew, their actions during the accident flight, their backgrounds and training; about operations, maintenance procedures and training practices of the carrier; and about environmental conditions aloft on the night of the crash. The latest update gives us a peek at a few more data points among the thousands that will be considered, but does not draw conclusions. Neither should the press.

I think this is the underlying message in a statement issued yesterday by Colgan Air in response to the latest NTSB update. Here is that statement:

We welcome the update from the NTSB on the progress of this investigation. As the report clearly indicates, there is still no definitive conclusion as to what caused this accident. It remains an active investigation and one with which we are cooperating thoroughly.

It’s important not to jump to conclusions, and instead focus on what is factual and released by the investigating team at the NTSB. Nothing in today’s announcement pinpoints a cause nor does it offer theories on a cause, as was suggested in some news reports. Again, the only absolute fact is that we do not know the cause of this accident.

We look forward to discussing recommendations the NTSB may have that could make our industry even safer. We stand by our FAA-certified crew training programs which meet or exceed the regulatory requirements for all major airlines and include training on emergency situations. When our crews fly our aircraft, we believe, and the FAA has certified, that our crews are prepared to handle emergency situations they might face.

It is tempting to infer probable cause from isolated facts in NTSB updates, but all of us would do well to remember that we do not yet know all the facts. We were not on the flight deck of the accident aircraft; we have not heard the contents of the cockpit voice recorder; we have not seen all the data from the flight data recorder; we have not examined all the debris from the aircraft - and even if we had heard and seen all of the above, we -- like the NTSB, at this point -- still would not be able to conclusively state the cause for this accident.

Once the NTSB assembles and models all of the data and information they have collected, they will issue a comprehensive final report that will make public their conclusions regarding probable cause. In addition, they will likely make one or more safety recommendations intended to correct a flaw, refine a procedure, or supplement crew training so that a similar accident can be avoided in the future.

Armchair accident investigators -- in the media and elsewhere -- would do well to learn and acknowledge that there is very rarely a single item than can be isolated as a causal event. Instead, accidents result from the interaction of a host of conditions, decisions, actions, and reactions, known colloquially as the Swiss Cheese Model. It is the job of the NTSB to figure out how it was that the holes in the Swiss Cheese slices lined up, allowing the accident to happen. This can't be discerned by examining one slice at a time.

We all can guess what might have caused an accident, and in the end, some of us will have guessed correctly.  But until all of the details and data are known, we cannot -- and should not -- present our guesses about probable cause as if they were facts.

RELATED: Click here to view all posts about Colgan Air Flt 3407 on Aircrew Buzz.

Colgan Air Flt. 3407 crash near Buffalo: New info from NTSB

Earlier today, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released new information from their ongoing investigation of last month's crash of a Colgan Air Dash 8-Q400 near Buffalo. Readers will recall that the aircraft, operating as a Continental Connection flight between Newark and Buffalo, crashed during an instrument approach to runway 23 at the Buffalo-Niagara International Airport on February 12, 2009, killing all 49 people on board, and one person on the ground.

We'll get to the new factual information about the aircraft, etc., in a minute, but first, I want to point out something that immediately jumped out at me when I read through today's news release from the NTSB, in which the Board also announced plans to hold a public hearing in Washington regarding this accident. The hearing, which is scheduled for May 12-14, 2009, "will cover a wide range of safety issues including: icing effect on the airplane’s performance, cold weather operations, sterile cockpit rules, crew experience, fatigue management, and stall recovery training," says the NTSB.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Sterile cockpit rules? What the heck was on that Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR)? Nothing about the CVR's content -- not even a partial transcript -- has been revealed publicly to date. I can't imagine that they would specifically mention 'sterile cockpit rules' unless there was a reason.

Fatigue management? That phrase gave me a start as well, as did the mention of crew experience and stall recovery training. In fact,I can't help but notice that the "wide range of safety issues" actually is loaded with a wide range of human factors issues. Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

Now, about the aircraft. Today's NTSB update provides the following factual information about Flight 3407:

A preliminary examination of the airplane systems has revealed no indication of pre-impact system failures or anomalies. Investigators will perform additional examinations on the dual distribution valves installed in the airplane’s de-ice system. The de-ice system removes ice accumulation from the leading edges of the wings, horizontal tail, and vertical tail through the use of pneumatic boots. The dual distribution valves, which transfer air between the main bleed air distribution ducts and the pneumatic boots, were removed from the airplane for the examination.

The airplane maintenance records have been reviewed and no significant findings have been identified at this time.

The ATC group has completed a review of recordings of controller communications with the flight crew during the accident flight and conducted interviews with air traffic controllers on duty at the time of the accident. The group has no further work planned at this time.

Further review of the weather conditions on the night of the accident revealed the presence of variable periods of snow and light to moderate icing during the accident airplane’s approach to the Buffalo airport.

Examination of the FDR data and preliminary evaluation of airplane performance models shows that some ice accumulation was likely present on the airplane prior to the initial upset event, but that the airplane continued to respond as expected to flight control inputs throughout the accident flight. The FDR data also shows that the stall warning and protection system, which includes the stick shaker and stick pusher, activated at an airspeed and angle-of-attack (AOA) consistent with that expected for normal operations when the de-ice protection system is active. The airplane’s stick shaker will normally activate several knots above the actual airplane stall speed in order to provide the flight crew with a sufficient safety margin and time to initiate stall recovery procedures. As a result of ice accumulation on the airframe, an airplane’s stall airspeed increases. To account for this potential increase in stall speed in icing conditions, the Dash 8-Q400’s stall warning system activates at a higher airspeed than normal when the de-ice system is active in-flight to provide the flight crew with adequate stall warning if ice accumulation is present.

Preliminary airplane performance modeling and simulation efforts indicate that icing had a minimal impact on the stall speed of the airplane. The FDR data indicates that the stick shaker activated at 130 knots, which is consistent with the de-ice system being engaged. FDR data further indicate that when the stick shaker activated, there was a 25-pound pull force on the control column, followed by an up elevator deflection and increase in pitch, angle of attack, and Gs. The data indicate a likely separation of the airflow over the wing and ensuing roll two seconds after the stick shaker activated while the aircraft was slowing through 125 knots and while at a flight load of 1.42 Gs. The predicted stall speed at a load factor of 1 G would be about 105 knots. Airplane performance work is continuing.

Further to the crew issues, the NTSB said:

Since returning from on-scene, the Operations & Human performance group have conducted additional interviews with flight crew members who had recently flown with and/or provided instruction to the accident crew, as well as personnel at Colgan Air responsible for providing training of flight crews and overseeing the management and safety operations at the airline. The group also conducted interviews with FAA personnel responsible for oversight of the Colgan certificate, which included the Principal Operations Inspector (POI) and aircrew program manager for the Dash 8 Q-400. The team has also continued its review of documentation, manuals, and other guidance pertaining to the operation of the Dash 8 Q-400 and training materials provided to the Colgan Air flight crews.

The Operations & Human Performance group continues to investigate and review documentation associated with the flight crew’s flight training history and professional development during their employment at Colgan as well as prior to joining the company.

By the way, there was some good news about the crew. Toxicology reports were negative for alcohol and illicit drugs for both pilots.

RELATED: Click here to view all posts about Colgan Air Flt 3407 on Aircrew Buzz.

FedEx identifies pilots who died in Narita MD-11 accident

FedEx has announced the identities of the two pilots who lost their lives in the crash of an MD-11 aircraft at Tokyo's Narita International Airport on March 23, 2009.

They are:

• Captain Kevin Kyle Mosley, 54
• Hometown: Hillsboro, Oregon
• Total career flight hours: 12,800
• Joined FedEx Express on May 1, 1996

• First Officer Anthony Stephen Pino, 49
• Hometown: San Antonio, Texas
• Total career flight hours: 6,300
• Joined FedEx Express on July 10, 2006

These crew members were the only two people on board FedEx Flight 80 at the time of the accident.

Condolences to their families, flying partners and friends, and to FedEx.

Pilatus PC-12 crash in Montana kills all on board

A Pilatus PC-12 single-engine turboprop aircraft (registration N128CM) crashed earlier today near Butte, Montana. According to news reports, the aircraft was preparing to land at Butte's Bert Mooney Airport, but impacted the ground about 500 feet short of the runway. The aircraft caught fire, and all on board are said to have perished.

A short time ago, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a press statement that said that the accident occurred at approximately 15:00 MDT on March 22, 2009. The NTSB statement noted that the aircraft crashed into a cemetery while on approach to the airport. The NTSB has dispatched a 'Go Team' to Butte to investigate the accident.

It is unclear exactly how many people were on board the aircraft, but various news reports said that a number of the passengers were children. News reports say that the aircraft was en route from Oroville, CA to Bozeman, MT, but that it diverted to Butte for unknown reasons. The origin and intended destination of the accident flight have not been confirmed by official sources.

UPDATE Mar. 23, 2009: It has been confirmed that there were 14 people on board the Pilatus PC-12 aircraft that crashed yesterday at Butte, Montana. Most of the seven adults and seven small children were members of the extended family of Dr. Irving 'Bud' Feldkamp III, of Redlands, CA, who leased the plane. All those on board perished.

The pilot, who also died in the accident, was identified as Bud Summerfield, from Highland, CA. He reportedly flew the Feldkamp family for about 10 years. An article about the accident on a Los Angeles Times blog quoted a surviving member of the Feldkamp family, who said about the pilot, “He is accomplished and careful, dotting his `i's' and crossing his 't's' and filing his flight plans. If you were in the position to hire a pilot, this is the guy you would hire. We called him Air Bud. My wife has flown with him. There are none better.”

Condolences to the families and friends of all those who perished in this accident.

RELATED: NTSB: Preliminary report on Pilatus PC-12 crash in Montana - Apr. 3, 2009