Boeing to acquire Vought operations in South Carolina

It is official now.

Boeing announced today that it has agreed to acquire the business and operations conducted by Vought Aircraft Industries at its South Carolina facility, where Vought builds a key structure for Boeing's 787 Dreamliner airplane. The transaction is expected to close by the third quarter of this year.

The Vought facility, located in North Charleston, performs fabrication and assembly of structures and systems installation of 787 aft fuselage sections, which are made primarily of composite materials. After the transaction, Vought will continue its work on many Boeing programs, including other components of the 787, as well as structures and components on the 737, 747, 767, 777, C-17 and V-22 through operations located elsewhere.

Through the agreement, Boeing will acquire the North Charleston facility, its assets and inventory and will assume operation of the site, and the parties will resolve all matters related to Vought's prior work on the 787 program. The cash consideration to be paid to Vought at closing is approximately $580 million. In addition, Boeing will release Vought from its obligations to repay amounts previously advanced by Boeing. Separately, Boeing entered into new agreements with Vought for work packages on the 737, 777 and 787.

Flightblogger Jon Ostrower has done a comprehensive analysis on the reasons behind this move. I strongly recommend reading it.

Read more »

Bloopers of Air New Zealand's nude safety demonstration video "Bare Essentials"

Considering the importance of safety, Air New Zealand wanted to make sure people were paying attention to their safety announcements and developed this very ingenious safety video with crew wearing nothing but body paint. Air New Zealand's nude safety demonstration video "Bare Essentials" took the internet by storm.



Hopefully you have recovered from the weekend and have settled in to your work and you enjoy this bloopers reel of "Bare Essentials".

Read more »

Air France #AF447: BEA initial report; real-time transmission of flight data

A lot has been interpreted over France's Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA) initial findings in to the crash of Air France AF-447 from Rio to Paris.

I do not want to add to the interpretation. Two good starting points for Bangalore Aviation readers.

1. The official initial report of the BEA which can be downloaded in PDF format here.
2. Simon Hradeck's analysis at Aviation Herald, which in my humble opinion is one of most comprehensive.

A lot has been made of the 25 ACARS messages that were received from the Airbus A330 airplane F-GZCP, since it is the only indication available of what MAY have happened. The official report goes in-depth in to most of these messages, what were the indications in the cockpit, and what is the meaning.

The on-going search for the two "black boxes" -- the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) and Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR)will be suspended on July 10th.

The demand for answers, the lack of locating the black boxes and the improvements in satellite and wireless communications technology have prompted calls for exploration of real time downloading of flight data and cockpit voice recordings to ground stations.

Airbus has launched a study for reinforcing flight data recovery, including, but not limited to, extended data transmission for commercial airliners, so that in the event of accidents, critical flight information can still be recovered and released to the investigating authorities.

Tom Enders, President and CEO of Airbus commented:

"Gathering information from accidents is vitally important to further improve the safety of flying. Various technical means for reinforcing flight data recovery and data transmission to ground centres are principally available. We will now study different options for viable commercial solutions, including those where our experience with real-time data transmission from our own test aircraft could support the further development of such solutions."

The study will be conducted by Patrick Gavin, Head of Airbus Engineering, and Charles Champion, Head of Customer Services, and will need to address technological issues as well as data protection and privacy concerns. Airbus will include industrial partners, research institutions, and international airworthiness and investigation authorities in this study.

Historically, the few air tragedies that have occurred, have led to large leaps in safety. While the study launched by Airbus may result in such a leap, we should caution ourselves against expecting too much. Existing air-to-ground links do not offer the bandwidth that would be needed for full real-time transmission of all the data stored in the DFDR and CVR. We also have to keep in mind the cost aspects of implementing such a system considering the fact that air travel is still the safest mode of transport and that in the very few cases of accidents, almost all times the DFDR and CVR are recovered.

It is ultimately a balance between the costs of implementing an upgrade versus the liability costs of an accident, and as much as I am hating writing this, history has repeatedly shown us that the bean counters always run the show; be it airlines or aerospace manufacturers.

Read more »

Audio Podcast: Air India on the skids

As per media reports, civil aviation minister Mr. Praful Patel announced in Chennai yesterday, there would be no job cuts despite the hugely over-bloated workforce at Air India.

This is precisely the political meddling and easy options approach that I had warned about in my earlier article.

Mr. Patel, if you are unable to help Air India management, at least please step out of the way and not hinder their efforts.

I have recorded an audio postcast with Addison Schonland of Innovation Analysis Group (IAG) on the state of Air India. Please give it a listen and do post your views via a comment.

Air India on the skids

IAGblog Podcasts

Read more »

Mumbai airport runway shut down

A Saudi Arabian Boeing 747-300 registration HZ-AIT performing flight SV-744 from Jeddah via Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to Mumbai, India, burst the number 2 and 3 tyres of the left hand main gear while landing on runway 27 at 18:24 (12:54Z) in heavy monsoon rains.

Since the aircraft was heavily loaded, it was stopped on taxiway N8 and passengers were disembarked normally by stairs and taken by bus to the terminal. The plane was towed to the terminal. The main runway 27 was shut down at 18:30 (13:00Z) till 19:06 (13:36Z) while the airport workers checked and collected debris.

Being a peak hour, a number of flights would have been diverted if they had insufficient fuel to remain in a holding patten. We would estimate around 10 flights.

METARS
VABB 041240Z 26008KT 0300 R27/0570 +RA SCT008 SCT015 FEW025TCU OVC080 25/25 Q0999 NOSIG
VABB 041410Z 21010KT 0300 R27/0900 +RA SCT008 SCT012 FEW025TCU OVC080 25/25 Q1000 NOSIG

Earlier weather forced Cathay Pacific flight CX-685 from Hong Kong to Mumbai to perform a "go-around" and land safely at 18:03 local as well as a Kingfisher Airlines flight IT-2138 from Thiruvananthapuram to Mumbai which landed safely just before the runway was shut down.

Read more »

Official report of Presidential helicopter near miss at Mumbai in February

The Joint Investigation team constituted on February 19, 2009 to investigate the serious incident of a near miss between the Presidential Indian Air Force (IAF) helicopter and a Air India flight IC-866 on February 9, 2009 at Mumbai airport has submitted it report to the Ministry of Civil Aviation.

To translate the official findings (shown below), the Presidential formation called Pratap (comprising of three helicopters Pratap 1, Pratap 2 and Pratap 3) landed on the active runway without reference to or permission from the Air Traffic Controllers causing the Air India Airbus A321 VT-PPV to perform a high speed take-off reject.

As in this article by 737 instructor pilot Captain A. Ranganathan, the team has also criticised the lack of modern recording and safety equipment like DFDR (Digital Flight Data Recorder), CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder), GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System), TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) on many Indian Air Force equipment.

The lack of such equipment on many official government aircraft is widespread and was also considered responsible for another near miss between an Ilyushin IL-76MD and an Air India flight just two days after the Mumbai incident. It was later discovered that the IL-76 did not belong to the Indian Air Force but the Aviation Research Centre which is directly under the Prime Minister’s Office. There is no release of information on that incident.

With apologies in advance for the plethora of acronyms, the findings of the Committee were:

• Pilot of IC-866 were appropriately licensed and aircraft was airworthy and maintained as per the Regulations of DGCA.
• Pilots of the IAF helicopter were authorized as per Indian Air Force Regulations and Helicopter was maintained as per Regulations and was airworthy.
• Air Traffic Control Officers (ATCOs) on duty had proper expertise and rating of their units.
• Weather at Mumbai airport at the time of incident was not suitable for VFR [Visual Flight Rules] Operations but it is not considered as a contributory factor.
• The coordination among various agencies was unsatisfactory and coordination meeting was not carried out as per the existing instructions.
• There is no common SOP [Standard Operating Procedure] between the Indian Air Force [IAF] and Airports Authority of India [AAI] for VVIP [Very Very Important Persons] operations.
• RT reporting procedure for formation is not satisfactorily documented. There was a difference of opinion between Airports Authority of India [AAI] and Indian Air Force [IAF] on procedure to be followed.
• Transfer of control from approach to Tower should have been earlier.
• Helicopter was given direct routing from INS Shikra (Kunjali) to Mumbai which was as per the regulations.
• There was a difference of opinion and understanding about the VFR circuit to be followed especially for Helicopters between Indian Air Force and Airports Authority of India.
• No closure of airport is required for VVIP flights at present as per the instructions of Home Ministry. VVIP flights are however to be given priority landing. There was a lack of common understanding on the concept of priority landing between AAI and IAF.
• IC-866 rejected take off at high speed after sighting Helicopter on the side of Runway and turned to taxi track ‘W’ to avoid direct collision with the Helicopter which was in front of him at distance of 30-40 meters.
• MI-8 and MI-17 Helicopters are not equipped with FDR and other safety equipments which are installed on civil version of these Helicopters.
• Pratap formation (all three helicopters) landed without landing clearance from ATC.
• According to the Committee the following factors can be attributed to the serious incident. These factors are listed according to sequence of events and not in terms of gravity:
• Unsatisfactory coordination among various agencies, involved in the incident.
• The late transfer of control of aircraft from approach to tower.
• Landing of Pratap 2 directly at the place of landing on Runway 27 by making a very short circuit.
• Landing of Pratap 2 without landing clearance from ATC even before Pratap formation reported the finals.
• Landing Pratap 1 and Pratap 3 without landing clearance.

In typical bureaucratic form the recommendations of the Committee are wide-spread, with no central agency responsible, and no fixed time frame for implementation.

• The instructions given in the Home Ministry’s Bluebook for coordination procedure should be strictly followed and all Members be invited for Coordination Meetings. The minutes of meeting should be documented and circulated to all concerned for compliance.
• Last minute local changes, if required, can be carried out after consultations among Aerodrome Operator, ATC, IAF and Security Agencies which should be documented and should be duly informed to Protocol Department of State Government.
• Airport Level coordination Meeting should be conducted to discuss the operational issues between AAI, IAF, DGCA [Directorate General of Civil Aviation] and Security agencies.
• Ministry of Home Affairs should send a copy of Bluebook to AAI in case it is not done at present. Based on the same, AAI will make internal confidential circulars for use of their own officers.
• AAI and Indian Air Force shall designate senior level officers for effective coordination for VVIP movements.
• AAI shall issue a Standard Operating Procedure for handling of VVIP flights incorporating all instructions already issued, to make a comprehensive document. IAF and AAI will mutually share SOPs.
• An Airport specific Standard Operating Procedure for VVIP movement in case of AAI managed airports be prepared by AAI and will be approved by AAI headquarters. In respect of IAF airfields, the Standard Operating Procedure shall be prepared and approved by IAF. For private airports, the Standard Operating Procedure for VVIP movement will be prepared by aerodrome Operator and shall be approved by DGCA. The standard operating procedure so prepared will be used by Indian Air Force, Airports Authority of India and Aerodrome operator jointly, covering all phases of operations. This task may be accomplished at the earliest.
• The two organizations namely IAF and AAI should exchange, documents in connection with VVIP flights whenever required.
• Priority landing and privileges attached with it may be defined and documented.
• Issue regarding routing, special VFR, position reporting etc. should be discussed and resolved at Airport Level Committee 24-48 hours before commencement of VVIP flights.
• The formation shall report position of lead Helicopter even during entering the aerodrome circuit or for asking permission for landing. However, vacation report of runway etc. will be that of last Helicopter. This procedure should be documented by Indian Air Force and Airports Authority of India in respective Standard Operating Procedures and in common Standard Operating Procedure, for correct understanding of procedure.
• Helicopters and aircraft used for VVIP flights must have a DFDR, CVR with multi channels, GPWS, TCAS and other safety equipments used on similar civil aircraft/helicopters, once these equipments are installed, regular monitoring of these flights be carried out on the lines of FOQA (Flight operations quality assurance), by other airlines for safety oversight.
• The Helicopter Committee set up by MOCA/DGCA [Ministry of Civil Aviation/Directorate General of Civil Aviation] should expedite identification of landing places for Helicopter at Delhi and Mumbai and to work out the traffic circuit for Helicopters.
• Till the time the above recommendation is implemented, all Helicopters will report finals at the beginning of Runway and thereafter land at desired spot on the runway. This should be immediately documented and circulated by both Indian Air Force and Airports Authority of India.
• Three minutes before and after ETA/ETD of VVIP operations, airspace should be closed. This closure should be informed by issuing a NOTAM.
• Existing Regulations of aircraft landing only after obtaining permission from ATC units should be strictly enforced and circulated to all concerned including pilots of VVIP flights.
• The Airport Committee comprising AAI, IAF and Aerodrome Operator should work out airport specific operational issues 24-48 hours before actual operations of VVIP flights.
• The existing laid down procedure for missed approach will remain in-force. However, the consequences of missed approach on the security, health and other aspect of VVIP on board need separate examination. In this regard MOCA in consultation with MHA may examine this aspect to asses whether any other procedure can be evolved in such an eventuality of missed approach.
• The committee re-emphasizes that Transfer of control from Approach to Tower and vice versa, should be followed strictly as per ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organisation] DOC 4444.
• Visual surveillance before landing, especially for VFR flights should be re-emphasized on all aircrew members and ATCO.

The report has been accepted by the Ministry of Civil Aviation.

Read more »

FedEx fails to deliver -- We're no worse than the other guy

With great anticipation I was waiting for my birthday gift to come to India. A Nikkor AFS VR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF lens. Considered one of the finest lenses made by Nikon. Thanks to FedEx, I will not have it.

My brother in law was leaving the US for India on Tuesday afternoon, and having saved up some money, I somehow found a piece at an online store based in Spokane, WA, Onecall.

While taking the order, the sales representative mis-entered the destination ZIP code as 10016 instead of 10017. This one dgit was the start of my woes. My mistake tha I did not observe it in the order acknowledgement.

The shipment was by FedEx priority overnight service which was to be guaranteed delivery by 10:30am.

Come 10:30am there was no sign of the shipment. At 12:33pm EDT, two hours after the deadline, I get an automated "delivery exception" indicating the address was wrong.

Tracking number: 924232035865
Reason Delivery Not Completed
1. Incorrect address - Street name/number;
Recommended Action
Contact us to provide correct delivery address and/or additional delivery information.;

Please do not respond to this message. This email was sent from an unattended
mailbox. This report was generated at approximately 11:33 AM CDT
on 06/30/2009.

Of course, the "contact us" hyper-link only connects to the generic FedEx "contact us" page.

On researching and finally speaking to a FedEx customer service representative, I was told there was an error in the ZIP code. I pointed out, only the last digit was different, and the destination phone number was on the label, and was informed that normally FedEx looks at "wrongly addressed" packages only after 24 hours, even in the case of Priority Overnight shipments.

I was further told that FedEx did me a favour by tracing the error and bringing the package to their station on W. 42nd Street (the delivery address was on E. 44th Street) on the same day. The earliest they could assure delivery was "before 8pm" by which time my brother in law would be over the Atlantic ocean.

Remembering my association with FedEx for the past 25 years, I could not believe that FedEx has degraded to such a level.

What happened to all the fancy automated address checking system that FedEx has built in to their software and their FedEx Address Checker website. Since the Onecall store used an automated FedEx shipping system (the FedEx customer service manager Ms. Stormy Ayler told me), would the system not have alerted the store when preparing the shipment? or at least the package pick-up driver while collecting and scanning the package? or the receiving station? or all the many stations, locations, and systems that my package would have gone through?

Considering it is a Priority Overnight shipment (one of the most expensive services FedEx offers), one would safely assume FedEx will also have priority resolution systems in place in line with the high prices charged. If they had informed either my brother in law or me just one hour earlier, he could have gone to the station and collected it.

Worst case if someone looked at the package, it had the destination phone number and a phone call would have resolved the problem immediately.

Doing me a favour? Sorry FedEx, a vendor never does a customer a favour. It is the other way around. Study the Japanese phrase "O Kyaku sama wah Kami sama desh" simply translated in English -- Customer is equal to God.

With the FedEx approach I experienced, may be they should change their motto -- We're no worse than the other guy.

....and the store, Onecall. They tried to convince FedEx and failed. They recalled the shipment, but will not refund my money till the package reaches them; effectively holding me financially responsible for a package which never reached me. Not a good way to build trust.

Mistakes happen, no doubt about it -- it is how well, seamlessly, and quickly the correction is done that separates the good organisations from the great.

In our modern hectic world, we seem to have forgotten the simple old-school rules of doing business one of which says, 69% of customers leave because of an attitude of indifference exhibited by someone in the organisation; the second which says no written agreement can beat a look in the eye, the spoken word, and a firm handshake; and the third which says it costs 10 times as much to gain a new customer than to retain one.

Read more »

News Brief: GoAir increases Bangalore flights; Kingfisher delays results; Air India analysis; SpiceJet appoints new CFO

Go Air increases Bangalore flights.

GoAir recently inducted it's eighth Airbus A320-214, most likely VT-WAK. (Despite follow up the airline's media partner could not give me the information.)

After a complete withdrawal from Bangalore, GoAir has re-focussed on Bangalore with two new connections to Mumbai and New Delhi, taking the airline's total number of weekly flights to 377.

With the addition of the new connections the airline will now have four flights between Bangalore and Delhi, two flights from Bangalore to Mumbai and three flights from Mumbai to Bangalore.

GoAir has also introduced new flight timings for the Ahmedabad, Delhi, Mumbai and Bangalore sectors. Full details are on the GoAir website.

Kingfisher delays release of financial results

Adding fuel to the ongoing fire of speculation, Kingfisher Airlines released this press statement.

“The Kingfisher Board met as scheduled today in Mumbai. However, the consideration of the audited financial statements for the year ended 31-Mar-2009 has been deferred since the Audit Committee meeting for consideration of the audited annual financial results, could not be held as the quorum requisite was not present with the Audit Committee Chairman who met with an unfortunate injury resulting in a fractured leg, also unable to attend.

The Audit Committee and Board Meetings for consideration of the audited annual financial results will be held at the earliest possible opportunity.”

Kingfisher is one of the three publicly listed airlines and therefore was to have released it's financials on or before June 30th. The other two airlines Jet Airways and SpiceJet have released their results.

Air India analysis

The Mint newspaper (a venture of Hindustan Times and the Wall Street Journal) had an excellent article over the weekend titled "Once maharaja of the skies Air India now struggles to fly". I strongly recommend reading it.

SpiceJet appoints Seema Chandra as Chief Financial Officer

SpiceJet Limited announced the appointment of Seema Chandra as it's Chief Financial Officer with effect from today.

Seema brings with her over 25 years of solid, stable work experience having worked with large corporate including HT Media, Nestle India Limited and Ranbaxy Limited. Her last assignment was as the Chief Financial Officer of Mascon Global Limited.

She is a graduate of Lady Shri Ram College of Commerce, and an M.B.A. from Delhi University’s Faculty of Management Studies with a Major in Finance.

Read more »