AircraftNews.Com

In the recent press it has been announced that the Victorian state Government has engaged the services of a DC 10 water bomber. Little detail has been release on the nature of the arrangements but it is a good start for the introduction of heavy metal into the fire bombing stakes here in Oz. the DC 10 is in the 11000 category simlar to the IL76 gallon but has a pressurized water load and can carry fire retardant which should assist its effectivness. A lot of observers are seeing the up coming fire season as having the makings of a horror event. It would be good to over react rather than under react. Of the other options, Various people conversant with the 747 have opined that it could easily manage the maneuvering required and the reports of the benefit of the IL76 in the Spanish fires are very enthusiastic. Some water scooping Amphibians would also be pretty good. Let us hope what is available is matched with what is required and the not invented here attitude does not prevail.
We wait with trepidation.

There is a saying that if one slowly heats a pot of water with a live frog in it the frog will go to sleep and not get out and so get cooked whereas if he is dropped into a hot pot he will leap out. So it is in many situations in life. We have it in aviation where slowly evolving situations get way past a point where some action should be taken because each development is incremental and not so different from the last situation. So it is with Airbus pitots and standby instruments and now with Flight 188 overflying its destination I think we have the same thing. It does not really matter if they went to sleep or lost track of time there was considerable potential for trouble. Much has been made of the poor match of the human physiology and performance and yet steadily the man is being taken out of the loop in flying so that such things can happen. An extraordinary number of RPT flights pass uneventfully but where a trend emerges it should be addressed. Ground control is now possible and studies should be made, discussed and decisions taken. Pilots do not have to leave the cockpit. It is just another logical progression. The Helios tragedy where apparently a cabin crew member was walking about with a portable O2 system but unable to enter the cockpit is another situation where ground control could have saved hundreds. The reasons why this has not happened are many and various and to do with how aviation has evolved a rigid and inflexible regulatory process. Vested interests are many but it is mainly a sort of general inertia and no one has had the courage really to say come on guys wake up or more to the point, hear those who have been saying such. As usual there will be wails of technical difficulty and cost but it seems clear that it is going to be a small cost in the long-term and long over due for considerations. Maybe the risk of different sort of hostile take over is behind the resistance but we seem to find ways to trust our fellow men in many other situations. Why not? Read more…

ATC is complex and resistant to computerization as many failed attempts to introduce advance automation into ATC has shown. Despite this the need to remove human error and to optimize trajectories which will over time lead to massive fuel and cost savings as well as efficiencies and time savings for the consumer has meant that the goal has been doggedly pursued. Numerous trials of various systems have taken place and are still talking place. Modern FMS and autothrottle and autopilot systems now permit such precise management of cruising speed that the time is now deemed by many to have come for the NextGen ATC which will provide these efficiencies.
In an announcement on 21st of August the FAA and Embry Riddle said that the dimension of time would be introduced into a demonstration of flight management. Read more…

A new system to help guide pilots away from severe storms and turbulence in remote ocean regions is being developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., NASA said this week. NASA is funding the development of a prototype that should be ready for testing next year. The system combines satellite data and computer weather models with artificial intelligence techniques to identify and predict rapidly evolving storms and other potential areas of turbulence. “Turbulence is the leading cause of injuries in commercial aviation,” said John Haynes, program manager at NASA headquarters, in Washington. “This new work to detect the likelihood of turbulence associated with oceanic storms using key space-based indicators is of crucial importance to pilots.” Turbulence has been cited widely as a possible factor in the recent loss of Air France 447 in the Atlantic Ocean, but it is not yet clear what role, if any, it played in that accident.

The prototype system will identify areas of turbulence in clear regions of the atmosphere as well as within storms. Pilots on selected transoceanic routes will receive real-time turbulence updates and provide feedback. When the system is finalized, it will provide pilots and ground-based controllers with text-based maps and graphical displays showing regions of likely turbulence and storms, NASA said. “Pilots currently have little weather information as they fly over remote stretches of the ocean, which is where some of the worst turbulence occurs,” said scientist John Williams, one of the project leads at NCAR. “Providing pilots with at least an approximate picture of developing storms could help guide them safely around areas of potentially severe turbulence.” Click here for the full NASA news release, which includes to a link to related graphics.
From Avweb http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1411-full.html#200686

Read more…

Probably the most important outcome of the ATSB investigation into the Lockhart River Metro crash is the recommendation for a redesign of the RW 12 GNSS NPA. This is a result of recognising that GPWS terrain warnings could still arise even if the approach was flown within correct tolerances. Repeated spurious warnings can lead to crew becoming complacent in the face of such warnings. If they then decide to ignore the warnings the purpose of the system is obviated. The situation could even be aggravated because the crew might well believe they are still protected. This is a good example of the traps of designing your own approach and that is what a crew would be doing if they were to decide to ignore the GPWS alerts.