The wing of an Airbus A350 struck the tail of Endeavor Bombardier CRJ-900, shearing it off. 

The CRJ-900 was operated by Endeavor Air, a Delta subsidiary, according to AirlineGeeks.com.

According to a spokesperson from Delta, the Airbus was taxiing out when it made contact with the smaller jet on an adjacent runway, “resulting in damage to the tail of the regional jet and the wing of the A350.”

The impact “resulted in the vertical and horizontal stabilizer of the CRJ being severed from the aircraft,” a spokesperson from the FAA told FLYING. The agency, along with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), is investigating the accident.

No injuries were reported on either flight. The Airbus, which was en route as DL295 to Tokyo-Haneda Airport (RJTT) had 221 on board while the CRJ-900 headed to Lafayette, Louisiana, had 56 on board. Both aircraft returned to the terminal and the customers rebooked on other flights.

Photographs on social media show the tail of the CRJ900 torn from its vertical position and laying across the empennage of the aircraft.

The post Delta Jets Damaged After Collision on Taxiway in Atlanta appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Runway Occupancy Awareness (ROA) is a software solution that uses Surface Indications and Alert (SURF-IA) technology to warn a pilot about a potential conflict from either an aircraft or ground vehicle, giving the flight crew enough time to take evasive action to avoid a collision.

How It Works

According to Garmin, ROA analyzes aircraft GPS and ADS-B traffic information resulting in enhanced situational awareness. This helps avoid runway and taxiway incursions in the busy and confusing airport environment, especially during low-light situations or during inclement weather when visibility is compromised.

• READ MORE: We Fly: Garmin Autoland for the Beechcraft King Air 200

Crews are alerted of a possible event in time for them to take prompt and corrective action, according to the company.

“With the rate of runway incursions increasing, there is a real need for increased safety tools in the cockpit,” said Phil Straub, Garmin executive vice president and managing director of aviation ROA technology. “Equipping pilots with this technology can reduce the risk of runway incursions and help provide confidence for pilots navigating busy and complex airports.” 

Textron Aviation received the initial FAA certification for ROA on the G1000-equipped Cessna Caravan. Garmin expects to obtain FAA certification for ROA in its G5000 STC for Cessna Citation Excel, XLS, XLS+ and XLS Gen2 by next month. 

• READ MORE: Honeywell Demonstrates SURF-A Runway Incursion Avoidance Tech

Certification for more Garmin-equipped aircraft is expected to follow in the coming months, according to the company.

ROA is initially available on select Garmin-integrated flight decks, ranging from G1000 NXi- to G5000-equipped aircraft serving the broad general and business aviation markets.

“We think it is important for the entire aviation industry to know this technology exists and is available in Garmin-integrated flight decks,” a Garmin spokesperson said. “Our flight decks serve general aviation, business aviation, helicopters, defense, and advanced air mobility, and we feel the entire industry will benefit from more aircraft having this technology. For aircraft equipped with a Garmin integrated flight, which includes ADS-B, this is a software upgrade.”

• READ MORE: FAA Investing $100M in Bid to Curb Runway Incursions

Visual, Aural Warnings

Garmin ROA provides visual crew-alerting system (CAS) caution and warning annunciations to the pilot’s primary flight display (PFD) on Garmin’s Synthetic Vision Technology (SVT) in either yellow or red depending on the level of threat. Warning annunciations appear on the SafeTaxi map while simultaneously appearing on the multifunction window.

The flight crews get both visual and aural alerts, ranging from no immediate collision hazard to a warning level alert where a collision risk could occur within 15 seconds.

The crew will be warned when there is traffic landing, taking off, stopped, or taxiing on the aircraft’s runway. Warnings are also issued when traffic is on approach to the aircraft’s runway or a runway that crosses the aircraft’s runway, or on the runway where the aircraft is holding.

ROA is the next level of Garmin’s other Terminal Safety Solutions, such as Runway Overrun Awareness and Alerting System (ROAAS), Garmin SafeTaxi, and Garmin SurfaceWatch. This suite of software was created to improve and increase situational awareness during ground operations.

The post Garmin Launches Software to Warn of Potential Runway Incursions appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The captain of the Coast Guard aircraft—the only member of the six person crew who survived, told investigators he had been cleared onto the runway. 

However, according to LiveATC.net and transcripts of tower communications released by Japanese authorities, the last communication between the tower and the Coast Guard aircraft was for the de Havilland Canada DHC-8 to repeat the instructions “taxi to holding point.” The aircraft was supposed to hold until given a clearance to enter the active runway.

The Japanese Transport Ministry—Japan’s civil aviation authority and version of the FAA—released a transcript of the controller communications approximately 4 minutes and 25 seconds before the accident. There is no clear takeoff clearance given to the Coast Guard aircraft, although the approaching jet was advised there was a departing aircraft as the jet approached Runway 34R and was cleared to land. The JAL pilot reads back the instructions.

The accident happened just before 6 p.m. local time. It was dark, and security video of the event shot from the terminal shows the lights of the JAL on approach, but the smaller aircraft cannot be seen from the camera angle. An explosion and a fireball followed by the larger aircraft skidding down the runway on a bed of flames were the first indications that there had been an accident.

• READ MORE: Japan Airlines A350 and Earthquake Relief Dash 8 Collide on Runway

Passengers aboard the jet reported feeling a bump, as if the aircraft struck something, and then the aircraft filled with smoke. All 367 passengers and 12 crew aboard JAL flight were safely evacuated and able to run to safety.

JAL Flight 516 was a domestic flight from Sapporo and slated to land at 5:47 p.m. local time. The Japanese Coast Guard aircraft was bound for an airbase in Niigata to take part in relief efforts stemming from the 7.5-magnitude earthquake that struck the island nation on New Year’s Day, killing 48 and heavily damaging homes, commercial buildings, and infrastructure.

About the Airport

Haneda Airport, sometimes referred to as Tokyo International Airport, covers 3,716 acres and is located next to Tokyo Bay. The facility has four runways, Runway 16R/34L and 16L/34R, Runway 5/23, and Runway 4/22. The accident happened on Runway 34R. As part of the investigation, authorities are expected to scrutinize runway layout, markings, lighting, and signage.

The airport was established in the 1930s and militarized during World War II. At the end of the war, it became a U.S. Air Force Base. In 1952 the U.S. returned part of the property back to Japan, and it became the site for Tokyo International Airport. The airport is served by both international and domestic carriers.

The post Japanese ATC Recording Sheds Light on Runway Accident appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The assessment was commissioned by the agency following its March Safety Summit, which focused on a recent string of close calls at airports across the country. Conducted by an independent safety review team, the report covered the FAA’s internal safety processes, staffing levels and practices, facility and equipment needs, and funding.

Among its recommendations, the team called for the strengthening of FAA organizational structures, further investment in the hiring, training, and certification of personnel, and adequately and consistently funding and authorizing the agency.

• READ MORE: Rise in Aviation Mishaps Focus of FAA Safety Summit

“Generally, the ATO [Air Traffic Organization] employs robust policies, procedures, and programs to manage safety risk and enjoys a just safety culture,” the team said in its report. “However, the FAA continues to be asked to do more with less in an already strained system, and the series of serious incidents in early 2023 illuminate significant challenges to the provision and safety oversight of air traffic services. These challenges, in the areas of process integrity, staffing, and facilities, equipment, and technology, all have ties to inadequate, inconsistent funding.”

As part of its plan to address the safety review team’s recommendations, the FAA will no longer be requiring graduates of the Air Traffic-Collegiate Training Initiative (AT-CTI) Program to attend the agency’s Air Traffic Controller Academy prior to being assigned to an ATC facility. Graduates will still need to pass the Air Traffic Skills Assessment (ATSA) exam along with satisfying medical and security requirements. The FAA noted that it will be working with AT-CTI programs to ensure that graduates have the skills necessary to begin on-the-job training.

“Aviation is safe because we are continuously looking for ways to improve,” said FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker. “The independent safety review team made some excellent recommendations, and we are adopting some of them immediately.”

The FAA also announced a year-round hiring track aimed at bringing in “experienced controllers from the military and private industry.” In addition, it intends to increase classroom capacity at the FAA academy and expand advanced training across the country. Looking toward longer-term training needs, the agency plans to deploy tower simulator systems in 95 facilities by December 2025, the first of which is scheduled to open in Austin, Texas, by January 2024.

Finally, the FAA says reports from the Air Traffic Safety Oversight Service will be provided to the FAA administrator and Aviation Safety associate administrator with the goal of strengthening safety culture at the agency.

The post FAA Moves to Improve Controller Training, Safety Reporting appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

According to the agency, the Runway Incursion Mitigation Program grant money will be part of its annual distributions and fund projects such as reconfiguring taxiways that may be confusing, installing airfield lighting, and constructing new taxiways to provide more flexibility on the airfield. 

• READ MORE: FAA Establishes Independent Safety Review Panel

The funding comes in response to a string of close calls and several near-collisions that have plagued the aviation industry in recent months. The concerning incidents prompted the FAA to convene a rare safety summit in March where Acting Administrator Billy Nolen called for vigilance saying, “Recent events remind us that we must not become complacent. Now is the time to stare into the data and ask hard questions.”

But despite the onslaught of alarming events, FAA data shows the most serious close calls at U.S. airports are declining—even as overall incidents have risen. The runway incursion rate for the most serious incidents jumped in January to 0.98 per 1 million takeoffs and landings but fell to 0.44 in April, according to the agency.

Still, the FAA, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and industry officials agree that steps must be taken to improve safety. “There is no question that we are seeing too many close calls,” the FAA said in a recent memo to employees.

• READ MORE: FAA Establishes Independent Safety Review Panel

In announcing the investments, FAA Associate Administrator Shannetta Griffin said, “some airfields have complex layouts that can create confusion for pilots and other airport users. This funding will reconfigure complex taxiway and runway intersections to help prevent incursions and enhance the safety of the National Airspace System.”

Among the 12 recipients are San Diego International Airport (KSAN), which will receive $24 million to construct a new taxiway, eliminating the need for aircraft to back-taxi on the runway, and Arizona’s Tucson International Airport (KTUS), which will receive $33.1 million to construct a taxiway and shift and rebuild Runway 11R/29L to be farther away from a parallel runway. 

Other airports included in the funding are Harry Reid International Airport (KLAS) in Las Vegas, Nevada; Republic Airport (KFRG) in East Farmingdale, New York; Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport (KSJC) in California; Miami International Airport (KMIA); Pensacola International Airport (KPNS) in Florida; Prescott Regional Airport (KPRC) in Arizona; Abraham Lincoln Capital Airport (KSPI) in Springfield, Illinois; Bellingham International Airport (KBLI) in Washington; Waverly Municipal Airport (C25) in Iowa; and Charles B. Wheeler Downtown Airport (KMKC) in Kansas City, Missouri.

Meanwhile, the NTSB is convening its own summit on May 23 in Washington, D.C., to discuss ways to avoid any future near-misses ahead of what’s shaping up to be a busy travel season.

“I look forward to hosting a candid assessment of what’s been done to prevent runway incursions in the years since our last event on the topic—and to spur meaningful, immediate action on the areas where we’re stalled,” NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said in a statement. “By proactively looking for ways to make our skies safer, this event reflects our agency’s commitment to meeting the same high standards we ask of others.”

Additionally, the FAA has taken steps to introduce runway safety technologies to provide pilots and air traffic controllers with increased situational awareness, such as Runway Status Lights, Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X, and ASDE-X Taxiway Arrival Prediction.

The post FAA Investing $100M in Bid to Curb Runway Incursions appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The January 13 incident swept headlines across the country when the American Airlines Boeing 777 crossed an active runway without clearance from air traffic control, causing a Delta Boeing 737 to abort its takeoff. The two aircraft narrowly averted disaster—coming within 1,400 feet of each other (slightly more than what was previously reported).

While the American Airlines crew complied with written testimony, they refused to be interviewed by investigators as their statements would be recorded for later transcription. According to the NTSB report, investigators attempted to interview the American Airlines crew three different times.

In its preliminary report, the investigative agency wrote, “NTSB has determined that this investigation requires that the flight crew interviews be audio recorded and transcribed by a court reporter to ensure the highest degree of accuracy, completeness, and efficiency. As a result of the flight crew’s repeated unwillingness to proceed with a recorded interview, subpoenas for their testimony have been issued.”

However, the Allied Pilots Association (APA), the union that represents the American pilots, has backed the crew’s decision. APA argued that NTSB interviews have historically been done using a stenographer or with investigators taking their own notes.

In a statement, APA wrote, “We join in the goal of creating an accurate record of all interviews conducted in the course of an investigation. However, we firmly believe the introduction of electronic recording devices into witness interviews is more likely to hinder the investigation process than it is to improve it. Not only may the recording of interviews lead to less candid responses from those witnesses who may choose to proceed under such requirements, but the existence and potential availability of interview recordings upon conclusion of an investigation will tend to lead many otherwise willing crew members to elect not to participate in interviews at all. Either outcome would not serve to advance the goal of conducting effective investigations in order to promote aviation safety.”

The union went on to say that the interviews should be “fact-finding” and not adversarial.

Other findings in the preliminary report stated that the air traffic controller at KJFK was alerted to the American aircraft crossing the wrong runway via a surveillance system—Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X). The NTSB was able to attain recorded statements by the controllers involved and written testimony from the Delta crew—which the agency deemed sufficient.

Unfortunately, cockpit voice recorders from both aircraft involved were overwritten. Following the incident, the American jet continued its route to London, England, and the voice recordings were taped over as the devices typically capture a two-hour loop.

Limitations on the cockpit voice recorders, as demonstrated in the recent JFK incident, has prompted the NTSB to issue recommendations to the FAA. On February 7, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy addressed the subject during a hearing on the upcoming FAA Reauthorization Bill. In her testimony she said, “We issued recommendations to the FAA to address the need to install CVRs with a minimum 25-hour recording capability on all newly manufactured airplanes required to have a CVR, and to retrofit these CVRs on existing aircraft required to have flight recorders.”

American Airlines says it is cooperating with the NTSB investigation. According to the NTSB, the pilots have seven days to respond to the subpoena.

The post NTSB Subpoenas American Crew Involved in Near-Collision at JFK appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

According to the FAA, FedEx Express Flight 1432, a Boeing 767, was cleared to land on Runway 18 Left at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (KAUS). The clearance was received and acknowledged when the 767 was several miles away from the airport.

“Shortly before the FedEx aircraft was due to land, the controller cleared Southwest Flight 708 to depart from the same runway,” the FAA statement continues. “The pilot of the FedEx airplane discontinued the landing and initiated a climbout. The Southwest flight departed safely.”

H2: FlightAware Shows Descent Profile

The flight tracking website FlightAware captured the descent of the FedEx 767. It reached an altitude of approximately 150 feet at approximately 6:40 a.m., then entered a rapid climb. The FedEx jet landed at 6:51 a.m. after the Southwest 737 had departed.

FedEx released a statement regarding the incident, noting that FedEx Express Flight 1432 from Memphis, Tennessee, to Austin, Texas, safely landed “after encountering an event just before landing at Austin Bergstrom International Airport.” As this is an ongoing investigation, the air cargo carrier referred all further inquiries to the FAA.

Southwest Airlines did not respond to FLYING’s request for comment by press time.

The event is under investigation by both the FAA and NTSB as a possible runway incursion.

This marks the second time in the past month that there has been a runway event involving major airlines in the U.S.

• READ MORE: The JFK Incursion Tragedy That Wasn’t 

On January 13, 2023, at JFK International Airport (KJFK) in New York an American Airlines Boeing 777 taxied into the path of a departing Delta Airlines 737. Both the Delta airplane and American Airlines carried full passenger loads at the time of the event. The tower control noticed the incursion as the 737 was rolling and canceled the takeoff clearance. The 737 came to a stop approximately 1,000 feet from the American Airlines 777.

The NTSB has not yet released a preliminary report on the New York incident.

The post FAA Investigates Close-Call Situation at Austin Airport appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

First, kudos to the tower controller for his timely reaction. I am certain that he took more than just a deep breath when his shift was complete. This was a nighttime operation, making it that much more difficult to assess the situation.  

And a pat on the back to the Delta crew that aborted their takeoff roll. When a controller cancels a takeoff clearance after the power levers are already set, hesitation is not an option. Rarely is that instruction heard. Despite the size of a 777, it’s not easy to see the silhouette of that airplane in the dark from a distance, wingtip nav light and rotating beacon notwithstanding. 

Anything over 80 kts is a high-speed abort. Data indicates the Boeing 737 reached approximately 105 knots—only seconds away from rotation speed. A rejected takeoff checklist would have been initiated shortly thereafter. Since the Delta flight returned to the gate, most likely an inspection on the brakes had to occur. Additionally, if the reversers were operated, the engines required an inspection.

The first reaction after listening to the recorded communication sequence is to shake your head and convict the American Airlines crew. But with most events, there’s more to the story. Let’s start with the taxi clearance.  

The controller instructed AA Flight 106, the Boeing 777, to taxi out of their ramp area at Taxiway Tango Alpha with a left on Bravo, hold short of Taxiway Kilo. The first part of the controller’s instruction included 4L as the departure runway.  Although the copilot read back the taxi instructions and the requirement to hold short of Taxiway Kilo, the runway itself was not read back. Small detail, but perhaps the crew hadn’t quite processed the information because the winds favored 31L that evening.

As AA 106 progressed in its taxi, the controller issued a clearance to cross Runway 31L at Kilo, which the copilot acknowledged. Although this a very typical clearance at JFK, (a taxi route that I’ve probably logged thousands of hours on), the intersection can be confusing, especially at night. Runway 4L, Runway 31L, Taxiway Kilo, and Taxiway Juliet, intersect at close proximity to each other.

That said, a Boeing 777 crew is usually well-seasoned. And that particular trip to London is flown by New York-based crews, so it shouldn’t have been their first rodeo. Was one of the pilots new to the airplane and not quite comfortable? Was there a distraction in the cockpit? Was the copilot involved with a task that required a heads-down operation at just the wrong moment?

In 1992, JFK Port Authority was responsible for installing a runway stop bar system that was used as a prototype to test its functionality. The system is designed to present a visual indication to pilots whether it’s safe to cross or enter a runway, with red lights embedded in the pavement for stop and green lights for go. Not all airline-type airports have the system.

It was not well-received by JFK controllers, but the equipment was not designed with ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) standards as it had been in Europe. The stop bar system still exists at JFK according to the airport diagram, but was it operational the evening of January 13?

Regardless, this situation warrants an objective investigation. Runway incursions are serious business. If additional factors were at play, then it’s important to utilize the information for prevention purposes. The American Airlines flight crew will have an opportunity to present their version of the event both with the FAA and the local flight office. Union representation is part of a fair process under such circumstances.  

I don’t envy the AA pilots. Regardless of the consequences, this event will remain with them for the rest of their careers. Perhaps this situation can be a valuable lesson for all of us in the aviation world. Let’s be grateful that one of the guardrails remained in the form of an alert controller. I shudder to think what the headlines would have read otherwise.

The post The JFK Incursion Tragedy That Wasn’t appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The 737 was operated by Delta Air Lines, the 777 by American Airlines.

According to the FAA, air traffic controllers “noticed another aircraft crossing the runway in front of the departing jetliner” and canceled the aircraft’s takeoff clearance.

The statement continues, “Delta Air Lines Flight 1943 stopped its takeoff roll approximately 1,000 feet before reaching the point where American Airlines Flight 106, a Boeing 777, had crossed from an adjacent taxiway.”

The Delta flight was bound for the Dominican Republic. There were 145 passengers and six crew on board. After the incident, the aircraft returned to the gate where customers deplaned.

FLYING reached out to both airlines for comment. A spokesperson from Delta replied, “The safety of our customers and crew is always Delta’s number one priority. Delta will work with and assist aviation authorities on a full review of Flight 1943 on January 13 regarding a successful aborted takeoff procedure at New York-JFK. We apologize to our customers for the inconvenience and delay of their travels.”

The flight was “subsequently delayed overnight due to crew resources” and “customers were provided overnight accommodations.” The flight departed on January 14 at 10:17 a.m.

American Airlines responded to FLYING’s inquiries by saying they are deferring questions to the FAA.

FlightAware data shows American Airlines Flight 106 departed JFK on Friday evening, bound for London. The aircraft arrived at Heathrow Airport on Saturday morning.

Technology to Prevent Tragedy?

According to the FAA, John F. Kennedy International Airport (KJFK) is equipped with technology to help avoid potential aircraft and vehicle conflicts. The Airport Surface Detection System—Model X (ASDE-X) alerts controllers to potential runway conflicts by providing detailed coverage of movement on runways and taxiways of aircraft and ground vehicles on the airport movement area, as well as aircraft flying on final approach to the airport.

Remembering Tenerife

For many in the aviation world, the January 13 event brought to mind the airline disaster at what is now Tenerife North-Ciudad de la Laguna Airport (GCXO), in the Canary Islands, on March 27, 1977, when two Boeing 747s collided on a runway in heavy fog. The collision killed 583 people. Both airliners—KLM Flight 4805 and Pan American World Airways Flight 1736—had been scheduled to depart from Las Palmas on the island of Gran Canaria. However, a terrorist bombing there earlier in the day diverted all aircraft to the then Los Rodeos Airport on the island of Tenerife.

The airport had a single runway. There was a thick fog over the airport when the KLM flight prepared to take off. The Pan Am flight was taxiing on the runway at the same time, but from the opposite direction. The impact resulted in a fireball. All the persons on board the KLM were killed. Miraculously, 61 people aboard the Pan Am flight survived.

The NTSB found the lack of clear communication about procedures and directives and failure to abort the takeoff as probable causes. The fog and low ceiling were factors.

The accident is to date the worst airline accident on record, and it is often studied in ground schools around the world.

The post Close Call at JFK International appeared first on FLYING Magazine.