March 2008 Archives

Why has US Airways been so quiet about that accidental gun discharge incident? The carrier seeks to answer that question in its latest employee newsletter (key phrases bolded below). Do you think this will make it all go away? I'm guessing not.

"Here’s some background on the Federal Flight Deck Officer’s (FFDO) program that may be helpful. The FFDO program was put into place after 9/11 and was developed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The program is administered completely by TSA -- airlines, including US, aren’t involved in this program other than the fact that our employees, pilots specifically, can participate. Training and equipment are provided by the TSA and Federal Air Marshal Service and volunteers are responsible for their own travel, lodging, and daily expenses.

Pilots apply to be in the program, go through the testing, including specified psychological, medical or physical ability requirements, and then work directly with TSA on equipment, training, procedures, bi-annual requalification, and so on. In fact, the program is so confidential that limited people know the procedures on how an FFDO works, and that’s the point. We also keep the identities and number of participants confidential. This is for our protection and for our customers’ protection.

"Program participants are there to fight off a potential terrorist attack and the fewer people who know the procedures, the better so that the “bad guys” can’t infiltrate and counter those measures. Therefore, it isn’t our place to comment on the gun discharge in the cockpit on board a Denver-Charlotte flight on Saturday, March 22. The TSA has asked us to refer all media inquiries to them and we’re doing that.

"If we start speculating about what might have happened, we could inevitably divulge information Homeland Security does not want out in the public or compromise security in some other way so we’ve felt it best to defer to the TSA."

I couldn't let the weekend begin without giving a big shout-out to AirCell, which has branded its ATG connectivity service Gogo, and released an awesome online video. Check it out at www.gogoinflight.com

Also take a look at the initial routes that will feature the Gogo service. I'd fly an American Airlines Boeing 767 coast-to-coast for this bad boy. Wouldn't you?

When is the inaugural guys?

Want to know what level of satellite bandwidth demand is likely to be required in each regional market? Get in line, baby. That’s the $64 million dollar question that market research and consulting firm Northern Sky Research (NSR) tackles in a new report on aeronautical satellite communications. It’s also a question I dared to ask of NSR analyst – and satcom expert - Claude Rousseau, even though the firm gets paid a nice fee to provide the answer.

Okay, so Rousseau didn’t bite on that one (can you blame him?) But I didn’t leave our e-mail exchange completely empty-handed. Far from it, in fact! Here’s what Rousseau would tell me. The rest you can find in the report.

1) The market for Ku-band satellite bandwidth will grow by more than 55 TPE (or transponder equivalent based on 36 MHz transponders) between now and the end of 2013, forecasts NSR. That's the equivalent of more than 1 average-sized GEO satellite these days!

2) The NSR Ku–band forecast for aeronautical satellite services is driven first by the business jet market and secondly (and more extensively), by expected deployments of satellite solutions with former Connexion-by-Boeing (CbB) clients first (in Europe and Asia), and full fleet deployments afterwards if current trials are conclusive (especially in North America)

NSR has not done an L-band transponder equivalent forecast in the report, but rather an L-band equipment and services revenues forecast for various categories of airplanes “that leaves no doubt that capacity will be increasingly used on these systems for aircrafts and business jets”, says Rousseau.

So there you have it. Who’s working hard for the money? I’m so glad I read the crap out of Jane Austen in college as it has been so very useful in satellite transponder chat!

About seven weeks ago this blog revealed that the new antenna being offered under a partnership between EMS Technologies and Israel’s Starling Advanced Communication is a mature product. I also believe I suggested you stay tuned to Runway Girl for more information. Don’t say I didn't keep my word but you can, of course, call me a little bit late if you’d like.

A few days before the Aircraft Interiors Expo is set to take place in Hamburg, Starling VP marketing and sales Jacob Keret has revealed to me that the EMS/Starling team is very close to announcing its first customer for their ultra-fast, ultra-lightweight (45lb/20kg) Ku-band airborne antenna system that will be targeted at the US commercial airline market. You can hear me chat about it here - on an IAG podcast today.

“We are really expecting that to materialize in the next month or so,” says Keret. He adds: “We are progressing quite rapidly actually with EMS. We are replying to several RFPs and RFIs of US-based companies."

An announcement regarding EMS/Starling’s first customer could be made in Hamburg or shortly thereafter. But, for the record, Starling feels “very, very comfortable with the partnership with EMS and we’re just moving forward,” says Keret. He also assures that Starling is financially “on solid ground”.

The EMS/Starling partnership has a number of competitors, but one of them, German firm Qest – a unit of automotive systems supplier Draxlmaier Group - had some interesting news today. As I reported for Flight premium news service Air Transport Intelligence, Qest will bring to market a bi-directional aeronautical antenna to support Ku-band services and ensure it can “immediately” meet current requirements of satellite operators.

Qest last year unveiled a new airborne broadband antenna that can enable both Ku-band and L-band services. By combining Ku-band and L-band in one integrated system, a “hybrid data link can be established”, resulting in “unprecedented connectivity options and maximum flexibility for owners and operators”, said the firm.

While the hybrid concept will not be abandoned it “entails new tasks for the satellite service operators, who will have yet to realize, amongst others, new concepts for a mixed signal processing in Ku- and L-band”, notes the firm.

In order “to be able to offer products that can immediately be used within existing satellite services, Qest will now also develop bi-directional antennas for Ku-band”.

Qest’s announcement, says Starling's Keret, shows just how much the Ku-band market is progressing. Having “mature technology and a mature product with EMS in the market” will give the EMS/Starling team a “competitive edge”, he says. Starling is also offering its Mijet Ku-band antenna, and has secured an undisclosed customer, as previously announced here.

Yes, I've got a request into Qest for an interview. Stay tuned :)

I recently highlighted two aviation conferences as part of my Paddy’s Day blog about the latest parade of industry greening efforts - the Green Skies Conference and Exhibition in Orlando, Florida, and the Eco-Aviation Conference in Washington DC. The events were scheduled to occur one month apart, starting with Green Skies on 21-23 May. Fast-forward a week-and-a-half, and Green Skies has been shelved for now, while Eco-Aviation is still firmly planted.

I asked my friend, founder of the Green Skies consultancy Michael Miller to discuss the reasons why such an actively-promoted conference was no longer in the books. Did the choice of Orlando as a venue, for example, hurt the event? Regulators who will decide environmental law are, after all, in DC.

Such an assessment, he says, would be inaccurate. “We've postponed the event this year because of the down economy and the desire by many companies to trim their conference budgets,” says Miller. “Green Skies will resume next year when the timing may be better. We're 100% committed to this effort and helping aviation become greener.”

To that end, Green Skies launched a new program this week called "Hug an Airline, Hug an Airport" in conjunction with branding firm Aerobrand that analyzes how going green can boost your brand and win new business. “It's very exciting and we already have an airline exploring this,” says Miller.

Personally, I have a few ideas on which airlines need the biggest hug (someone's 40-year-old DC-9s come to mind). If you've got your own thoughts on this one, please feel free to add your comment below. But I digress. For folks who are still keen to participate in a green aviation conference this year, Eco-Aviation is readying for its 18-20 June event at the Capital Hilton.

Backers of the conference say regulators, manufacturers, airlines, and airports will be in attendance (Airbus and Boeing are confirmed speakers). “What more do you need to find out what’s happening in Eco-Aviation?” asks the conference brochure. Here is what you can expect from Eco-Aviation in its own words:

Several companies are starting to look well-positioned to benefit from what is, according to some analysts, a looming downturn in the industry. AAR appears to be one of those firms.

Headquartered in Wood Dale, Illinois, AAR operates four segments – aircraft sales and leasing; aviation supply chain; maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO); and structures and systems. All four units achieved double-digit sales growth in the 2008 fiscal third quarter. During an earnings conference call last week executives said they sees opportunities going forward.

In the aircraft sales and leasing segment, as the US faces a liquidity and credit crunch, AAR is “aware that there are owners of aircraft who have liquidity concerns, problems I should say and we believe we’re in a good position to benefit from that”, says chairman and CEO David Storch.

Most of AAR’s activity has been in the Boeing 737 classic family, such as the prior acquisition of 18 737s from Malaysian Airlines. Storch says that while the firm has not yet moved into the next generation arena, it is “looking today at opportunities in that market”.

I haven’t written about one of my favourite subjects – in-flight connectivity – in what feels like ages. But I couldn’t let the opportunity pass to say a big word of congratulations to Arinc/Telenor joint venture AeroMobile, which is now enjoying visible gains from its hard work after the first authorized in-flight mobile phone call was made on an Emirates flight. Passengers were able to make and receive voice calls as well as use text messaging on today’s A340 flight between Dubai and Casablanca.

To be precise, folks have already proven that the technology to support cell phone usage in-flight actually works and is safe. You can read all about their efforts here. But this authorized call is a milestone of sorts, and could herald a whole new world of in-flight chatter whether you like it or not (but come on, deep down you want it...you just don't want your neighbour to have it).

As Flight’s article today points out, Emirates required three fundamental components to allow the call to take place: supplementary type certification for the aircraft – granted with support from the European Aviation Safety Agency – plus operating procedures approved by the United Arab Emirates’ General Civil Aviation Authority, and telecom regulatory clearance for each country overflown.

AeroMobile’s data service has already made headlines. A trial onboard a Qantas Airways 767-200 proved so successful that the Australian carrier agreed to move forward with a roll-out of in-flight mobile email and text messaging on some flights.

However, AeroMobile is not the only company bringing connectivity to portable devices. In fact, it faces stiff competition. In June 2007, OnAir, established by SITA and Airbus, received EASA certification for its airborne cellular equipment, following successful earlier tests by Airbus. OnAir has secured some pretty big customers, including launch customer Ryanair.

It's clear that Europe and the Middle East are ahead of the game. If you're flying in the USA, you may be waiting a while for the same in-flight privilege. At present, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and FAA restrict airlines from allowing airborne use of cell phones.

The USA is, however, moving forward with trials of WiFi-based services. JetBlue is offering some basic connectivity, but look for a wider offering on American Airlines' domestic 767s - as facilitated by AirCell - in the near-term.

Will folks pay more money to secure a bit of extra legroom on a JetBlue Airbus A320 or Embraer 190? I feel fairly certain that long-legged fans of the carrier’s service will be happy to do just that. JetBlue today confirmed it will allow A320 customers to pay extra for greater seat pitch; rows two to five will offer 38in pitch to be exact. A 38in pitch for a 36in inseam? Sold!

The announcement isn’t the biggest surprise. Reconfiguration of the A320s began in 2006. And in January of this year CEO Dave Barger discussed how the extra room up front would be used to drive ancillary revenue. I don’t recall him saying that JetBlue would up-sell the E-190 exit row seats. But I’d be happy to pay for that too.

Additionally, a JetBlue spokesman today told Flight premium news service Air Transport Intelligence that, with the latest changes, rows six to nine will now drop down to 34in pitch to “match the back half” of the aircraft. He says prices for additional legroom are $10 for short-haul flights, $15 for medium-haul and $20 for long-haul trips.

You don’t have to be a road warrior to know just how deep-vein-thrombosis tight the seats in steerage class can be (although JetBlue's 34in pitch is still pretty darn good). The airline seat guide to seat pitch gives a handy list of the worst offenders. Check it out at www.airlinequality.com/Product/seat_intro.htm

Could the JPMorgan conference stuff any more speakers into its line-up? Jam-packed doesn’t even accurately describe the event, which is running at the same time as the SpeedNews conference in Los Angeles. Boeing's Randy Tinseth was in attendance at the former and Jim Haas at the latter. But if you were listening for confirmation of another 787 delay, you didn't hear it from either of the two today.

Check out the article here. Key phrases include:

After enjoying a chicken lunch - and strong words from the man with endless industry input, International Lease Finance (ILFC) chief Steven Udvar-Hazy - Tinseth said he guesses that there must "be differing opinions about where we are on the program after lunch". Tinseth did not announce another 787 delay.

Boeing product marketing director Jim Haas also maintained Boeing’s current projection for initial deliveries. Speaking to Flight’s Stephen Trimble on the sidelines of the SpeedNews conference, Haas assured that 787 launch customer All Nippon Airways (ANA) will "definitely" receive first delivery in early 2009.

United Technologies, whose Hamilton Sundstrand unit is providing nine systems for the 787, has downplayed delay chatter. “It’s going to be a great program, whether it’s a week later or another month later, it’s not going to matter all that much,” said UTC VP of accounting and finance Greg Hayes.

Then there are those nagging reports...

United Technologies (UTC) remains confident the Boeing 787 “is going to fly soon” and believes that “the big drama is behind us”. So said the firm’s VP of accounting and finance Greg Hayes this morning at the JPMorgan Aviation and Transportation Conference in New York.

While Hayes could not comment on Boeing’s latest schedule (the airframer has committed to release the new schedule at the end of the month), UTC is “ready and we are supporting that aircraft”.

UTC subsidiary Hamilton Sundstrand has won contracts to provide nine major systems for the 787 twinjet.

“It’s going to be a great program, whether it’s a week later or another month later, it’s not going to matter all that much,” says Hayes.

Contractual payments from Boeing will be made “once that airplane gets delivered”, says Hayes.

One well-known legend about Saint Patrick pits the missionary against an obstinate old snake, which didn’t care to be banished from the Emerald Isle. Patrick outsmarted the wily serpent and convinced him to get into a box, which was then pitched into the ocean.

Today, ingenuity is synonymous with "thinking outside the box". A growing number of airlines and manufacturers are now looking to push the boundaries of modern-day boxes to usher in what could be a greener – cleaner – future (which could, of course, be profitable too).

On the eve of Saint Patrick’s Day, here is a trinity of noteworthy efforts in no particular order:

1) Electric wheel drive – A system being developed by aptly-named WheelTug will facilitate the ground manoeuvring of aircraft. Because engine taxiing is reduced, environmental benefits could include savings, through fuel cuts, in emissions such as CO2 and NOx. Delta Air Lines is providing assistance as launch customer.

2) Alternative fuels – Last month a Virgin Atlantic Boeing 747-400 carried out a London Heathrow-Amsterdam flight in part using biofuel. The aircraft flew with one of four GE CF6 engines using a mix of biofuel composed of babassu oil and coconut oil, a concoction that Richard Branson deemed good enough to drink. Environmentalists panned the test, calling it a publicity stunt. Nonetheless, other carriers are now following suit. Hard on the heels of the Virgin test, Continental Airlines says it will pursue a biofuels demo with Boeing and GE in the first half of 2009.

3) Green aviation conferences – Two timely events are in the offing: the Green Skies Conference and Exhibition on May 21-23 in Orlando, Florida, and the Eco-Aviation Conference on June 18-20 in Washington DC. Major industry players are expected to attend both.

Of course a number of other projects are also worth mentioning, including new engine technology (of which I’ve blogged extensively here). Now I’m off to prepare for some reckless Irish dancing, and to enjoy a drop of that Liffey water.

.

Embraer is cooking with gas, as they say. The company today reported a 61% increase in fourth quarter net profit on a 77% rise in revenue. A number of factors contributed to these gains. Discussing its results in a conference call this morning, Embraer president and CEO Frederico Fleury Curado said dedicated efforts to address the E-Jet family's growing pains over the last 18 months have proven effective.

Now enjoying the product of its labor – with the E-Jets maturing and customers vocalizing their satisfaction – it’s no wonder that Embraer does not see an immediate need to counter the proposed 110/130-seat CSeries (now on sale) or an Airbus/Boeing narrowbody replacement (which isn’t supposed to come down the pike until the latter part of the next decade anyway).

"We still do not have a clear vision about what is the optimum configuration of the next narrowbody aircraft, anything from 80- to 180-seats," he says, noting that it is his understanding that neither Boeing nor Airbus has decided on "anything with that respect either".

As a leading force in the 70- to 120-seat market, he says, Embraer has to be "very sober about making the right move at the right time".

"We will not put ourselves in a pressure until we are convinced exactly which way to go."

Certainly, if the CSeries is launched, and the Mitsubishi MRJ is confirmed, it is "rational" to imagine that Embraer may have "some market share lost with those new airplanes", says Curado.

But he notes that "the level of activity that we have been seeing since last year has not decreased" and, in fact, it is "very intense activity".

Embraer is not idle in terms of development; it continues to develop the E-Jet family, focusing on ETOPS and other initiatives.

Stay tuned...

I’m back in Amish Country after an eventful trip to Orlando for the annual ISTAT conference. After two days of speeches, several interviews, and one far-too-brief evening of dancing to the ISTAT band, I’m ready to make my life as easy as possible – and ensure some catch-up time with my daughter – by simply dumping some of the contents of my notebook onto this blog, which has been sadly starved in recent days. I’m sure there is a better word to use than dump, but there ya go.

Okay, sticking with the journalistic rule of alphabetizing company names, let’s start with Airbus. Conveniently, chief operating officer, customers, John Leahy was the first manufacturer to take the stage. Two years ago, he was forced to listen to major customer ILFC crank about the A350 design at ISTAT. Apart from a call this year from AVITAS senior VP – and infotainment specialist – Adam Pilarski for Leahy to “retire and stick the next guy with all the headaches” of the consultant’s projected aircraft cancellations (which he says will be “sizeable” and serve to “burst” the current bubble), the Airbus salesman received a pretty good reception as folks are understandably concentrated on the 787 saga right now.

First Leahy addressed some of Pilarski’s comments, saying this may be a cycle but it may not be “as steep a canyon” as previous years. Is there any reason for Airbus to bring a new single aisle aircraft to market before the latter part of the next decade? People are "smoking something" if they say the maker of the A320 really needs to come up with a new narrowbody sooner than now being predicted, in the 2017-2020 timeframe, says Leahy. He admits that, yes, the industry currently has a duopoly in Airbus and Boeing, and it’s “a nice stable duopoly” that will probably be around for quite some time to come.

Leahy is also confident that Airbus' rival will get the 787 program back on track. Speaking to me on the sidelines of the conference, he said that, in developing its 787 Boeing may have fallen into some of the “same traps” as Airbus on the A380 program, with Boeing having a “more extended supply chain”. He says the reported delay basically “says something about how complicated it is to build an aircraft”. There are “Monday morning quarterbacks” that are not familiar with the complexities of this, he adds.

The A350 XWB design, for the record, “is frozen” in terms of the fact that Airbus has “legally binding contracts” with performance guarantees that must be met, says Leahy. It features a large composite panel concept.

"The majority of the A350 XWB fuselage structure is made from CFRP, including the panels, doublers, stringers and typical frames," says Airbus PR. "The panel concept means that additional weight savings are achieved since each of the panels can be optimized in terms of their thickness according to the loads they will bear. The keel beam, centre wing box, belly fairing are also in CFRP."

Airbus PR adds that the wings of the A350 XWB “use CFRP and will be the largest CFRP lift structure, with a total area of 440 square metres. The centre wing box, stringers and spars will be made from CFRP”.

Boeing, meanwhile, is concentrating on getting the 787 flying, bringing the 777F to market, and clearing the 747-8. By now, the airframer’s VP marketing Randy Tinseth’s comments about the 787 program – how it continues to expect power on “sometime in the early beginning of the second quarter”, first flight at the “end of the second quarter” and first delivery “in early 2009” – have made plenty of headlines. You might not agree with this assessment (lord knows enough folks at ISTAT were sceptical), but this is what he said – don’t blame the messenger. Tinseth will speak again on Tuesday at the JPMorgan conference, so stay tuned.

There isn't much to celebrate here at Mystic Dunes in Celebration, Florida - one of the overflow hotels for the ISTAT conference. Staying here is like being handed a big, hard buttery crab for dinner only to find the guts of the thing is really green-yellow and rather sickly. But I can't fault the conference. It's downright riveting, at least from my front-row perch.

A number of moments are blog-worthy, and I hope to dedicate time to thrashing it out this week. But for now, I think it's definitely worth noting that Airbus and GE have made clear that expectations for new-technology aircraft before the latter part of the next decade is bordering on downright unreasonable.

There is an incredible amount of industry pressure in terms of addressing fuel burn says GE Aviation president and CEO Scott Donnelly. To make this happen, he says, is going to require a "massive investment".

GE will spend billions (about $2 billion to be exact) to get the kind of efficiency needed for next generation narrowbodies. To meet expectations, proper technology won't be mature "until 2015 to 2018".

Open rotor engines might very well be the answer but it requires a heck of a lot more study. Airbus VP of strategic marketing Philippe Jarry said clearly and simply: "We don't know what engine architecture will power the next generation airlines. We need to test them ... Even if we go to radical engine architecture change, it would not change [the] aircraft shape.

This made me wonder - what does Jarry think about the EasyJet concept aircraft revealed last year (and should we expect something resembling that design?). Well probably not exactly, but EasyJet -based in the UK - has been understandably vocal. EasyJet has also said it's design is a starting point for innovation.

Speaking one-on-one with me after his speech, Jarry said: "We cannot install the big propellers under a wing, so [the engine architecture] will drive our configuration as well. So that is why we really want to be on top of it. We want to stimulate them [engine makers]. If I put an airplane in service 30 years after the A320, I should get 30% [improvement in efficiency]!"

But airlines cannot simply make demands for narrowbody replacement in the next few years. "Everybody has to play their role. It is an industry challenge. It will be an industry issue, an industry effort, and an industry result."

Speculation that Boeing will once again delay the 787 program reached fever pitch yesterday among Wall Street circles and industry talking-heads. Journalists, bloggers and journa-bloggers alike (anyone understand the difference anymore?) did their duty to firm up the story - calling Boeing, 787 customers and anybody who might be willing to go on-record for a smidgen of confirmation.

So it wasn’t the biggest surprise in the world (but certainly cold comfort) when this morning Goldman Sachs reported it does not expect the first 787 to be delivered before the third quarter of next year. If true, this would represent another delay of at least six months. After market close this evening, however, Boeing continues to maintain that “nothing has changed in terms of our statements on 787 since our January update”.

Here in North America, Air Canada, Continental Airlines and Northwest Airlines have not commented (to its credit, Northwest has been working hard on a response). And US lessors Aviation Capital and International Lease Finance (ILFC) remain quiet.

But this is not a statement about the reported 787 delay – you know to simply do a bit of heavy Googling for rewrites of the Goldman Sachs report and analysts commentary. Rather, it is to make the point that in 2008, a hot story has a tendency to grow long legs – even without on-record comment. The industry is now waiting anxiously to see if a pair of snug-fitting credibility will be wrapped around those gams.

All it takes is one outspoken customer - that's what Airbus found out in March 2006 when ILFC chief Steven Udvar-Hazy told former Everett Herald journalist - and early aerospace blogger - Bryan Corliss that the A350 design, at that point, wasn’t up to snuff. Present a few days later at the annual International Society of Transport Aircraft Trading (ISTAT) in Orlando, Florida, Hazy reiterated his comments, and told an awe-struck audience that the aircraft didn’t measure up to the 787.

You know the rest of the story. Within months Airbus was working on a redesign of the long-range narrowbody. ILFC in October 2007 revised its agreement with Airbus to replace its November 2005 order for 16 A350 aircraft with 20 A350 XWBs.

So, can we expect big revelations about the 787 next week at ISTAT? A who’s who of the aviation industry will be in attendance, including ILFC. This journalist, blogger, journa-blogger, is headed down to Florida tomorrow to begin the journey to Celebration, and praying the story doesn’t break on-record when she’s trying to relax, Huck Finn-like, on a boat floating down the St Johns River.

(River photo from Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:St_Johns_River.jpg)

It's so nice to work with smart, savvy colleagues. Take the US Editor of Air Transport Intelligence, Lori Ranson , who joined us from the competition not so long ago, thank God, and who yesterday pointed out that the CF34-3B1 engine fan blade defect story comes on the heels of the DOT IG's finding that lapses in monitoring suppliers by manufacturers and the FAA have caused faulty components to be installed on aircraft.

Let me be the first to say - and for the RECORD - it is not confirmed in any way, shape or form that there is any sort of correlation between the two. But it is a very interesting point.

On February 26, the DOT IG revealed its assessment of the FAA oversight of aircraft manufacturers' quality assurance systems for domestic and foreign aircraft part suppliers.

"We found that FAA's risk-based oversight system for suppliers needs improvement as it does not consider the degree to which manufacturers now use suppliers to make aviation products," says the DOT IG.

"Specifically, (1) FAA has not ensured that manufacturers are providing oversight of their suppliers, (2) FAA does not require inspectors to perform enough audits of suppliers to determine how well manufacturers' quality assurance systems are working, and (3) the systemic deficiencies we identified at 21 supplier facilities indicate that both manufacturers and FAA need to strengthen their oversight of these facilities."

The timing is mad. GE today told me that a population of 13,000 fan blades from General Electric CF34-3B1 engines that power Bombardier CRJ200 aircraft have been identified by the engine manufacturer as being defective.

The admission comes after the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) yesterday issued recommendations to the FAA citing a safety concern raised by two engine failures on CF34-powered CRJ200s.

In both instances - a 27 July 2006 engine failure on an Air Nostrum CRJ shortly after takeoff from Barcelona, Spain, and a 24 May 2007 engine failure on an Atlantic Southeast (ASA) airlines CRJ while in cruise flight from Syracuse to Atlanta - a fan blade on a CF34-3B1 turbofan engine fractured, causing a loud bang, severe vibration and in one case an engine fire.

These blades were produced between late 2002 and late 2006 by Teleflex Aerospace Manufacturing Group, and rough estimates show they are present on about 1,500 CF34-3B1 engines, says a GE spokesman.

Okay, it was a metallurgical issue. I could pretend that I completely understood that at 7am this morning, but I'd be lying through my bloomen teeth. By 8am, however, I was informed by GE that it meant that fan-blade supplier Teleflex Aerospace Manufacturing Group, a US-based company that sends machining to Mexico, received from "a certain shipper" a large billet of titanium alloy that contained a higher percent of aluminum than appropriate.

The result, says GE, is that hard particles "line up together" to form an aligned hard alpha and, over time, a crack can form.

Diversified industrial firm Teleflex in 2007 sold its Teleflex Aerospace Manufacturing Group unit to UK aerospace firm GKN.

Teleflex Aerospace president John Suddarth says it would be inappropriate to comment on a firm that is no longer part of the Teleflex company.

GKN has declined comment.

And Bombardier is keeping its comment brief. "Bombardier and GE will continue to work together to address the safety recommendations raised by the NTSB. We will not compromise the safety of our products," says a spokesman.

Photo from http://www.crj.bombardier.com/CRJ/en/photo.jsp?low=../img/multimedia/200/crj200_bbd_low.jpg&high=../img/multimedia/200/crj200_bbd_high.zip

It looks like Los Angeles is going to be THE place to be on April 9. The Oneworld alliance is holding a media briefing at 11:30 am that day, and chief executives from all ten members will be there to unveil the grouping’s latest airline recruit.

The announcement will come as Oneworld marks the first anniversary of its biggest expansion, with Japan Airlines and five of its subsidiaries, plus Malév Hungarian Airlines, Royal Jordanian, LAN Argentina and LAN Ecuador joining the alliance a year ago. Since then, Dragonair (owned by Cathay Pacific Airlines) has also boarded the grouping, notes the alliance in a media invite to the event.

The CEOs will gather in Los Angeles just days after the first stage of US-European open skies takes effect, and following member airline British Airways' transition into the $8.6 billion new Terminal 5 at alliance hub London Heathrow (this is the first phase of Oneworld’s biggest yet airport co-location project), adds Oneworld.

I'm knee-deep in writing about new engine technology while trying to work through some patience-stretching computer problems (my little workhorse appears to have picked up something nasty in Sin City last week...I barely let her out of my sight!). While sifting through my notes, however, I came across this gem from IATA technical and operations specialist Juergen Haacker, who says the key point for engine manufacturers now is: "What do you need, manufacturing-wise, to accelerate this type of R&D activity?"

The answer, says Haacker, is "very interesting". Manufacturers say there are a number of prerequisites that must be met, including a "predictability of the future political environment for new engines". Best of luck to them on that one.

Noise versus emissions is very important, especially when considering open rotor technology. "If the government, especially local green activists, also push on the noise element locally, then the open rotor concept may not have the same chances. That is where IATA could step in and work with them," he says.

(CFM International)