FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
2003
2003 - 0881.PDF
Diar 28-29 April 2nd Annual Military Data Links Conference Las Vegas, Nevada, USA Tel:+1310 563 1223 marcusd@ttcus.com www.TechnologyTraining.com 28-30 April 6th US Regional Airline Conference Georgetown, Washington DC, USA Tel:+441932 893 860 www.commercialaviation.net 28-30 April Annual Air Cargo and Freighter Aircraft Workshop Seattle, Washington, USA Tel: +1 206 587 6537 kkoch@cargofacts.com 4-8 May ISA-49th International Symposium Orlando, Florida, USA +1919990 9260 cclayton@isa.org 19-20 May 6th Annual Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Conference San Diego, California, USA Tel:+1310 5631223 marcusd@ttcus.com www.TechnologyTraining.com 19-20 May Missile Defence and Defence Shield Conference Washington DC, USA Tel:+1310 563 1223 marcusd@ttcus.com www.TechnologyTraining.com 26-27 May Air Cargo Asia 2003 Hong Kong Tel:+852 28041901 abfhk@netvigator.com 3-5 June Maintenance and Operations Little Rock, Arkansas, USA Tel:+1316 676 0432 susie_olivier@rac.ray.com 3-5 June Operating Leases San Francisco, California, USA events@everestevents.co.uk 5-6 June 5th Annual Network Centric Warfare Conference San Diego, California, USA marcusd@ttcus.com www.TechnologyTraining.com For a full list of events see www.flightinternational.com Letters flight.international@rbi.co.uk Flight International welcomes letters on any aspect of the aerospace Industry. Please write to: The Editor, Flight International, Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5AS, UK. Or e-mail fllght.interna- tlonal@rbi.co.uk The opinions on this page do not necessarily represent those of the editor. Flight International cannot publish letters without name and address. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length. SAFETY ILS errors: where is the data? It is remarkable that it is only recently that the possibility of ILS errors has been commu nicated - especially when you consider the venerable age of instrument landing system technology (developed in the early 1930s). Category III was achieved in the late 1960s - yet problems appear only now? The problem with ILS errors, as with all ground and airborne failures, is the lack of freely available incident data. ILS is a mature technology, but as with all technology, as it advances, some of the more basic lessons need to be relearned. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to learn lessons from incidents due to the lack of availability of data and the unwillingness of operators to share that data. The UK has a mandatory occurrence reporting system which was extended some time ago to include ground engineering failures. But the volume of data is small, giving the impression that incidents are rare - which is not the case. Access to what little data exists is possible - but with restrictions, and under supervision. Many countries do not even record such data and rarely make it available if they do. One wonders why? Aviation claims to be safety conscious, but actually maintains a "safety culture" more fitting to the Cold War years. It is time the walls were knocked down and the culture of secrecy banished to the past where it belongs. Kim O'Nell Managing Director, Advanced Aviation Technology, Compton, UK Single engines? No thank you Am I missing something here? In reading the debate about single- engine instrument flight rules (SEIFR) operations, I find a growing sense of disbelief. The probability statistics of fail ure for a modern turbine engine is hardly the issue. On a black night, in bad weather, on a twin when one engine fails there is a 100% proba bility of having power remaining from the other engine. In a single-engined aircraft, there is a 0% probability. The aircraft is going down, instrument flight rules, complete with passengers, beginning right now. Even if some fantastically com plicated set of conditions is imposed, eg within gliding dis tance of an alternate at all times, not over remote terrain or water, not over built-up areas, etc, I can see no justification for gambling with fare paying passengers in this way. Whether the pilot feels lucky tonight should never be on a mini mum equipment list. Where next? The Boeing 7E7 with only one engine because the stats are good? Peter Johnson Gloucester, UK Pride to blame in Caribbean Harmonisation of aviation legisla tion, combined with the refusal to work together, is one of the main problems in Caribbean aviation. A reason for this lack of co-operation is national pride, as mentioned in your article "Trouble in paradise" (Flight International, 8-14 April). Most island governments would rather not see other Caribbean national carriers penetrate into their own (domestic) markets. The "I am the boss" mentality will not permit it. This may not be a good thing, but it can be explained. The Caribbean islands are small com pared to mainland countries. Their markets are small and most islands don't have a healthy economy. This explains why the govern ments are over-protective of their own markets. Competition only makes it harder to increase the domestic income of the islands. Most Caribbean airlines are government owned. In some cases such govern ment-owned airlines are seen as a social workplace rather than a com petitive business-oriented com pany. In some Caribbean regions there are too many small airlines. An example is the five islands of the Netherlands Antilles, all trying to start separate airlines. Privatisation and/or forming one larger airline might help to make these smaller airlines emulate Dutch Caribbean Airlines of Curacao, formed after the bankruptcy of Air ALM, and now making a small profit. Roger Cannegieter Amsterdam, The Netherlands No smoke without fire David Learmount's synopsis of the Tranportation Safety Board of Canada's report on the 1998 Swiss Air Boeing MD-11 accident (Flight International, 8-14 April) reminded me of a flight I made in 1997 from Dublin to Brussels. Just after take-off we had smoke in the cockpit and the captain ordered the flight engineer to initi ate fuel dumping at 1,500ft (460m) and we were back on the ground within 6min. Cargo and smoke detectors failed to detect the source, but a few weeks later it was found to be from an autopilot servo under the flying officer's yoke. This told me that there is no smoke without fire, sparks or heat, all of which in isolation or combi nation are detrimental to contin ued flight and time wasted in try ing to locate and isolate its source 54 22-28 APRIL 2003 FLI8HT INTERNATIONAL www.fliqhtinternational.com
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
