29 DEC 2009, ca 18:00
de Havilland Canada DHC-3T Otter
DQ-GLL ? - Pacific Island Seaplanes
0 / 6
Vomo Island (Fiji)
Passenger flight, during Unknown
According to Fiji news sources a DHC-3 Otter on floats was involved in an accident when it tipped ov... (more)

25 DEC 2009, ca 11:30
Airbus A330-323X
N820NW - Northwest Airlines
0 / 289
Detroit-Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, MI (DTW) (USA)
International Scheduled Passenger flight, during Approach
An Airbus A330-323Xpassenger jet, registeredN820NW, was involved in a failed attempt toblow-up the ... (more)

 

Ugh, a crazy person has lept over a pew and jumped the Pope at Christmas Mass — right in St. Peter’s. (He evidently was not hurt).

What the hell kind of security do they have in Rome? I mean for Pete’s sake (so to speak), Derek Jeter gets better protection at Yankee Stadium.

And the video. Did you see how those people were dressed, in St. Peter’s, with the Pope, on Christmas Eve? Down jackets and cheap scarves and jeans? They looked like the mid-morning crowd at Wal-Mart. Come on, folks: At least put on a tie or a skirt for Christmas Mass at St. Peter’s with the Pope in attendance. Dress well. He does.

Anyway, back to reality here. Who gets up at 4 a.m. unless it’s for a tragedy, an illness, a boot-camp whistle, a psychotic episode or …oh yeah, an airplane trip, which come to think of  it shares something in common with all of those things. The airlines have conditioned us to getting up at 4 a.m. Hit the deck!

The online air-travel maps are all blinking green. (After all, it isn’t dawn yet in half of the country). The media weather hysterics seem to have settled in for a long winter’s nap. Hey, it’s snowing in Minneapolis. Hey, it’s winter! It’s Minneapolis!

The air travel system is still tangled from the thousands of cancellations last weekend on the East Coast. Airplanes are not all where they should be. Crews are out of place, and work schedules are messed-up, with the end of the month approaching. Who knows what adventure lies ahead for me today between Arizona and Newark?

Once more into the breach! My cross-country flight is on time, and so is the connection through the uproariously named George Bush Intercontinental Airport, where I brace myself for that all-consuming announcement from the shrill lady on the loudspeaker constantly threatening to “`rist” anyone for making inappropriate jokes or comments about security.

The bag is packed, the coffee mug washed.

A quick duck outside for a lungful of cold desert air and a look at that black starry sky, where a meteor streaks into the horizon over the mountains.

And so away, and Merry Christmas to all.

###

20 DEC 2009
British Aerospace BAe-748-398 Srs. 2B
5Y-YKM - 748 Air Services
0 / 36
Tonj Airfield (Sudan)
Domestic Non Scheduled Passenger flight, during Landing
A British Aerospace BAe-748 turboprop plane, registered 5Y-YKM, was damaged when it suffered a runwa... (more)

19 DEC 2009
Hawker Siddeley HS-748 ?
-
0 / 36
Tonj Airfield (Sudan)
Domestic Non Scheduled Passenger flight, during Landing
According to media reports an aircraft suffered a runway excursion at Tonj Airport, Warrap State, so... (more)

In response to consumer complaints about being stranded in airplanes for hours, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has issued new rules to "enhance airline passenger protections" in the following ways:

By requiring air carriers to adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays and to publish those plans on their websites.

By requiring air carriers to respond to consumer problems.

By deeming continued delays on a flight that is chronically late to be unfair and deceptive in violation of 49 U.S.C. §41712.

By requiring air carriers to publish information on flight delays on their websites.

By requiring air carriers to adopt customer service plans, to publish those plans on their websites, and audit their own compliance with their plans.

This goes back to November 15, 2007 when the Department of Transportation issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that "called for comment on seven tentative proposals intended to ameliorate difficulties that passengers experience without creating undue burdens for the carriers."

[The DOT] received approximately 200 comments in response to the ANPRM. Of these, 13 came from members of the industry-i.e., air carriers, air carrier associations, and other industry trade associations-and the rest came from consumers, consumer associations, and two U.S. Senators. In general, consumers and consumer associations maintained that the Department's proposals did not go far enough, while carriers and carrier associations attributed the current problems mostly to factors beyond their control such as weather and the air traffic control system and tended to characterize the proposals as unnecessary and unduly burdensome. The travel agency associations generally expressed support for consumer protections.

As a result of the input received, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) was issued on December 8, 2008, which resulted in just 21 comments:

...10 comments were from members of the industry and the rest came from consumers and consumer associations. On the consumer side, eight individuals filed comments as did three consumer advocacy organizations: Flyersrights.org (formerly the "Coalition for an Airline Passengers Bill of Rights" or CAPBOR), the Aviation Consumer Action Project (ACAP) and the Federation of State Public Interest Research Groups (U.S. PIRG). Of the industry commenters, two carriers (US Airways and ExpressJet Airways), and two airport authorities (Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport and The City of Atlanta Department of Aviation) filed comments. Three industry associations filed comments: the National Business Travel Association (NBTA), the Air Transport Association of America (ATA), and the Regional Airline Association (RAA). Two travel agency associations, the American Society of Travel Agents (ASTA) and the Interactive Travel Services Association (ITSA), also filed comments, as did the Airports Council International, North America (ACI-NA).

The DOT stirred all this together, and posted the final rule on 21 December 2009. The air carrier contingency plans require "that each plan include, at a minimum, the following:"

(1) an assurance that, for domestic flights, the air carrier will not permit an aircraft to remain on the tarmac for more than three hours unless the pilot-in-command determines there is a safety-related or security-related impediment to deplaning passengers (e.g. weather, air traffic control, a directive from an appropriate government agency, etc.), or Air Traffic Control advises the pilot-in-command that returning to the gate or permitting passengers to disembark elsewhere would significantly disrupt airport operations;

(2) for international flights that depart from or arrive at a U.S. airport, an assurance that the air carrier will not permit an aircraft to remain on the tarmac for more than a set number of hours, as determined by the carrier in its plan, before allowing passengers to deplane, unless the pilot-in-command determines there is a safety-related or security-related reason precluding the aircraft from doing so, or Air Traffic Control advises the pilot-in-command that returning to the gate or permitting passengers to disembark elsewhere would significantly disrupt airport operations;

(3) for all flights, an assurance that the air carrier will provide adequate food and potable water no later than two hours after the aircraft leaves the gate (in the case of a departure) or touches down (in the case of an arrival) if the aircraft remains on the tarmac, unless the pilot-in-command determines that safety or security requirements preclude such service;

(4) for all flights, an assurance of operable lavatory facilities, as well as adequate medical attention if needed, while the aircraft remains on the tarmac;

(5) an assurance of sufficient resources to implement the plan; and

(6) an assurance that the plan has been coordinated with airport authorities at all medium and large hub airports that the carrier serves, including medium and large hub diversion airports.

Failure to do any of the above would be considered an unfair and deceptive practice within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. §41712 and subject to enforcement action, which could result in an order to cease and desist as well as the imposition of civil penalties.

This rule is not without problems from the air passenger's point of view (see DOT Mandates Passenger Bill of Rights and I’m Not Happy by Cranky Flyer), but I maintain my previous position: the airlines brought this on themselves. They did so by failing to step up to the core issues being raised by irate passengers. The airlines defended overflowing toilets, bad air, and hungry and thirsty passengers by declaring that it was not their fault: they couldn't control the weather.

Well, of course they could not control the weather. They could, however, actively manage the effects of long, weather-induced flight delays in a way that their customers could understand and relate to. "The airlines" didn't do that quickly in at least some highly publicized cases. I think the result was entirely predictable.

Airlines are all putting out announcements that you can change your Christmas travel plans without penalty if you’re flying through “affected airports.” Here’s a look at the ones identified so far by Continental. All other airlines have are posting online bulletins.

Watch this one closely because a great big mess can grow in the Plains and Midwest and radiate throughout the air-travel system. And that system has not yet fully recovered from last week’s East Coast blizzard disruptions. Another big weather disruption will affect the system through New Year’s, as stranded passengers rush to get re-accommodated.

By the way, Chicago O’Hare has already had about 250 flight cancellations (arrivals and departures) as of 6 p.m. Central time.

Keeping in mind that media hysterics have a financial interest in hyping storms, gere’s a weather report. It’s looking ugly. Dear media: Let us please keep those jolly “white Christmas” references to a minimum?

###

22 DEC 2009, 22:22
Boeing 737-823 (WL)
N977AN - American Airlines
0 / 154
Kingston-Norman Manley International Airport (KIN) (Jamaica)
International Scheduled Passenger flight, during Landing
A Boeing 737-823, registered N977AN and operated by American Airlines, sustained substantial damage ... (more)