FlightGlobal.

com February 2024

Our review of Airbus dominates Boeing

airl
irlline incidents
airline in annual sales battle p10
last year
Fast mover Hermeus eyes
SR-71 speed record p22

Safety scare
JAL crash highlights deadly risk of runway incursions p6
£5.99

Sliding doors Home win

Alaska Max 9 France signs
mishap dents $5.5bn deal for
737 revival more Rafales
p8 p21

Not shrinking
Vladislav Gajic/Shutterstock
Still trailing
Boeing lost out to its great rival for the fifth straight year
in 2023 – but more worryingly for the US airframer, it saw
Airbus extend its narrowbody sales lead
M
easuring the sales and
deliveries performance of
an aircraft manufacturer
over a single calendar year
can lead you to false conclusions.
After all, Airframer A may have
bested Brand B this time around,
but those roles may well be
reversed 12 months later.
In other words, viewed in isola-
tion, a single year is important but
does not tell you the whole story.
However, when Airbus beats
Boeing five years on the trot, one
might then reasonably call it a trend.
That is not to say that Boeing is in-
capable of delivering a stellar 2024
– and a 150-unit 737 Max order from
Akasa Air in mid-January is a good
start – but it has plenty of ground to
make up if it wants to regain parity
with its great rival.
The difference between the two
firms is most clearly seen in the
narrowbody market, were Airbus
now has a backlog share just shy
of 64%. It has taken total orders for
10,354 A320neo-family jets: almost
double Boeing’s total 737 Max
commitments of 5,860 aircraft.
And it is at the top end of this seg-
ment where Airbus is really pulling
away. Sales of the family’s largest
member, the A321neo, show no sign
of slowing down, with the airframer
having booked another 1,279 orders
in 2023. Total commitments for the
variant now stand at 6,171.
It is an aircraft for which Boeing
has no clear answer. The Max 10
offers some competition, but sales
have been lukewarm: at year-
end the airframer held just 1,063
unfilled orders.
Persuading operators to commit
to the variant is also made
much harder when the latest
service-entry target remains at
least a year away.
If Boeing cannot close this
widening gap, then perhaps it
needs to accelerate its plans for a
new aircraft launch.
But the question is less whether
Boeing wants to launch a develop-
ment programme, more whether it
is capable of doing so.
A series of strategic missteps
appear to have limited its capacity
to take the fight to Airbus, and
Comment
the years spent lurching from one
crisis to the next have also taken
their toll.
The latest safety scare, which
saw an emergency exit door plug
blown out of a Max 9 while in flight,
points to unresolved manufactur-
ing quality issues at the airframer.
Besides, even if Boeing wants to
launch a new jet, it is not yet ob-
vious whether the technology to
deliver a meaningful improvement
in fuel consumption will be ready
soon enough to make a difference.
For example, both narrowbody
engine suppliers see next-gener-
ation powerplants only arriving
around the middle of next decade.
Similarly, flight tests of Boeing’s
great hope for improved aircraft
performance, the transonic truss-
braced wing, will only start in 2028.
Can Boeing bounce back? More
than 100 years of history suggest
so, but past performance is no
future guarantee.
On its own, 2024 may not matter,
but this year Boeing must begin to
buck the long-term trend. ◗
See p10
February 2024 Flight International 3
 In focus
Questions abound in wake of Spain bolsters maritime Braced for success 30
Haneda A350 fatal crash 6 overwatch 20 F-35 ‘Franken-bird’ revived 32
Quality matters for Max 8 Beluga operations to broaden as GE rises to hypersonic
Airbus has wind in its sales 10 cargo carrier secures AOC 24 challenge 34
‘Revolutionary’ X-59 makes Russian regulator approves Elysian fields new research for
quiet debut 16 higher capacity for MC-21 28 all-electric airliners 36

16

Baby boom X-59 supersonic

demonstrator is unveiled

52
FlightGlobal.com February 2024

Our review of Airbus dominates Boeing

airlin
irlin
rlli e incidents
airline in annual sales battle p10
last year
Fast mover Hermeus eyes
SR-71 speed record p22
Jiji Press/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

Safety scare
JAL crash highlights deadly risk of runway incursions p6
£5.99

Sliding doors Home win

Alaska Max 9 France signs
mishap dents $5.5bn deal for
737 revival more Rafales
p8 p21

Regulars Comment 3 Straight & Level 62 Women in aviation 66

4 Flight International February 2024


In depth
Warning signs 38
The airline industry’s
exceptional performance in
2023 illustrates how much
safety has improved – but
the new year’s opening week
delivered a stark wake-up call
38
Domestic defences 52
Ahead of the Singapore air
show, we review how the
city-state and its regional
neighbours are bolstering
their fleets in order to deter
expansionist China
36
Contents
Revelling in recovery 58
Asia-Pacific carriers have
seen a slower return to pre-
pandemic levels of passenger
demand than in other regions,
but positive signs are at last
beginning to emerge
24
February 2024 Flight International 5
 Visit FlightGlobal Premium for all the latest aviation news and insight FlightGlobal.com
Questions abound in wake of
Haneda A350 fatal crash
Japanese investigators will seek to understand how
coastguard Dash 8 strayed onto active runway, causing
collision and fiery destruction of JAL widebody twin
David Kaminski-Morrow London
W
hile the fatal colli-
sion at Tokyo Hane-
da, between a Japan
Airlines (JAL) Airbus
A350-900 and a Japanese coast-
guard De Havilland Dash 8-300,
throws up multiple angles of inquiry,
the central question for investiga-
tors remains simple: how did the
turboprop stray onto an active
runway, apparently oblivious to the
heavy jet on final approach?
Investigators will focus on the
communications misunderstand-
ing that led the Dash 8 to occupy
runway 34R – also known as run-
way C – on which the A350 had
been cleared to land, according to
air traffic control transmissions.
Five of the six crew on board the
Dash 8 did not survive the fiery col-
lision, close to the C5 holding point
around 500m (1,640ft) from the
displaced threshold of 34R, adja-
cent to the aiming point and just
beyond the touchdown zone.
The A350 rolled to a halt about
1,700m from the point of impact,
veering off the right side of 34R. All
379 occupants were evacuated.
Holding points
There are 14 holding points,
designated C1 to C14, along the
3,360m length of the runway.
Preliminary indications suggest the
Dash 8 crew was only cleared to
holding point C5.
The inquiry will examine wheth-
er the instructions were clear,
correctly received, and correct-
ly read back, and whether any
communication could have been
confusing or misinterpreted.
Japan’s aeronautical informa-
tion publication states that holding
points C1 to C14 feature stop-bar
lights, 90m from the centreline of
runway 34R, while a number of
holding points – including C5 – also
6 Flight International February 2024
have runway guard lights 75m from
the centreline.
According to a NOTAM dated in
December, the stop-bar lights on
all the holding points for runway
34R were unserviceable. The aer-
onautical information for Haneda
states that this is one of dozens of
operational restrictions resulting
from construction work, and that it
remains in effect until March 2024.
An accompanying diagram shows
that it includes the stop-bar for C5.
JAL flight JL516 had been arriving
on a domestic service from Chitose
airport, near Sapporo, in darkness
on 2 January.
Runway 34R was operating in
mixed mode at the time, simulta-
neously handling both departures
and arrivals. Several flights were
queued for departure when the
A350, having been instructed to
continue its approach, was cleared
to land 2min later.
A partial transcript released by the
Japanese transport ministry shows
controllers were communicating
with aircraft waiting for take-off,
including a Delta Air Lines A330 plus
the coastguard Dash 8 (JA722A),
which was operating a humanitari-
an service to Niigata in response to
the Noto peninsula earthquake the
previous day.
Just after the A350 was told to
continue its approach, controllers
instructed the Delta flight to taxi to
holding point C1 and then cleared
the A350 to land.
Ten seconds later, according
to the transcript, the Dash 8 on
taxiway C contacted the tower
and was told to proceed to holding
Japan’s transport ministry has
taken immediate steps, without
waiting for the inquiry’s analysis, to
reinforce anti-incursion protection
point C5 – which its crew correct-
ly acknowledged – and informed it
was “number one”.
A JAL Embraer 190, also taxiing
to C1, was then assigned “number
three” while another JAL flight, a
Boeing 737-800 from Akita, in trail
to the A350 for the 34R approach,
was told it was “number two”.
Jiji Press/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
Japan Transport Safety Board
investigators will examine whether
this numbering system contribut-
ed to any misunderstanding by the
Dash 8 crew.
No details have been released
on crew duty times for either air-
craft, but the Dash 8’s humanitarian
operation, particularly regarding its
intensity and workload, is likely to
draw scrutiny.
Dark profile
The Dash 8’s wreckage lay paral-
lel to the runway centreline, fac-
ing the departure direction. If this
reflects its position at the moment
of the collision, it might suggest
the turboprop presented a narrow
and relatively dark profile to the
inbound A350 pilots, who would
have been faced with a large array
of approach and landing lights.
Meteorological data from Hane-
da shows good visibility at the time
of the accident, but investigators
will seek to determine whether
a cockpit head-up display was
aiding the A350’s approach – and,
if so, whether its symbols and data
might have obscured or distracted
from the Dash 8’s presence. There
is no immediate evidence that the
A350 crew attempted a go-around
or other evasive action.

Although the final wreckage
positions of the aircraft are clear,
the geometry of the collision is an
aspect yet to be confirmed.
Video images of the A350 an
instant before impact suggest it
had derotated and was practically
rolling level along the runway.
Dimensions of the Dash 8-300
put its horizontal stabiliser some
7.5m above the ground, which
would coincide with the crown
above the cockpit of an A350. The
A350’s fuselage underside could
have run over the low-set Dash 8.
It is unclear whether damage
to the A350’s radome and nose-
gear resulted from the Dash 8’s
empennage or wing root, but the
jet subsequently slid along the
runway on its nose. The Dash 8’s
wings could also have caused
apparent slice damage on the in-
board sides of the A350’s engines.
“We have a fire on the runway,
34R,” another JAL crew informed
Haneda tower in the moments
after the accident, prompting
controllers to order other inbound
aircraft to go around.
The accident resulted not only
in a fire on the A350 but also a
considerable blaze at the impact
point, both of which were tackled
All 379 occupants were safely evacuated from
by firefighting personnel, as well as
a trail of burning fuel.
Investigators have yet to de-
termine whether tower control-
lers could have detected the
developing conflict through the
use of surface-movement radar,
ground-surveillance equipment,
or runway-incursion alert systems.
The inquiry will also look into
visibility of the Dash 8 from the
tower, which is located 1,500m
from the collision point.
Controller monitoring
Japan’s transport ministry has nev-
ertheless taken immediate steps,
without waiting for the inquiry’s
analysis, to reinforce anti-incursion
protection. It states that it is
“strengthening” controller monitor-
ing and communication, and ensur-
ing “thorough” external monitoring
by pilots as well as “enforcement of
rules regarding runway entry”.
Ten days after the accident, on
12 January, the ministry revealed
that it had set up a “collision
countermeasures” review commit-
tee to improve warning systems,
including the use of stop-bars
and enhancing the capabilities of
surveillance and monitoring equip-
ment to alert controllers.
Cover story
twin-aisle, despite fierce post-accident fire
The Japan Coast Guard also or-
dered checks on various manuals to
confirm implementation of process-
es in the aftermath of the collision.
Destruction of the A350 marks
the first loss of the type since it en-
tered service nine years ago. The
jet lost at Haneda (JA13XJ) was
barely two years old, having been
delivered to JAL in November 2021.
The post-accident fire consumed
the fuselage, and this is likely to
result in analysis of behaviour of
the A350’s carbonfibre structure.
Investigators will also look into
the evacuation of the aircraft, which
was complicated by malfunction of
the public-address system, accord-
ing to JAL, meaning cabin crew had
to resort to other means to direct
passengers. All on board vacated
through three exits, and the inquiry
will aim to determine why other
exits were unavailable or unused,
and whether the evacuation was as
efficient as it could have been.
Operations on Haneda’s runway
34R/16L resumed on 8 January,
although damage to landing and
navigation aids – notably the preci-
sion-approach path indicator lights
for 16L – meant ILS was used on ap-
proach routes in southerly winds. ◗
See p38
February 2024 Flight International 7
 Visit FlightGlobal Premium for all the latest aviation news and insight FlightGlobal.com
Quality matters
Boeing is finding no respite from its travails as a 5 January
incident, in which a door plug was ejected in flight from a 737
Max 9, has prompted fresh safety scrutiny for the airframer
Jon Hemmerdinger Tampa
B
oeing’s quality-control and
safety protocols have been
thrust back into the spot-
light following the early
January in-flight failure of a 737
Max 9’s door plug, with regula-
tors, investigators and lawmakers
launching fresh probes into the
company’s persistent troubles.
Just how the latest problem will
impact Boeing remains unclear,
but at the very least it seems likely
to affect 737 production and de-
livery rates in the near term. Some
analysts also predict management
changes on the back of the incident.
If nothing else, the issue further
tarnishes Boeing’s reputation as it
fights to regain market share lost
to Airbus.
Problems remain
More broadly, the 5 January Alaska
Airlines incident makes clear that
Boeing’s quality issues endure de-
spite executives repeatedly insist-
ing in recent years they had taken
steps to bolster safety and resolve
quality lapses.
“New CEO. Period,” says Rich-
ard Aboulafia, managing director
with consultancy AeroDynamic
Advisory when asked what is re-
quired to reverse the airframer’s
fortunes. He thinks Boeing’s trou-
bles have persisted long enough
under the tenure of chief executive
David Calhoun, the former board
chair who took over in 2019 with
the express goal of helping Boeing
overcome the initial 737 Max crisis.
That opinion is not universal.
Another analyst, Michel Merluzeau
with AIR, thinks sacking Calhoun
would be little but symbolic, and
possibly counterproductive.
“It’s a simplified answer to a very
complex problem. I think we need
to be a little bit patient and not to
rush into excessive finger pointing,”
Merluzeau says.
He notes that the exact cause of
the Alaska incident remains unclear
8 Flight International February 2024
and that Calhoun seemed genuine-
ly shaken by the event and equally
determined to fix Boeing’s ailments.
Management changes within Boe-
ing Commercial Airplanes (BCA)
are more likely, Merluzeau believes.
“I don’t think that the current
[commercial aircraft] leadership will
remain intact post-Max 9 events.”
BCA has been led since 2019 and
the first Max crisis by chief exec-
utive Stan Deal, who succeeded
Kevin McAllister.
The 737 Max became Boeing’s
biggest problem after crashes in
October 2018 and March 2019 in
which 346 people were killed.
Investigators attributed the
tragedies to a poorly designed
flight-control system that pushed
both aircraft into dives from which
the pilots could not recover. Re-
ports also cited pilot errors and
maintenance shortcomings. The
US Federal Aviation Administra-
tion (FAA) grounded all 737 Max
aircraft for 20 months until Boeing
addressed the flight-control issue.
That grounding should have been
a catalyst for change in culture
and practice. Since then, Boeing
executives have repeatedly stressed
a renewed dedication to quality and
safety, pointing to structural chang-
es, new safety programmes, and
technology investments to show
the airframer was doing everything
necessary to fix its problems.
Boeing created the new role of
chief aerospace safety officer, held
since the start by long-time execu-
tive and engineer Michael Delaney,
and formed a new board-lev-
el panel – the Aerospace Safety
Committee. It also made engineers
“When I got that picture… I didn’t
know what happened to whoever
was supposed to be in that seat
next to that hole in the airplane”
David Calhoun Chief executive, Boeing
throughout the company report
to a chief engineer rather than to
business leaders.
Other enhancements cited by the
airframer include new digital and
analytical tools, improved commu-
nication with customers, new work-
shops and training programmes,
increased employee engagement,
and a safety risk management
NTSB/UPI/Shutterstock
evaluation with a major airline.
Missed goals
Yet quality issues have kept crop-
ping up, both with the 737 Max
and other models, notably the 787,
which have hit Boeing’s ability to
meet delivery goals. Not all the
fault can be laid at Boeing’s door
– supplier Spirit AeroSystems pro-
duces several affected parts – but
the airframer’s systems did not pick
up on the issue until hundreds of air-
craft had already been assembled.
Those issues were significant. But
at least they were caught before
something terrible happened.
Everything changed on 5 January
when the Alaska Max 9’s emergency
exit door plug blew out at around
16,000ft, leaving a gaping hole in
the side of the jet. The rapid decom-
pression reportedly ripped the shirt
off one passenger.
To some extent, the incident had
a happy ending: the pilots landed
flight 1282 safely in Portland without
serious injuries to anyone on board.
But had the narrowbody (N704AL)
been at its cruising altitude of
35,000ft, the outcome could have
been much worse.
This is why flight 1282 lit a candle
under the FAA, airlines and legisla-
tors. Alaska quickly pulled its Max

9s from service, and the FAA fol-
lowed with an emergency airwor-
thiness directive grounding 171 Max
9s globally – all with those same
door plugs – pending inspections.
The FAA says the grounding will
remain in effect until it approves
“an inspection and maintenance
process that satisfies all FAA
safety requirements. Once the
FAA approves an inspection and
maintenance process, it will be re-
quired on every grounded 737-9
Max prior to future operation”.
Safety first
It has also not predicted when
the grounded jets might return to
service, saying safety will dictate
the process.
The failed plug covered an un-
used mid-cabin emergency exit
door. While Max 9s can carry up to
220 passengers, Alaska outfits its
jets with only 178 seats, meaning
it does not need mid-cabin exits
under FAA regulations. Other air-
lines also plug that particular exit.
Four bolts keep the door plugs in
place, or are meant to. Early indica-
tions suggest the incident resulted
from a problem with the plug or
its fixings, inherent at the aircraft’s
delivery in late October 2023.
Following the 5 January incident,
United Airlines reported that it had
found loose door-plug hardware
during inspections.
Experts say circumstances point
to a manufacturing or quality is-
sue, either with Boeing or a sup-
plier. The National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) says Spirit
AeroSystems makes the plugs at
a site in Malaysia. It also builds the
737’s fuselage.
While the incident’s root cause
remains unclear, former NTSB
member John Goglia, now an
aviation safety consultant, believes
the buck stops with the airframer. “It
would appear that Boeing needs to
seriously increase the inspections of
the installation of various [parts] on
their airplanes,” he says.
Investigations by the FAA and
NTSB are now underway. Lawmak-
ers are also demanding answers.
The FAA says its investigation
is focused on Boeing’s manu-
facturing, testing and quality as-
surance processes, and those of
Spirit. The agency is evaluating
Boeing for “alleged non-compli-
ance” with aircraft inspection and
testing regulations and is reviewing
the “delegated authority” under
which Boeing and other aerospace
manufacturers enjoy a large degree
of self-regulation.
“The FAA is… bolstering its
oversight of Boeing, and examin-
ing potential system change,” the
agency says.
Since 5 January, Calhoun has
promised full transparency. He says
Air Transport Safety
Door plug was recoverd from a
residential area of Portland, Oregon
the company will be “acknowledg-
ing our mistake” and giving its full
support to investigators.
By contrast, during the early
part of the first 737 Max crisis,
the manufacturer was perceived
as being less than transparent
and pressuring the FAA to lift the
type’s grounding.
“When I got that picture… I didn’t
know what happened to whoever
was supposed to be in that seat
next to that hole in the airplane,”
Calhoun said during a 9 January
all-hands company meeting, refer-
ring to images taken from inside
the Alaska jet. The event “shook
him to the bone”, he added.
Special advisor
Boeing on 16 January said it had
hired former US Navy admiral Kirk-
land Donald to lead an “in-depth
assessment” of its quality manage-
ment system. Donald will also be a
special advisor to Calhoun.
Analysts predict Boeing and
the Max will recover, noting the
grounding affects a small subset
of the overall Max fleet. But larger
questions, such as how additional
scrutiny by regulators will impact
the company, and what investiga-
tors may find, remain unanswered.
“It’s a question of what it means
for additional oversight. It’s the
knock-on effect,” says Aboulafia. ◗
See p38
February 2024 Flight International 9
 Visit FlightGlobal Premium for all the latest aviation news and insight FlightGlobal.com
Why Airbus has the wind in its sales
While the orders and deliveries battle in 2023 followed a
familiar script, the European airframer’s growing narrowbody
advantage raises big questions that Boeing has yet to answer
Jon Hemmerdinger Tampa
David Kaminski-Morrow &
Dominic Perry London
F
or the fifth consecutive year,
Airbus in 2023 delivered
more aircraft and landed
more orders than Boeing,
reflecting the US airframer’s ongo-
ing difficultly in overcoming trou-
bles with its aircraft programmes,
most notably with the 737 Max.
In many ways, the order totals fol-
lowed a familiar pattern: Airbus won
the narrowbody battle, but Boeing
bested its rival on widebodies.
But that does not tell the whole
story, particularly the scale – both
in 2023 and cumulatively – of the
A320neo’s growing lead over the
competing 737 Max.
In fact, having secured 1,675 net
orders for A320neo-family aircraft
in 2023, Airbus has now surpassed
the 10,000-order mark for the
re-engined variant (see p13).
Although reaching that mile-
stone carries its own significance,
Flydubai ordered 30
787s in November
10 Flight International February 2024
outselling the 737 Max last year by
a ratio of around 2:1 makes a more
profound statement.
Of course, Boeing was not idle on
the commercial side, racking up tri-
ple-figure Max deals from Air India
(190), Ryanair (150), and Southwest
Airlines (111), plus a landmark order
in late December from Lufthansa.
62%
Share of undelivered narrowbody
backlog now held by Airbus: 7,191
units compared with Boeing’s 4,316
However, its full-year net total for
the narrowbody was just 883 units.
At end-2023, Airbus reported
a backlog of 7,191 aircraft for the
A320neo family, against Boeing’s
total of 4,316 for the 737 Max,
meaning that the European air-
framer now holds a 62% share of
the total undelivered backlog.
The A321neo was again a big sell-
er, pulling in 1,279 net orders last
year – 76% of Airbus’s narrowbody
total, and 65% of all narrowbody
commitments – including 521 in
the last month of the year alone.
AirTeamImages
EasyJet, Turkish Airlines and Avo-
lon each placed 100-plus-strong
A321neo orders in December.
The total backlog for the largest
family member now sits at 4,923
– including 550 of the long-range
XLR model – alongside 1,248 exam-
ples already in service. By contrast,
Boeing has booked 1,063 orders for
the competing 737 Max 10, deliver-
ies of which have yet to start.
“The advantage Airbus has es-
tablished with the A321neo makes
it tough for Boeing to compete at
the larger end of the single-aisle
sector,” notes Max Kingsley-Jones,
senior consultant at Cirium Ascend
Consultancy. “And Boeing’s situa-
tion isn’t helped by the ongoing –
and increasing – uncertainty over
the 737-10’s schedule.”
But Airbus’s success creates its
own problem for the airframer,
 Airframers Performance

“The advantage Airbus has with

the A321neo makes it tough for
Boeing to compete at the larger
end of the single-aisle sector”
Max Kingsley-Jones Senior consultant, Cirium Ascend Consultancy

A321neo was again a big seller,

pulling in 1,279 net orders last year

with few, if any, delivery slots

available in the near term. In theo- Airbus 2023 orders and deliveries
ry Boeing could capitalise on that Type Orders Cancellations Net orders Deliveries End-2023 backlog

congestion, says Kingsley-Jones, A220-100 7 0 7 3 43

“but only if Seattle can achieve the A220-300 135 1 134 65 557
production-rate increases it is tar- A319 2 1 1 7 46
geting and significantly increase A320 520 125 395 247 2,228
shipment volumes”. A321 1,313 34 1,279 317 4,923
Total narrowbodies 1,977 161 1,816 639 7,797
Baby steps A330 5 16 -11 3 5
Boeing has a target to raise A330neo 37 29 8 29 175
monthly deliveries of the 737 Max A350 300 19 281 64 621
to 57 aircraft by July 2025, and Total widebodies 342 64 278 96 801
took steps – albeit baby ones – to- Total 2,319 225 2,094 735 8,598
wards that goal in 2023, handing Source: Airbus Note: Totals include airframes for military conversion

over a total of 387 units.

However, the airframer struggled
throughout 2023 with production Boeing 2023 orders and deliveries
and quality problems that slowed Type Orders Cancellations Net orders Deliveries End-2023 backlog

deliveries across its portfolio, but 737NG 0 0 0 9 16

particularly for the 737 Max. 737 Max 987 104 883 387 4,316
At the start of last year, Boeing Total narrowbodies 987 104 883 396 4,332
had aimed to hand over 400-450 747 0 0 0 1 0
737s during the year. But in Octo- 767 30 0 30 32 104
ber it reset the target to 375-400 777 126 26 100 26 464
deliveries, citing a quality problem 787 313 12 301 73 726
involving mis-drilled holes in aft Total widebodies 469 38 431 132 1,294
pressure bulkheads supplied by Total 1,456 142 1,314 528 5,626
Spirit AeroSystems. Source: Boeing Note: Totals include airframes destined for military conversion

While it met that revised goal,

the ongoing quality issues bedevil-
ling the manufacturer were starkly
illustrated in the opening days of
2024 when a door plug blew out of
a Max 9 during flight, forcing reg-
ulators to ground hundreds of the
type. It is so far unclear how the
latest mishap will affect Boeing’s
production plans this year, but
as New Year omens go, it hardly
augurs well.
Analysts have predicted mini-
mal long-term impact, but the fall-
Boeing
sparked broader concern about AeroDynamic Advisory. He is une-
Boeing’s ability to consistently de- quivocal when asked how Boeing
liver problem-free aircraft. should proceed: “Launch a new
In the meantime, Boeing must product,” he says. “Ideally a sin-
decide what to do next. “If Boe- gle-aisle New Midsize Airplane.”
ing can’t materially address the While noting that the 787 “is the
widening gulf [with the A320neo leading widebody” – Boeing added
family], perhaps it will have to con- another 301 net orders for the
sider accelerating its timeline for Dreamliner in 2023 – the airframer’s
the introduction of an all-new sin- strategic weakness lies further down
gle-aisle?” says Kingsley-Jones. the size range: “A lot of people are
That view is shared by Richard looking towards a narrowbody for

out continues to spread and has Aboulafia, managing director of what used to be [performed by]

February 2024 Flight International 11

 Axing of dormant Iran Air order saw eight
A330-200s scrubbed from backlog

A330-300 backlog falls to zero 30 years after entry into service

Airbus has removed the only outstanding order for
A330-300s from its backlog, an agreement for eight
aircraft with China’s state aviation supply firm CASC.
The adjustment means all 776 A330-300s on firm
order have been delivered, almost exactly 30 years
since French airline Air Inter put the first into service
in January 1994.
CASC placed an order for 30 A330-300s in
October 2015, but still had eight aircraft on the
airframer’s backlog by 2019. Airbus’s latest full-year
backlog data shows the aircraft have been removed.
There is no indication which carrier was destined to
operate the twinjets.
Airbus is still taking orders for the A330-200 shrink,
because it is used as the platform for the military
Multi-Role Tanker Transport.
The A330-300 has evolved into the A330-900 –
the larger member of the re-engined A330neo family
– which has taken 284 orders.
Gross orders for the A330neo during 2023 reached
37 aircraft, all but one for the -900 variant.
However, net orders for the Neo last year stood at
eight aircraft after 29 cancellations were recorded.
Airbus
The majority of these, 28, is accounted for by the
removal of Iran Air’s landmark agreement for 100
aircraft from the backlog.
The Iranian flag carrier placed the order in 2016
after sanctions were eased as part of a political
agreement over Tehran’s nuclear energy programme.
Iran Air ordered 98 jets including 16 A350-1000s
and 28 A330-900s, as well as eight A330-200s,
along with 32 A320neos, eight A321s and six A320s.
The carrier was also assigned a pair of A330-200s
which had originally been delivered to Avianca but
not put into service.
But while the two A330-200s and a single new
A321 were delivered to the Tehran-based airline, the
remaining 97 aircraft have remained on the backlog
after political tensions between the US and Iranian
governments re-emerged in 2018.
All the 97 remaining aircraft assigned to Iran Air
have been struck off, the airframer’s updated backlog
figures show.
This adjustment for Iran Air accounted for more
than 40% of a total of 225 cancellations recorded by
Airbus last year.

Environment and Noise Management Courses by the UK CAA

Ensure your team is up to date with Environment and Noise Management training, designed to
identify actions to enable the sustainable development of the aviation sector.

Aviation and the Environment Noise Management

Understand the key environmental challenges
at a global and local scale by addressing
initiatives to minimise the impact on the
environment and global climate.
Virtual | 10 May 2024
Gain a thorough grounding in the regulatory
framework for aircraft noise control
internationally and in the UK; noise mapping
principles for assessing/quantifying noise and
techniques for noise control and mitigation.
Virtual | 12-13 June 2024
Virtual | 5-6 December 2024

To book or view the complete schedule of our training courses,

please visit www.caainternational.com/training

12 Flight International February 2024


a widebody,” Aboulafia says. “And
that means Airbus.”
But years of strategic drift have
left the US airframer poorly placed
for a new aircraft launch.
“It’s good to be Airbus,” observes
Aboulafia. “They have leadership.
They have a product-development
roadmap and they are winning the
market-share war. They are well
run. Boeing is not.”
That said, the Dreamliner’s com-
mercial performance, and that of
the 777X, was a spot of good news
for Boeing. In total, it booked net
orders for 431 widebodies – includ-
ing 30 767-based KC-46 aerial re-
fuelling tankers and 100 777/777X
aircraft. In the latter case, a 90-unit
777X commitment from Emirates
Airline in November accounted
for the bulk of new business for
the big-twin, helping to offset 26
cancellations for the programme
during the year.
Negative territory
Although the A350 sold strongly
during 2023 – Airbus took in 281
net orders – cancellations for the
A330/A330neo, and the remov-
al of a dormant order for Iran Air,
pushed that programme into nega-
tive territory.
“Airbus has struggled to gain trac-
tion with the A330neo,” observes
Kingsley-Jones. But with a backlog
of only 175 aircraft at year-end,
compared with respective figures of
621 and 726 for the A350 and 787,
there is potentially an opportunity,
he argues: “Perhaps Airbus can take
advantage of having earlier slot
availability to secure some tactical
wins with the A330neo?”
One final nuance highlighted
by the order figures, adds Kings-
ley-Jones, is in the freighter market,
where Airbus took in commitments
for 15 A350Fs last year, against 10
current-generation 777Fs, while
Boeing failed in 2023 to add to its
55-unit backlog for the 777-8F.
Overall, 2023 was a record-
breaking year for Airbus, with the
airframer booking a total of 2,094
net orders – its best-ever annual
performance. Aside from beating
Boeing, which brought in 1,314 net
orders (1,456 gross), Airbus was
significantly ahead of its 2022 to-
tal, when it sold 820 jets.
The figures mark the first time
Airbus has achieved more than
2,000 net orders in a single year.
The airframer’s previous high-
est net total was 1,503 in 2013,
Airframers Performance
AirTeamImages
Virgin America was first to commit to
re-engined narrowbody in January 2011
Orders hit five-digit mark for A320neo family
Orders for Airbus’s A320neo family have reached five digits, almost
13 years to the day since the first airline agreement for the type
was disclosed.
Airbus’s latest backlog data shows firm orders for the re-engined
models have reached 10,354 aircraft.
Chief commercial officer Christian Scherer says this five-figure total
was “more than originally anticipated”.
“We’re quite happy about that,” he says.
Airbus disclosed the first order for the A320neo, from Virgin
America, in January 2011.
The A321neo has since established itself as the preferred variant,
with 6,171 orders, and Scherer says these include 550 of the new
long-range A321XLR – due to enter service in the second quarter of
this year.
Airbus’s cumulative orders for the A320neo family exceed, by more
than 2,000, the total for conventional A320-family jets.
The airframer delivered 8,100 aircraft from this earlier family
between 1988 and 2021.
It has finally cut the last seven outstanding A321s from the backlog,
but still officially has orders for four A320s and two A319s.
Airbus has an overall backlog of just under 8,600 aircraft across its
entire range, including nearly 7,200 A320neo-family jets.
aided by strong A320neo-family Airbus has yet to disclose its pro-
and widebody numbers. duction expectations for this year,
Airbus recorded gross orders for but Faury indicates it will not reach
2,319 aircraft, the highest gross to- the pre-pandemic level of 2019.
tal since 2014 when it listed 1,796. Its delivery output in 2023 fol-
Airbus handed over a total of 735 lowed a year in which supply-chain
aircraft during 2023, exceeding its snags foiled its attempt to reach a
full-year delivery target of 720. The target in 2022 of 700 – a revision
airframer delivered 247 aircraft in down from the original 720 – re-
the fourth quarter – more than 33% sulting in the manufacturer’s falling
of its total shipments last year. some 40 deliveries short.
Airbus chief executive Guillaume
Faury calls 2023 “a landmark year Latest target
for Airbus’s commercial aircraft Faury says this year’s production
business, with exceptional sales ramp-up remains “on track”.
and deliveries on the upper end of But he says the target for deliver-
our target”. ies this year – likely to be disclosed
“A number of factors came during its full-year financial briefing
together to help us achieve our on 15 February – is “very unlikely”
goals, including the increased flex- to reach the 2019 level of 863.
ibility and capability of our global “[It] won’t be at that number in
industrial system, as well as the 2024,” he states.
strong demand from airlines to re- Faury acknowledges that the
fresh their fleets,” he adds. situation in the supply chain is
The airframer had handed over “still tense”, although there are
663 aircraft in 2022 – although the indications it is “getting better”.
formal total was 661, after adjust- The company is maintaining 2026
ment for a pair of A350s which monthly production targets of 75
could not be delivered to Russia’s A320neo-family aircraft, 10 A350s
Aeroflot owing to sanctions. and 14 A220s. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 13
PAID CONTENT
America’s Runway Safety Requires
Urgent Action by Congress,
FAA and Industry
F
ive people were killed Jan-
uary 2 when a jetliner with
379 passengers and crew-
members onboard collided
with a coast guard aircraft on a
Tokyo runway. Heroic efforts by
the airliner’s cabin crew prevented
greater loss of life, but the tragic
accident underscores the need for
immediate action to reduce the
frequency of runway incursions
and close calls.
Serious runway safety incidents
have become entirely too com-
monplace at U.S. airports, leaving
no doubt that Congress, the FAA
and the aviation industry need to
address this alarming trend.
Two airliners passed within 300
feet of each other on a Burbank,
Calif., runway in February 2023,
putting 118 lives at risk. A busi-
ness aircraft and a jetliner came
within just 100 feet of one an-
other last summer in San Diego
with 117 people onboard. And in
October, two business jets col-
lided on the runway at Houston
14 Flight International February 2024
Hobby International Airport with
seven people onboard; fortunately,
no-one was injured.
These and more than 20 other
serious runway incidents in 2023
demonstrate that America’s
approach to runway safety is
insufficient and under enormous
stress. The rate of serious close
call incidents is rising, and these
events are receiving growing
attention from policymakers, the
media, and the flying public.
Runway Safety Trends are Moving
in the Wrong Direction
Of the nearly 55 million takeoffs and
landings in fiscal year 2023, there
were 23 of the most serious types
of runway incursions, up from 16 in
FY 2022. Human factors analysis
suggests this sharp increase is not
just a temporary blip in the data.
It indicates a troubling trend that
must be addressed immediately to
prevent accidents and save lives.
In her November 9 testimony be-
fore the U.S. Senate Subcommittee
on Aviation Safety, Operations and
Innovation, National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) Chair Jennifer
L. Homendy put it this way:
“Trends around these most
serious surface incidents and other
near misses are not moving in the
right direction, and we must re-
spond to these incidents seriously.
Any one of these near misses could
have been a devastating tragedy.”
NTSB Recommends Cockpit
Alerting Systems to Improve
Runway Safety
NTSB Chair Homendy emphasized
the vital importance of cockpit
alerting systems in any effective
warning system: “We continue to
urge the FAA to require a system
that provides direct warning capa-
bility to flight crews at all airports
with scheduled passenger service,
and to collaborate with aircraft
and avionics manufacturers and
software developers to create the
technology for a cockpit system
that directly alerts pilots when an

airplane is not aligned with the
intended runway surface.”
Over the last 20 years, the FAA
has installed Airport Surface
Detection Equipment-Model X
(ASDE-X) at 35 airports at the
cost of $550 million. ASDE-X is
designed to improve air traffic
controllers’ awareness of potential
runway surface issues, but it does
not provide cockpit alerts to the
pilots who play such a critical role
in preventing runway incursions as
the last line of defense.
Equipping an additional
470-plus airports may be cost
prohibitive for American taxpayers
and full deployment would likely
take more than a decade while the
threat of additional serious runway
incursions continues.
Cockpit Alerting Technologies
are Critical to Improving Runway
Safety and Preventing Accidents
Onboard cockpit alerting solu-
tions are FAA-certified, ready and
available today. They can be rolled
out quickly for a fraction of the
cost of airport surface detection
technologies such as ASDE-X and
provide a huge improvement in
runway situational awareness for
flight crews.
“The FAA has focused over-
whelmingly on promoting tech-
nologies that equip the control
tower to manage traffic on the
“We must work to bring ready-
now safety technologies like the
runway awareness and advisory
system to the flight deck.”
Jim Currier President and CEO, Honeywell Aerospace Technologies
runway surface and respond
to close calls,” said Jim Currier,
President and CEO for Honeywell
Aerospace Technologies, a
leading developer of avionics and
aviation safety solutions. “This
is only part of the multi-dimen-
sional layered solutions we need
to solve a safety problem of this
magnitude. We also need to give
flight crews highly intuitive warn-
ing systems so they can respond
quickly and efficiently in an emer-
gency and prevent catastrophe.”
Currier added: “We must work
to bring ready-now safety tech-
nologies like the runway aware-
ness and advisory system (RAAS)
to the flight deck. RAAS software
is already installed on most newer
Boeing and Airbus aircraft, but
only a few airlines are currently
using the system.”
RAAS is an advisory system that
provides aural alerts to increase a
pilot’s situational awareness during
ground and air operations at the
airport. Because it is a software
upgrade to the enhanced ground
proximity warning system (EG-
PWS), the RAAS is significantly
more cost-effective than ground-
based runway incursion solutions.
As required equipment on
commercial aircraft, the EGPWS
has been credited with saving
countless lives since its introduc-
tion in the 1970s.
PAID CONTENT
Pilot Community Supports
Greater Use of Cockpit Alerting
Systems
Capt. Jason Ambrosi, President
of the Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA) also testified
before the Senate Subcommittee
on November 9. “Flight deck
enhancements are important for
flight crews to increase situational
awareness and receive alerts
early enough to take action to
avoid a near miss or an accident,”
he stated.
“No stone should go unturned
as we look to advancements in
technology to help address these
near miss events.”
“The path forward will be
challenging,” Currier concluded.
“Creating a technology roadmap
encompassing both airside
and ground-based solutions
will require strong leadership
from the FAA and the active
engagement of airlines and
aircraft operators, original
equipment manufacturers, safety
solution suppliers, pilots and air
traffic controllers.” Z
● Honeywell is a leading
developer of aviation safety
technology including runway
awareness and advisory system
(RAAS) technology.
For more information, visit
www.aerospace.honeywell.com
February 2024 Flight International 15
 ‘Revolutionary’ X-59
makes quiet debut
Steve Freeman/NASA
NASA’s low-boom supersonic demonstrator is unveiled at
Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works site ahead of test campaign
Howard Hardee Sacramento
W
ith the drop of a
curtain, NASA and
Lockheed Martin on 12
January revealed the
experimental X-59 aircraft that is
intended to demonstrate the poten-
tial of “low-boom” supersonic flight.
During a roll-out ceremony at
Lockheed’s Skunk Works facility
in Palmdale, California, the sleek,
Boom demonstrator
edges closer to flight
Delayed XB-1 could fly this year, enabling
developer to explore technologies for
future Overture supersonic airliner
Jon Hemmerdinger Tampa
T
he US Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) has
taken a step toward ap-
proving Boom Supersonic
to perform faster-than-sound test
flights using its XB-1 demonstrator,
but the agency’s green light re-
mains outstanding.
The FAA on 9 January released
an environmental assessment
addressing possible impacts of
Boom’s planned supersonic flight-
test programme.
16 Flight International February 2024
single-engined jet was hailed by
its developers as a potentially
“revolutionary” step forward that
could unlock commercial superson-
ic flights over populated areas.
“As we unveil this technologi-
cal marvel, it’s really important to
understand the profound impact the
X-59 holds for the aviation indus-
try,” says NASA deputy administra-
tor Pam Melroy. “Today, supersonic
flight brings a thunderous boom. It
is restricted across populated areas
The 79-page document describes
the activity as having minimal envi-
ronmental impact, considering the
supersonic flights are to be con-
ducted within airspace corridors
already widely used by the military.
Boom has for several years said
it was close to getting the XB-1
airborne for the first time, but
its targets have come and gone.
Recently, the company said it
expects the milestone event will
occur in “early 2024”.
Boom is planning to use the XB-1
to evaluate designs and technolo-
gy as part of the development of
for good reason. And the X-59 is
going to break that barrier.”
Melroy adds that the X-59’s
boom-dampening technology “re-
defines the feasibility of commer-
cial supersonic travel over land”.
Ground testing
The aircraft was assembled at the
Skunk Works site and has been un-
dergoing ground testing in a tent-
like enclosure called a run stall. It
had previously been seen publicly,
its conceptual Overture superson-
ic airliner.
Boom last year received an
airworthiness certification from the
FAA for its XB-1.
Because US rules prohibit su-
personic flight of civilian aircraft,
Boom needs a “special flight au-
thorisation” before flying the XB-1
at supersonic speed. That process
requires the FAA to complete an
environmental impact study.
“The FAA is evaluating Boom’s
request for a special flight author-
isation,” it said in a regulatory no-
tice released on 11 January.
Environmental assessment
The newly released environmental
assessment provides fresh details
about Boom’s planned XB-1 flight
tests. The company expects the
test programme will include 10-20
flights at supersonic speed, and
the FAA’s waiver would be valid for
one year.
Boom Supersonic
Boom will operate the XB-1 from
Mojave Air & Space Port in Califor-
nia and perform supersonic flights
at altitudes of at least 30,000ft in

Aircraft was formally revealed
with a fresh colour scheme
but was formally unveiled with a
fresh coat of paint.
NASA says the X-59’s first flight is
“coming soon”, but does not spec-
ify when the experimental aircraft
will get airborne.
The X-59 is designed to produce
a “soft thump” rather than a sonic
boom, says Bob Pearce, associate
administrator for NASA’s Aeronaut-
ics Research Mission Directorate.
“Is the thump quiet enough to
allow supersonic flight over land?
two regions of airspace over the
state, both within an area managed
by the US military. Those regions
include the “Black Mountain Super-
sonic Corridor” and the “High-Alti-
tude Supersonic Corridor”.
Boom intends to use a Northrop
F-5 or T-38 as a chase aircraft dur-
ing flight tests.
Our laboratory studies would say
yes, but the real answer can be
found engaging people who would
hear it in daily life,” he says.
The flight-test programme with
the X-59 is due to last nine months.
Then, the agency will begin a three-
year period of measuring the air-
craft’s sonic boom – including sur-
veying members of the public on
the ground as it flies over US cities.
Lockheed executives tout the
commercial potential of the X-59’s
technology, which could cut flight
times between New York and Los
Angeles roughly in half. John Clark,
general manager of Skunk Works,
says the technology could be in
commercial use as soon as 2032.
“There is going to be a lot of op-
portunity in the future to drive new
innovations with new commercial
transport based on the technology
we’re creating here,” he says.
The development team used
advanced manufacturing tech-
niques including augmented reali-
ty, robotic drilling and modelling to
help condense assembly time.
The clean-sheet demonstrator
was assembled using components
from various suppliers and off-the-
shelf parts from the Northrop T-38,
“The XB-1 demonstrator will test
design features and operations,
develop technologies and validate
tools that aid in reducing later risks
associated with the final aircraft
design,” the FAA says. “The XB-1
would serve as a flying data collec-
tor; a massive data acquisition sys-
tem is integrated into the airplane.
Company will carry out tests at
Mojave Air & Space Port in California
Technology Supersonics
Boeing F-15 and F/A-18, and Lock-
heed F-16. It is powered by a GE
Aerospace F414-100 engine, and
will be capable of cruising at speeds
greater than 800kt (1,482km/h).
Notably, the aircraft lacks
forward-facing cockpit windows,
which were deemed too disruptive
to airflow. Rather, its pilot will rely
on an external vision system based
on ultra-high-resolution cameras.
Alternative view
Melroy says the system “has the
potential to influence future aircraft
designs, where the absence of that
forward-facing window may prove
advantageous for engineering
reasons, as it did for us”.
Other design features include a
top-mounted engine “with a deck
under the nozzle, which ensures
that shock waves don’t merge be-
hind the aircraft and create that
disruptive shock below”, she says.
The aircraft’s unveiling marks a
milestone in the repeatedly delayed
programme, as NASA had previous-
ly intended to fly the X-59 in 2021.
Last year, a flight-control problem
was discovered during ground-test-
ing, forcing the aircraft back indoors
for re-evaluation. ◗
“This would enable the
development of a safe, airworthy
design for the company’s full-
size supersonic airliner, Overture,”
adds the document.
The FAA is accepting public
comments about the assessment
through 2 February.
Boom rolled out its three GE
Aerospace J85-15-engined XB-1 in
October 2020, saying at the time
that it intended for the aircraft to
make its first flight the following
year. Then in 2021, Boom chief ex-
ecutive Blake Scholl said the mile-
stone might not occur until 2022.
Overture engines
Major questions about Boom’s
project remain open, including
about the engines intended to
power its conceptual Overture.
Late in 2022, Boom picked Florida
Turbine Technologies, GE Additive
and StandardAero to help it devel-
op a new Symphony engine – four
of which will power the Overture.
The aircraft is to fly at Mach 1.7,
carry 64-80 passengers and have a
4,250nm (7,870km) range. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 17
 Airlines Strategy
JT Occhialini/Wikimedia Commons
Court ruling lowers JetBlue’s Spirit
Pair ponder next steps as planned $3.8 billion acquisition of
ultra-low-cost carrier is blocked on competition concerns
Howard Hardee Sacramento
J
etBlue Airways is considering
its next move after a US dis-
trict court ruled on 16 Janu-
ary that the airline’s proposed
$3.8 billion acquisition of rival ultra-
low-cost carrier (ULCC) Spirit Air-
lines cannot proceed, blocking the
deal on anti-competitive grounds.
The US District Court for the Dis-
trict of Massachusetts sided with
the federal government’s argument
that the proposed deal would vi-
olate the Clayton Act, an antitrust
law designed to protect consumers
from the harms of monopolies.
“The court rules that the pro-
posed merger, as it stands, would
substantially lessen competition in
violation of the Clayton Act,” writes
Boston-based US District Judge
William Young. “The proposed
merger, therefore, is enjoined.”
The decision is a major setback
for JetBlue’s growth strategy and
ends the carrier’s all-out pursuit of
Spirit’s assets – namely its fleet of
Airbus narrowbodies. JetBlue has
also described the deal as critical
to its ambitions of competing with
the US majors.
JetBlue and Spirit disagree
with the ruling and say they are
evaluating their next steps, seem-
ingly leaving open the possibility
of an appeal.
“We continue to believe that
our combination is the best
18 Flight International February 2024
opportunity to increase much
needed competition and choice
by bringing low fares and great
service to more customers in more
markets while enhancing our abil-
ity to compete with the dominant
US carriers,” the pair state.
Last year, JetBlue was forced to
abandon the so-called ‘Northeast
Alliance’, a separate collaboration
with American Airlines – focused
on routes from major airports in
the northeast USA – after it was
also deemed illegal, and had to be
unwound. While American appealed
that ruling, JetBlue did not, hoping
it would help its bid for Spirit.
No barriers
“JetBlue’s termination of the North-
east Alliance and commitment to
significant divestitures removed any
reasonable anti-competitive con-
cerns that the Department of Jus-
tice raised,” the airline adds.
Young concedes that “it is under-
standable that JetBlue seeks inor-
ganic growth through acquisition
of aircraft that would eliminate one
of its primary competitors”, but as-
serts that the deal “does violence to
the core principle of antitrust law”.
“If JetBlue were permitted to
gobble up Spirit – at least as pro-
posed – it would eliminate one of
the airline industry’s few primary
competitors that provides unique
innovation and price discipline,”
he writes. “It would further consol-
idate an oligopoly by immediately
Federal government argued merger
would violate antitrust laws
doubling JetBlue’s stakeholder size
in the industry.
“Worse yet, the merger would
likely incentivise JetBlue further to
abandon its roots as a maverick,
low-cost carrier.”
Young acknowledges that the
combined company would prob-
ably put greater pressure on the
“Big Four” US carriers – American
Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest
Airlines and United Airlines.
“At the same time, however, the
consumers that rely on Spirit’s
unique, low-cost model would like-
ly be harmed,” he writes.
He argues that Spirit’s position in
the market “would be exceedingly
difficult for another airline, or a
combination of other airlines, to
replicate, even with low barriers
to entry… inasmuch as they face
the same industry-wide aircraft
sourcing issues”.
Although analysts view the
decision as positive for JetBlue,
given Spirit’s recent poor financial
performance, the outlook is less
clear for the ULCC, with options on
the table varying from a Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection filing to a
merger with another airline.
For example, Frontier Airlines
could take another run at acquiring
Spirit after appearing close to final-
ising a deal in July 2022, only to be
rebuffed in favour of JetBlue’s more
lucrative offer. However, this would
likely be at a lower price than its
original proposal. ◗
 Defence Contracts
Duties for 16-strong fleet will
include anti-submarine warfare
Spain bolsters maritime overwatch
Air force and navy will field adapted C295 twin-turboprops
as replacements for retired P-3s and ageing CN235s, as
nation’s unmanned SIRTAP project also takes off
Craig Hoyle London
M
adrid has awarded Airbus
Defence & Space almost
€1.7 billion ($1.8 billion) to
produce 16 C295s adapt-
ed for maritime duties.
Announced in December 2023,
the deal spans two versions of
the twin-turboprop: a maritime
patrol aircraft (MPA), and maritime
surveillance aircraft (MSA).
“These new aircraft will enable
the Spanish air and space force and
the Spanish navy to strengthen the
national anti-submarine warfare
capability as well as increase and
enhance surveillance, reconnais-
sance and search and rescue units,”
Airbus’s defence unit says.
To replace already-retired
Lockheed Martin P-3 Orions, the
C295 MPA will perform anti-sub-
marine and anti-surface warfare
tasks, along with intelligence, sur-
veillance and reconnaissance (ISR).
Airbus Defence & Space
It will have a tail boom-housed
magnetic anomaly detector and
deploy sonobuoys, be armed with
torpedoes, and have a Ka-band
satellite communications fit.
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
20 Flight International February 2024
Airbus says the variant also
“can become a flying command
and control centre, providing the
Spanish armed forces with the
versatility to carry out a wide
range of missions”.
Airbus Defence & Space chief
executive Michael Schoellhorn
describes the deal as “a major
development project that will bring
together the latest technologies to
provide an operational advantage
to our customer”.
Also included in the deal are
full flight and mission system
simulators, plus an initial logistics
support package.
Complex conflguration
The company describes the MPA
model as “the most complex C295
mission configuration to date”, and
the MSA version as “the natural
replacement for the CN235 VIGMA
aircraft fleet, which has been in
service with the Spanish air and
space force since 2008”.
The MSA platform will be
configured for maritime and
over-land duties including “an-
ti-smuggling, anti-illegal immi-
gration and anti-drug trafficking
Download the 2024
Wo r l d A i r Fo r c e s r e p o r t
FlightGlobal.com/waf
operations”, in addition to search
and rescue tasks.
The airframer has not disclosed
the orders split between the
variants, which will be delivered
from its San Pablo final assembly
site near Seville.
The company had the pre-
vious month been awarded a
roughly €495 million contract to
manufacture nine SIRTAP tactical
unmanned air systems for Spain’s
air force and army.
Each system will comprise three
air vehicles and a ground control
station, with the deal also including
two simulators.
Images released by the airframer
show the SIRTAP design as
featuring a V-tail with a single
turboprop engine in a pusher
propeller configuration.
Due to make its flight debut in
2025, the unmanned aircraft will
perform ISR tasks, but could also
conduct offensive missions. Its
wingspan is thought to be around
13m (42ft 6in), with a payload of
over 150kg (330lb). ◗
Additional reporting by
Dominic Perry

Rafale sales keep soaring
Paris signs contract for ‘tranche 5’ batch of C-model fighters
to enter service from 2027, while Indonesian commitment
for 18 more examples pushes backlog beyond 200 units
Craig Hoyle & Dominic Perry London
T
he French air force will begin
fielding its most advanced
batch of Rafale C fighters
from 2027, under a produc-
tion contract placed with Dassault
Aviation at the end of last year.
Valued by France’s defence
ministry at more than €5 bil-
lion ($5.5 billion), the so-called
tranche 5 order is for a total of 42
single-seaters. Placed “at the end
of December 2023”, the deal was
announced on 12 January.
France’s DGA defence procure-
ment agency says deliveries will
involve aircraft produced in the F4
operating standard, but “designed
to evolve towards the F5 standard
in the 2030s”.
In all, Dassault took in orders
for 60 Rafales in 2023, with the
total also including 18 examples
for Indonesia. The company then
added another 18 of the type to its
backlog for Jakarta on 8 January,
taking the export buyer’s total firm
commitment to 42.
“Indonesia has opted for a
unique tool for sovereignty and
operational independence that
will help consolidate its role as a
Dassault Aviation
France’s order for 42 units is
valued at more than $5.5 billion
major regional power,” says Das-
sault chief executive Eric Trappier.
Referring to its latest deal with
the French air force, Dassault notes:
“The [international] order book,
plus the new tranche 5 contract,
secure production activity for the
next 10 years.”
“We are ready and determined to
use our skills as prime contractor
and complex systems integrator
to serve the sovereignty of our
nation,” Trappier says, noting that
France’s “military industrial sover-
eignty is an exception in Europe”
which “guarantees the superiority
of our combat aviation”.
Export strength
Trappier also describes the Rafale
as “an asset for diplomatic influ-
ence and an economic strength in
export trade”. In addition to its use
by the French air force and navy,
the multi-role type is also flown
by the air forces of Croatia, Egypt,
Greece, India and Qatar. Addition-
al firm orders include its business
with Indonesia, plus an 80-unit deal
with the United Arab Emirates.
Programme Orders
Cirium fleets data shows the
French air force as operating 90
Rafale B/Cs. A new F4.1 operating
standard is in the process of being
introduced, and work on the future
F5 standard “is currently preparing
for launch”, Dassault says.
The company delivered 13 Rafales
in 2023, against previous guidance
of 15 units; in 2022 it had handed
over 14 examples. Its order back-
log for the type at the end of 2023
stood at 211 aircraft.
Separately, sales and shipments
of the airframer’s Falcon business
jet family slipped during 2023, its
results data shows.
Orders slumped to 23 aircraft,
from 64 the previous year. Deliver-
ies also fell short of its earlier guid-
ance of 35 units, with the company
instead handing over 26 jets, down
from 32 in 2022.
The shortfall appears to have
been due to post-certification
modifications required to the fuel
tanks of its new, ultra-wide-cabin
Falcon 6X twinjet. Approvals for
the aircraft from European and US
regulators were also only received
in August 2023.
Its year-end backlog for the
Falcon family stood at 84 aircraft:
down three from 2022. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 21
Hermeus Technology Demonstration
Company aims to deliver uncrewed
aircraft capable of reaching Mach 4
Quarterhorse ups the pace
Successful test activity involving non-flight article clears way
for Hermeus to start its journey towards proving hypersonic
performance for both military and commercial applications
Ryan Finnerty Syracuse
H
ypersonic developer Her-
meus has completed ground-
based evaluations on the
first iteration of its Quarter-
horse remotely-piloted aircraft.
Technical objectives for the
non-flying Quarterhorse Mk 0
included taxiing under remote
command and control, evaluat-
ing radio frequency latency, and
the ground handling qualities of
its integrated systems, the Atlan-
ta-based company says.
It also enabled human
factor evaluations and
demonstrated pilot-in-
the-loop steering and
controls, with all test
objectives complet-
ed during 37 days of
deployed evaluations,
Hermeus adds.
Notably, the test article
– the first of four vehicles
planned for the Quar-
terhorse programme –
was designed and built
Hermeus
in under six months, the
company says.
“Leveraging rapid and
iterative design is how Hermeus
will accelerate aircraft develop-
ment on timelines that are relevant
to our customers,” says chief ex-
ecutive and co-founder AJ Piplica.
“Test campaigns measured in days,
instead of months or years, repre-
sent the pace required to mature
hypersonic technology and field
transformative aircraft.”
Testing took place at the US
Air Force’s Arnold Engineering
Development Complex in Tullaho-
ma, Tennessee.
22 Flight International February 2024
“Hermeus made the deliberate design is a turbine-based com-
decision to perform these ground bined cycle engine, incorporating
test operations on an air force a pre-cooler, off-the-shelf turbojet
base, allowing the team to inter- and a ramjet.
face directly with air force range In order to break the threshold for
and regulatory authorities,” the hypersonic flight, a vehicle needs
company says. two engine systems: a turbojet or
In November 2023, the rocket to reach an airspeed of be-
Pentagon’s Defense Innova- tween M3 and M3.5, and then a ram-
tion Unit provided Hermeus jet or scramjet to accelerate to M5
with research and development and beyond. That mid-flight tran-
funding in order to support the sition between conventional and
maturation of hypersonic technol- high-speed propulsion remains a
ogies, including the development significant technical hurdle.
of a flight vehicle. Hermeus plans to work its way
through the engineering
and development chal-
Initial prototype was designed lenges using four pro-
and built in under six months gressively more capable
Quarterhorse vehicles.
The Mk 1 will be
the first flight-capa-
ble aircraft, which the
company hopes to
launch this year for
remotely controlled
subsonic flight. That
vehicle is currently
under construction,
says Hermeus.
With its Mk 2 vari-
ant, the company will
seek to break the sound
With Quarterhorse, Hermeus is barrier and demonstrate autono-
seeking to deliver an uncrewed mous supersonic flight below M3.
aircraft capable of reaching speeds Hermeus aims for the final
of Mach 4 and beyond. Its target Quarterhorse Mk 3 to become
is to break an airspeed record of the “world’s fastest aircraft”, by
1,905kt (3,529km/h) – or M3.3 – successfully demonstrating ramjet
established by Lockheed Martin’s transition and breaking the SR-71’s
SR-71 Blackbird in 1976. long-held speed record.
To surpass that feat, Hermeus The company says it hopes to
is developing its own power- eventually adapt its hypersonic
plant called Chimera, which the technology to power both mili-
company says will be capable tary uncrewed aerial vehicles and
of producing thrust sufficient to commercial passenger aircraft. ◗
power M5 flight. The proprietary See p34
Airbus Cargo
Ca
Carg
rgo Str
St
S
Strategy
tra
ratte
egy
gy
Airbus to broaden Beluga operations
as new cargo carrier secures AOC
Transport unit will offer outsize freight services from Toulouse
Francazal airport using withdrawn A300-600ST fleet
David Kaminski-Morrow London
A
irbus has secured an air op-
erator certificate (AOC) for
the new carrier established
to conduct outsize freight
transport using the airframer’s with-
drawn A300-600ST Beluga fleet.
The manufacturer unveiled plans
two years ago to set up Airbus
Beluga Transport, intending the
company eventually to operate as
a dedicated airline.
Airbus has introduced the larger
A330-700L BelugaXL to replace
the five A300-600STs previously
used to ship aircraft structures be-
tween its manufacturing facilities.
Three Beluga aircraft have been
transferred from the register of in-
ternal logistics company Airbus
Transport International, and a fourth
is due this year. Airbus Beluga
Transport has started services on its
short-haul network covering such
familiar locations as Saint Nazaire,
Bremen and Hamburg, supporting
A320neo-family production.
“We now have the aircraft, the
people, the facilities and the cer-
tificate,” says managing director
Download the 202 Commercial Engines Report
now with updated enhanced data and in-depth market analysis
FlightGlobal.com/commengines
24 Flight International February 2024
Benoit Lemonnier. “So now we can
operate missions as our own airline.”
He says the flight safety, techni-
cal and operations documentation
and data of Airbus Transport Inter-
national supported the application
process for the new AOC.
Recruitment drive
The carrier has established a man-
agement structure and recruited
some 60 personnel, including addi-
tional pilots. It offers a new avenue
for A300 and A310 flightcrews, and
the company predicts a need for
36 Beluga pilots by 2026. To bridge
the training gap, it will temporarily
take 12 Airbus Transport Interna-
tional pilots for up to three years.
Airbus Beluga Transport’s head-
quarters is near Toulouse Blagnac
airport while it has set up an air-
craft operating base – including
two dedicated parking positions –
at the city’s Francazal airport.
“Our ground crews have been de-
veloping the capabilities to prepare
the Beluga and its missions, espe-
cially in terms of… the transport pal-
lets, as well as managing and main-
taining the aircraft,” says Lemonnier.
Outsize freighter will operate
o
as part of a dedicated airline
He adds that the carrier’s expan-
sion will be cautious, initially fo-
cused on familiar routes to ensure
its crew training and procedures
are robust, before embarking on
“complex” long-haul operations –
multi-stop services which will be-
come its core activity – with three
such flights monthly later this year.
Although the carrier has gained
experience delivering payloads for
Airbus’s helicopters and defence
divisions, it aims to broaden its cli-
ent base, and flight operations head
Olivier Schneider – formerly with Air
France’s regional carrier Hop – says
this ramp-up is a “big challenge”.
“We’re learning ‘on-the-fly’ since
this type of operation is something
brand new for many of the team,”
he adds. “It’s one thing to plan and
undertake one long mission, but it’s
quite different to perform several
of them in the same week.”
He says the carrier will ultimately
have a fleet of five Beluga aircraft
operating flights worldwide, and
it is looking to secure approval for
the twinjet type to accommodate a
wider range of payloads, including
engines and containers. ◗
 Safety Investigation

Yeti ATR 72 fatally stalled after pilot

inadvertently feathered both propellers
Twin-turboprop crashed on approach to Pokhara airport in
Nepal in January 2023, killing all 72 people on board
David Kaminski-Morrow London

N
epalese investigators be-
lieve an instructor captain
inadvertently moved the
propeller condition levers,
instead of the flap selector, during an
ATR 72-500’s approach to Pokhara,
Krishna Mani Baral/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

causing the propellers to feather

and the aircraft to stall fatally.
The instructor had been supervis-
ing another captain, the flying pilot,
during the Yeti Airlines service from
Tribhuvan on 15 January 2023.
After joining the downwind track
for Pokhara’s runway 12, the crew
Investigators say crew lost
extended the flaps to 15°. The cap-
recognition of aircraft’s state
tain disengaged the autopilot at
720ft above ground and then called
for a further flap extension to 30°.
But while the instructor con- But within a few seconds, as air failed to identify the problem and
firmed the ‘flaps 30’ call, the traffic control granted landing clear- take corrective actions despite the
flight-data recorder “did not record ance, the captain twice remarked [crew alerting panel] cautions,” the
any flap surface movement”, says that the engines were not deliver- inquiry says, adding that the captain
the Nepalese aircraft accident ing power. The throttle levers were did not crosscheck the commanded
investigation commission. quickly advanced to their maximum configuration change.
The rotation speed of both pro- position, as the aircraft initiated its
pellers, however, simultaneously de- final left turn at 368ft. New facility
creased to less than 25%, and torque The inquiry says the captain Pokhara airport was a new facility,
started falling to zero. The inquiry handed over control to the instruc- and had opened on 1 January, two
says this was “consistent” with both tor and again stated that there was weeks before the accident. It had
propellers feathering, although the no engine power. not published instrument approach
feather condition is not captured by As the ATR (9N-ANC) descend- procedures, and was operating as a
the flight-data recorder. ed through 311ft the stick-shaker visual-only airport.
activated, and triggered again sec- Procedures for visual approaches,
Master caution onds later as the aircraft abruptly however, had not been developed
Cockpit-voice recorder information banked to the left. A radio-altitude and Yeti Airlines had internally
picked up a master caution chime, alert sounded at 200ft before the created a visual-circuit pattern for
but the crew conducted the ‘before aircraft struck the ground. operating into the airport, intended
landing’ checklist without identify- None of the 68 passengers and to avoid both the old airport and
ing that the flaps had not extend- four crew survived the crash. surrounding terrain.
ed to 30° before carrying out a The inquiry says the instructor “This resulted in an approach that
left-hand turn onto the base leg. “likely” misidentified the propeller required tight turns during the de-
While the throttle levers slightly condition levers and moved them scent and… the aircraft being at a
advanced, the inquiry points out: to the ‘feather’ position after the lower altitude once aligned [with
“When propellers are in feather, captain had called for 30° flap. runway 12],” says the inquiry. “This
they are not producing thrust.” On the ATR 72-500 the condition did not meet the requirements for a
The bank angle of the aircraft levers are situated immediately left stabilised visual approach.”
reached a maximum of 30° during of the flap lever, and right of the Investigators point out that this
the left turn. throttles. Although the captain had “challenging” operation to an
Some 20s after the captain had only 186h on ATRs, the instructor unfamiliar airport generated high
called for 30° flap, the flight-data had around 3,300h. workload, and a loss of recognition
recorder registered the flaps ex- “[After] the unintentional feather- by the crew of the aircraft’s state. ◗
tending to this position. ing of both propellers, the flightcrew See p38

February 2024 Flight International 25

 Aircraft Safety
Carrier found issue during
routine checks on 9 January
EFW expects quick repair to cracks
on Lufthansa Cargo A321P2Fs
Conversion specialist says damage discovered in aft floor
area of two freighters is unrelated to modification process
David Kaminski-Morrow London
P
assenger-to-freighter con-
version specialist EFW has
issued repair instructions to
Lufthansa Cargo after the
carrier found cracks on a pair of
Airbus A321P2Fs, in the vicinity of
the aft floor structure.
EFW says it is “in close exchange”
with the carrier, and expects the
repairs to be completed “within a
few days”, enabling the twinjets to
return to operation.
Lufthansa Cargo says a “single
fine crack” in the shear plate of a
converted A321P2F was discovered
during routine checks on 9 January.
It identifies the aircraft as
D-AEUC, a CFM International
CFM56-powered airframe original-
ly delivered to Niki in 2008. It was
operated by Eurowings before be-
ing converted and transferred to
Lufthansa as a freighter in 2022.
As a precautionary measure, says
the carrier, its other three A321P2Fs
– D-AEUA, D-AEUI and D-AEUJ –
were withdrawn from service and
checked for cracks.
EFW says a “minor crack” in a
“similar area” was found in one of
these other aircraft. Nothing was
discovered on the other two freight-
AirTeamImages
ers, which were returned to service
on 10 January.
26 Flight International February 2024
Lufthansa Cargo says the second
affected aircraft is D-AEUI. This
airframe, also fitted with CFM56
engines, was originally in service
with Air Berlin from 2012.
“The passenger version of the
Airbus A320 family is not affected
by this,” it states. “Only the aircraft
modified for the cargo operation
are affected.”
Lufthansa Cargo approached
EFW customer support regarding
both A321P2Fs.
EFW says the affected parts “re-
main untouched” during the passen-
ger-to-freighter conversion process,
and are retained in the airframe.
But it adds: “The aircraft main-
deck floor structure is under EFW
responsibility after the aircraft
operates as a freighter.”
Technical review
EFW carried out a technical
review and issued instructions to
Lufthansa Cargo on rectification
measures for both aircraft. It adds
that these are covered by standard
schemes in the A321 structural
repair documentation.
Additionally, EFW believes the
cracks are not linked to its freighter
modification of the aircraft.
Its analysis of data shows the
damage does not result in “any
unsafe condition” for the freight-
ers’ operation.
EFW says it has not previously
been notified of any similar finding
on its A321P2Fs.
“Our aircraft are safe,” insists
EFW chief executive Jordi Boto.
“There is currently no indication
that the damage is related to the
P2F modification.”
Analysis indicates that mechani-
cal loads on the A321P2F are “sim-
ilar or even lower” than the passen-
ger version of the twinjet, says Boto.
EFW states that the effect of
ballast on the floor grid “does not
induce significant loads” to the floor
structure, and stresses are “compa-
rable” to the passenger aircraft.
“At this stage, there is no specific
action required for operators,” the
company adds.
EFW points out that the crack
damage is “nothing unusual” for a
mid-life A321.
A321 freighters converted by
EFW had briefly been the subject
of fatigue-cracking concerns last
September, when the European
Union Aviation Safety Agency told
operators to implement a tighter
inspection regime in the vicinity of
the centre wing-box.
However, this instruction
was rescinded after a review
determined that stress and load
calculations to determine compli-
ance times for the checks had not
been performed correctly. ◗
 Programmes Russia
Development work is continuing to
expand type’s operating parameters
Russian regulator approves higher
capacity for MC-21
Rosaviatsia also green-lights airframe design on SJ-100 as
Yakovlev eyes first delivery of modified Superjet in 2024
David Kaminski-Morrow London
R
ussian federal air trans-
port regulator Rosaviatsia
has approved the Yakovlev
MC-21 to transport up to 211
passengers, a higher figure than
previously permitted.
The type certificate for the
single-aisle twinjet was amended
on 26 December 2023, it says.
Under the previous authorisation
the aircraft was certificated to take
175 passengers.
“Before the approval of the
amendment to the type certificate
was issued, tests were carried out
on the emergency evacuation of
passengers and crew members of
the aircraft,” says the regulator.
It says the MC-21’s compliance
with airworthiness standards and
emergency equipment require-
ments have been confirmed.
United Aircraft (UAC) gen-
eral director Andrei Boginsky
says the approval will allow the
manufacturer to deliver MC-21s in
“all configuration options”.
Rosaviatsia deputy head Andrei
Dobryakov adds that development
work is continuing to expand the
type’s operating parameters.
Yakovlev has produced two
versions of the MC-21 – the Pratt
& Whitney PW1400G-powered
MC-21-300 and the MC-21-310,
which is fitted with Russian-built
Aviadvigatel PD-14s.
Meanwhile, Rosaviatsia has
AirTeamImages
approved the airframe design
for the Yakovlev SJ-100, the
modified Superjet 100 intended to
28 Flight International February 2024
accommodate domestically pro-
duced systems and components.
UAC says the change to the
type certificate, authorised on 26
December, allows assembly lines to
switch to SJ-100 production with a
view to delivering the first aircraft
this year.
It marks a step towards certifica-
tion, which still requires approval
of systems developed under
import-substitution initiatives as
well as the Russian-built Aviadvi-
gatel PD-8 engine.
Airframe clearance follows
ground work on test structures at
the Central Aerohydrodynamic In-
stitute in Moscow and the SibNIA
facility in Novosibirsk, and approval
of new processes to produce them.
Domestic market
Dobryakov says the authorisation
is “extremely important”, add-
ing that it “confirms the airframe
design is safe and meets all
airworthiness standards”.
Several Russian carriers oper-
ate the Superjet 100 – which has
Franco-Russian PowerJet SaM146
engines – and import-substitution
measures are also being applied to
servicing the powerplant.
State technology firm Rostec says
local engineers have gained capa-
bilities in repairing the engine’s elec-
tronic control unit – in co-operation
with Aeroflot and Aviadvigatel
parent United Engine – and the first
such serviced units will enter opera-
tion in January-February.
Repairs for other components,
including the starter valve and
combustion chamber, have also
been approved. Rostec adds that
Russian versions of the fuel filters
have been developed and initial
batches shipped to carriers.
Elsewhere, Russian carrier Red
Wings has received a Tupolev
Tu-214 twinjet, following work to
restore its airworthiness.
The aircraft (RA-64518) was
originally delivered to now-defunct
operator Transaero in 2009. It was
subleased to Red Wings for a short
period until 2017.
Red Wings states that the aircraft,
leased from Ilyushin Finance, un-
derwent upgrade work and was
formally handed to the carrier at
Kazan on 28 December.
“Fleet expansion is a key part
of our strategy aimed at develop-
ing the route network of passen-
ger transport in Russia,” says chief
executive Evgeny Solodilin.
He says the carrier has experi-
ence with the Tu-204 and Tu-214.
“Western sanctions are essentially
stimulating accelerated restora-
tion of the domestic civil aviation
industry,” he adds.
“I am confident that the updated
Tu-214 will strengthen Red Wings’
competencies and will be conven-
ient for passengers.”
Red Wings says the aircraft, fitted
with Aviadvigatel PS-90 engines,
is configured with 194 seats in a
single-class cabin. It also recently
received a restored Ilyushin Il-96-
400T freighter, and plans to build a
cargo operation.
“Next year we will continue with
the transfer of aircraft,” Ilyushin
Finance general director Mikhail
Podkhvatlin said in December. ◗

Deepening bet on jets threatens
Southeast Asia’s green transition
New report argues that declining popularity of turboprops
for short-haul routes could scupper zero-emission switch
Greg Waldron Singapore
S
outheast Asia is experienc-
ing a decline in the use of
turboprops on short-haul
routes, raising questions
about the region’s ability to adopt
zero-emission aircraft for such
services in the future.
In 2019, prior to the coronavirus
pandemic, turboprops account-
ed for 43% of “super-short-haul”
routes in Southeast Asia. Howev-
er, this figure dropped to 39% in
2023, according to a new report
published by the Aviation Studies
Institute at the Singapore Universi-
ty of Technology and Design.
Titled The Future of Super-Short-
Haul Air Travel in Southeast Asia,
the report, penned by independent
aviation consultant Brendan Sobie,
defines a “super-short-haul” route
as one of less than 270nm (500km).
“Given the relatively large size
of the [region’s] super-short-
haul market it is surprising there
have not been any commitments
from Southeast Asian carriers for
zero-emission short-haul aircraft,”
the report says.
“It is this segment of the market
where net-zero carbon goals are
achievable in the relatively not too
distant future.”
Sobie observes that Southeast
Asian carriers have reduced their
Malaysia’s Firefly is the only carrier to link
Singapore and Kuala Lumpur with turboprops
ATR
turboprop fleets in recent years,
instead increasingly relying on jets.
He estimates that the amount of
turboprop flights is 40% lower than
in 2019, and that the number of tur-
boprops in service with the region’s
airlines has fallen to 200 aircraft
from about 300 at the start of 2020.
“This is a concerning trend as
turboprops are generally more
efficient and emit less carbon
dioxide per passenger than jets on
very short sectors,” writes Sobie.
“The dwindling turboprop fleet in
Southeast Asia is also a concern as
it provides fewer opportunities for
potential conversions to electric,
hybrid-electric, hydrogen-electric
or hydrogen powertrains.”
Policy failures
Sobie indicates that turboprops are
less popular among the region’s
airlines and passengers, who tend
to prefer jet-powered aircraft.
Moreover, government policies
favour jets. By a considerable mar-
gin, the most popular turboprops
in the region are ATRs.
To underscore the problem,
he lists a number of short-haul
sectors in the region that could be
efficiently operated by turboprops.
For example, the Singapore-
Kuala Lumpur route, at 159nm, is
ideally suited to turboprop opera-
tions, but is instead mainly served
by jets. At present, only Malaysian
Aircraft Operations
carrier Firefly deploys turboprops
between the two cities.
Sobie also highlights instances of
government policy hindering the
use of turboprops on short-haul
routes, such as flights between
the Malaysian city of Kuching and
Pontianak in Indonesia.
Although both are located on the
island of Borneo and are just 112nm
apart, Indonesian policy restricts
international scheduled services
into Pontianak, so the shortest al-
ternative is for passengers to fly via
Jakarta, a total journey of 900nm.
Sobie offers a number of rec-
ommendations to improve the
situation, in particular calling
for Southeast Asian airlines and
governments to reconsider turbo-
props for very short segments.
Indonesia should also reconsider
its policy of limiting international
flights to just 12 airports, he adds,
while Malaysia should rethink its
plan to allow jets at Kuala Lum-
pur’s secondary airport, Subang,
and instead promote better use
of turboprops, so as to create an
environment suitable for a later
switch to zero-emission aircraft.
“Singapore should consider
adjusting policies for small aircraft
at Changi airport, particularly for
new zero-emission aircraft, to
facilitate sustainable aviation and
super-short-haul connectivity,”
adds Sobie. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 29
 Visit FlightGlobal Premium for all the latest aviation news and insight FlightGlobal.com

Braced for success

Lengthy project to test the feasibility of
new wing configuration gets under way
at NASA’s Palmdale site, as aged MD-90
is prepared for major transformation
Jon Hemmerdinger Tampa fuselage, will be highly flexible shipped to
and much longer than tradition- Palmdale.
al jetliner wings, requiring it be It will have

B
oeing has started dis-
mantling and scanning
an old MD-90 as part of a
multi-year NASA-support-
ed project to transform the former
passenger jet into the X-66A truss-
braced-wing demonstrator.
Since the MD-90 arrived at a
Palmdale, California hangar last
August, Boeing’s team has re-
moved its twin International Aero
Engines V2500 turbofans and
completed optical and laser scans
of the aircraft, the company says.
The work has just started. Boeing
and its partners will now spend
several years removing the jet’s
wings and 19 fuselage sections
before equipping it with Boeing’s
“transonic truss-braced wing”. First
flight of the X-66A is targeted for
the third quarter of 2028.
Validation effort
Part of NASA’s Sustainable Flight
Demonstrator programme, the
effort aims to validate that the
wing can significantly improve fuel
efficiency. However, the X-66A
could be used to test other fuel-
saving technologies.
“Boeing has begun extensive
modification of an airplane that
will become the X-66 Sustainable
Flight Demonstrator, removing en-
gines and completing 3D metrology
scans to inform the plane’s design
and build plan,” the company says.
On 8 January, the company
released a time-lapse video depict-
ing modifications to date, including
removal of the engines, “jacking
and shoring of the jet” and scan-
ning. Boeing manufactured the
MD-90 (registration N931TB) in
1999 and acquired it from Delta Air
Lines, Cirium fleets data shows.
Boeing’s truss-braced wing, to
Boeing
supported by trusses. That extra
length and increased aspect ratio
should generate less drag than a
traditional design.
NASA has estimated truss-
braced wings could make a future
narrowbody jetliner 10% more
efficient than current aircraft, with
other technological advancements
bringing total potential efficiency
gains to 30%.
Long, flexible wings can pose ae-
ro-elasticity challenges – they can
bend and distort in flight, increasing
drag and potentially causing flutter.
But Boeing’s Sustainable Flight
Demonstrator programme manager
Eric Kaduce says the wing’s support
structure mitigates those issues.
“The strut is very effective [in] sup-
porting the wing. Aero-elastics and
flutter are certainly something that
we will be spending a lot of time
and attention on, but it’s not some-
thing that is of great concern.”
Boeing subsidiary Aurora Flight
Sciences is manufacturing the
X-66A’s composite wing in West
Virginia, from where it will be
fly-by-wire
controls, but Boeing will
retain the MD-90’s mechanical-
cable system that controls its
rudder and elevator, Kaduce says.
Transonic effect
Boeing has said a truss-braced
airliner could fly at Mach 0.8. It
calls the wing “transonic” because
at that speed some air flowing
around the aircraft’s aerofoils will
meet or exceed M1.
“Our goal is to validate the archi-
tecture, learn about the new and
novel elements of the configuration,
so that we can better inform future
product strategy,” Kaduce says. The
X-66A can help Boeing demon-
strate tools and methods related
to computational fluid dynamics,
finite-element analysis and structur-
al-joint-architecture analysis.
As the original aircraft’s manu-
facturer – via its 1997 combination
with McDonnell Douglas – Boeing
knows everything there is about
new-build MD-90s. But decades of
carrying passengers can change
Video screengrab shows former
airliner with its engines removed

be mounted atop the MD-90’s

NASA

30 Flight International February 2024


much about a jet’s condition. The
team must therefore complete de-
tailed scans to understand its cur-
rent state prior to making larger
structural changes.
“We have to have a really solid
understanding of the existing struc-
ture in order to be able to ensure
that the new wing gets installed
appropriately from an aerody-
namic perspective, and meets the
requirements of the programme,”
says Claire Rosenlof, Boeing’s
X-66A director of modification and
manufacturing operations.
To allow more time for scanning,
Boeing flew the aircraft to Palmdale
last August, accelerating a previous
plan for it to arrive this year.
In 2025, the company anticipates
starting more “teardown activity,
in order to gain access to all the
major structural components that
we’re going to be modifying”, says
Rosenlof. The team will remove
the MD-90’s wing outboard of the
landing gear pylons, and also re-
move 19 fuselage sections to short-
en it by several feet. Kaduce notes
that those are the same frames
that McDonnell Douglas added to
the MD-80-series aircraft to create
the 1.4m (57in)-stretched MD-90.
Perfect match
The X-66A must be shorter because
Boeing removed the aft-mounted
engines and will install new power-
plants under its wing, changing the
centre of gravity. Those engines
will be twin Pratt & Whitney geared
turbofans, which Kaduce calls
“perfectly matched from a thrust-
class perspective” to the X-66A.
Speculation has abounded that
Boeing could later use the X-66A
to test a new engine design, such
as the open-rotor engine CFM
International is developing un-
der its Revolutionary Innovation
for Sustainable Engines (RISE)
demonstrator programme. In-
deed, Boeing chief executive Da-
vid Calhoun said last year that the
X-66A’s high-wing configuration
could be ideal for an open rotor.
In mid-2026 or 2027, Boe-
ing anticipates completing what
Rosenlof calls “the predominance
of structural modification, which is
really setting the centre section up
to receive the new wing”.
$1.15bn
X-plane’s estimated total development
cost – with $425 million to come from
NASA and balance from industry
“We’ll be adding critical compo-
nents of structure to take those
new load paths, [and] reinforcing
some of the existing structure on
the airframe in order to accommo-
date that new wing,” she says.
The work will require modifying
the top and bottom of the jet’s
fuselage, and its landing gear.
Its first flight, scheduled during
2028, will kick off what Boeing
anticipates will be a nine-month
flight-test programme, although
Kaduce says flight-test details
remain unfinalised.
NASA last year awarded Boeing
a contract to develop the X-66A
under a “funded Space Act agree-
ment”, notes NASA Sustainable
Technology Programme
First flight of the X-66A is
targeted for third quarter of 2028
Flight Demonstrator programme
manager Brent Cobleigh.
That funding mechanism – never
previously used by NASA’s aero-
nautics division – is unique because
it aims to advance goals deemed to
be in the public’s interest. The deal
requires significant financial com-
mitment from industry and does
not involve NASA actually acquiring
the X-66A, which Cobleigh says will
remain Boeing’s aircraft.
Fuel burn
The agreement also does not set
out a long list of exacting techni-
cal specifications, but rather leans
on Boeing to develop technologies
to “dramatically reduce aircraft fuel
burn”, NASA documents note.
“NASA is not leading it from
the perspective of defining every
element of the research, or even
how to do it,” Cobleigh says.
NASA has committed $425 mil-
lion to the X-plane’s development
over seven years and will grant the
X-66A’s airworthiness approval.
Industry partners will pay the bal-
ance of the programme’s estimated
$1.15 billion development expense,
with Boeing’s financial commitment
topping NASA’s, he adds.
NASA experts are embedded
in Boeing’s teams. Its responsibil-
ities also include stress testing the
wing’s struts, and the team will use
NASA’s windtunnel facilities.
NASA hopes the project will help
Boeing determine if truss-braced
wings are operationally and eco-
nomically feasible. If so, the agency
hopes Boeing’s next narrowbody
jet – the 737’s replacement – will
have the wing.
“If we really want this technology
to make it to market, we shouldn’t
be telling industry how to do it,”
Cobleigh says. “Boeing is leading
this effort.” ◗
February 2024 Flight International 31
 Project Repairs
USAF to revive F-35 ‘Franken-bird’
Fuselage sections from two accident-damaged fighters will
be combined to deliver serviceable asset by mid-decade
Ryan Finnerty Syracuse
E
ngineers and maintenance
experts from the US Air
Force (USAF) and Lock-
heed Martin are working to
splice together sections from two
damaged F-35s to form a single
working aircraft.
Dubbed the “Franken-bird”
project, the activity will mate
the undamaged nose section of
aircraft AF-27, which experienced
a severe engine fire during a take-
off run in June 2014 – with the
fuselage of AF-211, the front of
which was damaged beyond re-
pair in a landing gear separation
event in June 2020.
“This is a first for the F-35
programme and a very exciting pro-
ject,” says Dan Santos, heavy main-
tenance manager at the Pentagon’s
F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO).
“Not only will this project return
a combat asset back to the war-
fighter, but it opens the door for
repairing future mishap aircraft
using tooling, equipment, tech-
niques and knowledge that has
been developed.”
The USAF says the Franken-bird
effort will build on several of its
US Air Force
Assembly activity is being
performed at Hill AFB in Utah
32 Flight International February 2024
recent aircraft salvage and re-pur-
posing projects, including the
launch of the first F-35 maintainer
training facility that uses salvaged
aircraft sections for instruction.
Damaged aircraft AF-27 had
been used as an example piece for
battle damage and repair training
at Hill AFB in Utah, prior to the new
project’s launch at the same site.
New connection
Lockheed is under contract from
the JPO to perform the work of
connecting the two F-35 sections
and creating a serviceable aircraft.
“Work began on the feasibility of
this project in January 2020, when
the F-35 JPO reached out to us be-
cause we had already accomplished
really big damage restoration pro-
jects for the F-22,” says Scott Taylor,
Lockheed’s lead mechanical engi-
neer for the project.
He says the work will include “me-
ticulous documentation” of the new
procedures being developed, which
could eventually be integrated into
normal maintenance operations.
“All of the aircraft sections can
be de-mated and re-mated theo-
retically – it’s just never been done
before,” he says. “This is the first
F-35 Franken-bird.”
Specialised tooling, fixtures and
equipment have been designed
and built for the project, with the
USAF requiring the package to
support future overseas deploy-
ment to locations where it may
not be able to quickly replace
damaged aircraft.
“We’ve designed versatile tooling
that fits neatly into a [container]
box, making it transportable to var-
ious locations, including forward
operation areas,” Taylor notes.
The USAF says the fixtures will
be able to achieve the same results
as the large, stationary automated
manufacturing jigs at Lockheed’s
F-35 final assembly plant in Fort
Worth, Texas.
According to the US Depart-
ment of Defense, the Franken-bird
project will also benefit other F-35
operators around the world.
“The F-35 programme is still
young compared to legacy
airframes,” says Dave Myers, lead
engineer for the JPO’s support
team. “We are doing this for the first
time, and organisationally for the
future, we are creating a process
we can move forward with.”
The USAF expects the re-
assembly project to be completed
in March 2025. ◗

Demonstration flight sees C-5M strategic transport provide
KC-135 with more than 10t of fuel via 30min boom contact
Ryan Finnerty Syracuse
T
he US Air Force (USAF) has
tested a “reverse flow” in-
flight refuelling technique
which involves a transport
aircraft transferring fuel to a tanker.
During a demonstration per-
formed over California and Oregon
on 12 December 2023, a Lockheed
Martin C-5M Galaxy transferred
10,660kg (23,500lb) of fuel to a
Boeing KC-10 during an approx-
imately 30min contact using the
tanker’s boom.
Ordinarily, the task of refuelling a
tanker in mid-air would require the
use of a second dedicated tanker.
However, the USAF says the re-
verse flow approach eliminates
that constraint, meaning that more
of its assets could be made availa-
ble to support other missions.
“By using a C-5 as a huge floating
gas station, it allows more tankers
to be positioned for offloading to
fighter or mobility aircraft, versus
having to use one tanker to refuel
another,” says Major Justin Wilson,
chief of standards and evaluations
at the USAF’s 22nd Airlift Squadron.
According to Wilson, the recent
US Air Force
test marked the first time a GE
Aerospace CF6-80C2-L1F-engined
Galaxy trial
reverses the flow
C-5M had conducted a reverse
flow fuelling trial.
“To execute the reverse air refu-
el, we made amendments to two of
our normal checklists,” says C-5M
flight engineer Technical Sergeant
Robin Ogg. “These changes were
in the flight engineer’s fuel panel
configuration, to set us up to give
fuel versus receiving it.”
With the demonstration having
shown that the concept is viable,
the USAF could potentially ex-
pand the capability of its strategic
airlifter, which entered service in
A-model guise in 1970.
Data gathering
The 22nd Airlift Squadron says the
successful test allowed aircrew to
gather data that can be used in the
future to enhance the range and
capabilities of tanker aircraft.
“By doing reverse air refuel-
ling, the [donor] aircraft is getting
lighter at a quicker rate than if you
were just flying normally, so it flies
a little different,” Wilson says.
The USAF’s Air Mobility Com-
mand, which provides airlift and
in-flight refuelling services globally,
has been seeking creative ways to
squeeze extra utility out of its exist-
ing fleet, which also includes Boeing
KC-135 and KC-46A tankers.
Capability Refuelling
Other innovations to have been
explored by the command in-
clude the idea of launching pal-
let-housed cruise missiles from the
rear ramp of a transport aircraft,
and using the Boeing B-52 bomber
to deliver cargo.
Separately, lawmakers in the
US Congress have moved to halt
the USAF from retiring more of
its vintage KC-135s until it has
submitted a procurement plan for
a stealthy Next Generation Air-
refuelling System (NGAS).
In addition to mandating a
“roadmap timeline” for the NGAS
procurement, the 2024 National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
requires the USAF to complete a
business case analysis for its further
KC-135 recapitalisation effort.
The legislation has also barred
the service from retiring or pre-
paring to retire additional KC-135s,
unless individual airframes are
assessed to be non-airworthy,
non-mission capable, or “uneco-
nomical to repair”.
The wording of the NDAA also
validates requirements for a future
competitive contract award, po-
tentially setting up another tanker
showdown between Boeing and
rival Airbus Defence & Space, which
is promoting its A330 US-MRTT. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 33
 Visit FlightGlobal Premium for all the latest aviation news and insight FlightGlobal.com
Rotating detonation combustion design
could enable high-speed, long-range flight
GE rises to hypersonic challenge
Initial test success involving sub-scale demonstrator of
innovative dual-mode ramjet design could pave way for
future aircraft operations beyond Mach 5
Ryan Finnerty Albany
P
ropulsion specialist GE
Aerospace has achieved a
significant breakthrough in
its effort to develop a reus-
able engine capable of powering
ultra-fast hypersonic flight.
In mid-December 2023, the
company revealed that scientists
at its Global Research Center near
Albany in Upstate New York had
successfully tested a subscale
demonstrator of a dual-mode ram-
jet (DMRJ) engine that uses a novel
technique called rotating detona-
tion combustion (RDC).
GE says the design could enable
high-speed, long-range flight for
expendable and reusable vehicles
with greater efficiency than is
possible using currently available
scramjet engines.
“As the aerospace sector sets its
sights on the future of hypersonics,
GE Aerospace is well positioned
with the right capabilities, expe-
rience and scale to be a leader in
driving new developments,” says
Amy Gowder, chief executive of the
company’s defence unit.
GE believes its DMRJ prototype
is the first example anywhere of a
GE Aerospace
hypersonic-capable engine that
makes use of RDC.
34 Flight International February 2024
The US Air Force describes the
technique as a “more-efficient
type of combustion, characterised
by a closely coupled shock wave
and reaction zone, where the fresh
propellants are rapidly compressed,
heated and burned”.
Crucially, GE believes the RDC
technology will address a criti-
cal obstacle to hypersonic flight:
transitioning between conventional
jet engines and ultra-fast DMRJs.
$250m
Annual scientific spending by GE
Aerospace, with 30% coming via US
government contract awards
While Tom Cruise’s character
made reaching Mach 10 look easy
in a scene from latest cinematic
offering from the Top Gun fran-
chise, hitting the M5 threshold for
hypersonic flight is significantly
harder in real life.
The secretive Darkstar aircraft
depicted in Top Gun: Maverick
used a jet engine to reach M3.5,
at which point its pilot flips a few
cockpit switches to cut off the
conventional powerplant, alter the
shape of the air intakes and ignite
the scramjet – or DMRJ – to power
it beyond M10.
But in real life, transitioning
between propulsion systems re-
mains a problem.
The physics of conventional
DMRJ engines require airspeeds of
around M3.5 to achieve compres-
sion significant enought to produce
ignition and generate thrust, while
current scramjets perform most
efficiently at M4 and above.
The fastest crewed aircraft ever
flown – Lockheed Martin’s iconic
SR-71 Blackbird – reached M3.
Propulsion engineers
address the speed gap between
roughly M3 and M3.5 before crewed
must
hypersonic flight in a reusable
vehicle can become a reality.
“There is still a lot of inven-
tion that needs to take place,”
says Craig Young, director of
engineering and hypersonic pro-
pulsion at GE Edison Works, the
company’s advanced technology
development unit.
One option is to use rocket boost-
ers, rather than jet turbines, to
reach high sub-hypersonic speeds.
Examples of the rocket-powered
approach include Stratolaunch’s
uncrewed TalonA vehicle, and
weapon designs like Lock-
heed’s Hypersonic Air-breathing
 Technology Propulsion

Weapon Concept and the Raythe-

on-Northrop Grumman Hypersonic
Attack Cruise Missile.
Young says best-in-class hy-
personic systems are current-
ly achieving a transition from
conventional propulsion to scram-
jet power somewhere between
M3.2 and M3.7.
“We can do better than that,”
Young says.
Rather than build a faster turbojet,
scientists at the Global Research
Center say a DMRJ engine with RDC
will be able to ignite and produce
thrust at slower speeds than con-
ventional scramjets.
Young says the approach brings
potential for “significant improve-
ment” over existing systems.
Airspeed threshold
While improvement means a low-
er airspeed threshold for scram-
jet ignition, it also takes the form
of smaller boosters for rocket-
powered systems, more compact
DMRJs and more efficient combus-
tion in high-Mach flight.
That makes the recent RDC en-
gine milestone significant not just
for the prospect of crewed hyper-
sonic flight, but also expendable
systems.
Joseph Vinciquerra, GE’s senior
director of aerospace research,
describes the company’s DMRJ
concept as “platform agnostic”
– meaning it could someday be
used to power a missile, aircraft or
even a commercial vehicle bound
for orbit.
While much development work
remains incomplete, the company
is pouring resources into solving
the hypersonic problem. As just one
part of this effort it has invested
some $1.5 billion into scaling up the
Lockheed
Lo
Loc k ed Martin’s
khe Mar
arrtin
tin’’s
’s
71 Blackbird
SR-71
SR-
SR Blaackbird
ckb
b d is
the
h ffa
he fastest
test crewed
astest
ste cre
rewed
wed
ed
aircraft
a
aircr ft ever
cra ever flown,
flow
own
w ,
NASA
“One of the things that we’ve honed
over the past five years is the ability
to seek out problems that the
government is trying to solve”
Joseph Vinciquerra Senior director of aerospace research, GE Aerospace
production of ceramic matrix com- first quarter of last year, including
posite materials. transitioning between gas turbine
The high-strength, lightweight and scramjet engines.
and heat-resistant components will Mark Rettig, general manager of
support the push into the hyper- business development at Edison
sonic realm, as well as being used Works, calls the acquisition “huge”
on existing products like the CFM for GE, with Innoveering’s DMRJ
International Leap turbofan. design having formed the basis of
GE is also aggressively pursu- its RDC-based prototype.
ing opportunities with the US In practice, Rettig explains, mode
government, with federal contracts transition would allow an aircraft
now making up roughly 30% of to be launched under the power
its roughly $250 million in annual of a gas turbine engine, transi-
scientific spending. tion to scramjet power to reach
“One of the things that we’ve hypersonic speeds and perform a
really honed over the past five mission, then decelerate and tran-
years is the ability to seek out sition back to turbine-powered
problems that the government is flight for landing.
trying to solve,” Vinciquerra says. “That mode transition is critical
The company is seeking govern- to the efficiency of the vehicle,”
ment opportunities that align he says. “It’s critical to the vehicles
with “product priorities that we’re being able to get the range and
looking to advance within the performance they need to execute
enterprise”, he notes. their missions.”
The DMRJ engine falls squarely
within that sweet spot – and GE Mode transitions
plans to move rapidly on advanc- Optimising efficiency and engine
ing the concept. performance during those mode
Conducted in the final quarter of transitions will be key to proving
last year, the initial RDC test used the concept has realistic potential,
a sub-scale demonstration arti- he notes.
cle housed in the submarine-like While the recent RDC test fea-
basement of the Global Research tured only the DMRJ demonstrator
Center. The facility allows re- engine, the full-scale test planned
searchers to explore and address for early 2025 will include mode
challenges related to scramjet transition with a jet turbine engine.
ig
gni
n tit on
ignition,o , combustion
comb
comb bus stabil- If GE proves that design’s
ity
it y, throttle
y,
ity, thrrot
ottl
tlle control,
c n
co exces- feasibility, the prospect of crewed
sive vibration,
sive vib
ibrarattiionn heat loads hypersonic flight will become “an
a
and material engineering problem”, as Young
selection. describes it, rather than a matter
GE in- of invention.
tends to Solving that problem will fall
tees a full-scale
test largely to airframers like Boeing,
DM
DMRJMRJ
R engine with Lockheed, or Northrop, who will
R C by early 2025.
RD
RDC be challenged to devise ways of
Part
Pa rtt of o the com- integrating two radically different
pany
pa ny’s
pany’s ’s sstrategy
trra for de- propulsion systems with unique
velo
ve lo
opi
ping
veloping ngg andand expanding air-intake requirements.
th
he te
the tech
chno no
technologyolo
logy
g was was the acquisi- Such a feat might have seemed
tion in
tion in 2023
20 023
2 of of NewNew York-based pure fiction when Top Gun: Maverick
p op
pr opulu si
sion
on-d-ddev
eve
propulsion-development elopme
el opme
op m company was released in 2022, but GE’s re-
Inno
Inno
nove veer
erin
er
Innoveering. ing
in
ng.
g. That
Tha
hatt fir r
firm success- cent propulsion breakthrough has

reaching
rea
ea
achi
ch ngg M3
M3 full
fu lly
ll
fully y tested
test
te sstted itsits
t ownown n DMRJ
D in the made the concept less fanciful. ◗

February 2024 Flight International 35

 Visit FlightGlobal Premium for all the latest aviation news and insight FlightGlobal.com
Elysian fields new
research touting potential
for all-electric airliners
Company says recent studies prove
feasibility of battery-powered 90-seater
and targets 2033 service entry for
conceptual E9X
Dominic Perry London
D
utch start-up Elysian
Aircraft claims newly-
published research sup-
ports its ambitious plan to
develop an all-electric 90-seater
for service entry in 2033, arguing
that the potential for battery-pow-
ered aircraft has previously been
significantly underestimated.
Established last year, Elysian
says the work carried out by its
team – co-chief executive and
chief technology officer Rob
Wolleswinkel and director of de-
sign and engineering Reynard de
Vries – alongside staff from the
Delft University of Technology,
signals a “paradigm shift in the po-
tential for electric flight”.
Contained in two research
papers – A new perspective on
battery-electric aviation, part I
and II – the findings show that
“large battery-electric aircraft
can carry much more energy and
are aerodynamically more effi-
cient than originally assumed,”
Wolleswinkel says.
False conclusions
Previous analysis has been based
on “several misconceptions”, the
company argues, leading to the
conclusion that battery-powered
aircraft would only be suitable for
short-range use, in the sub-19-seat
commuter class.
But Elysian’s reappraisal of the
data suggests a full-electric aircraft
can deliver meaningful performance
levels, carrying 90 passengers on
routes of up to 430nm (800km),
Elysian Aircraft
based on cells with energy density
of 360Wh/kg at pack level.
36 Flight International February 2024
“These results indicate that, to
successfully reduce the climate
impact of the aviation sector,
battery-electric aircraft should not
be designed as a niche product
operating from small airfields but
as commercial transport aircraft
competing with fuel-based region-
al and narrowbody aircraft,” the
second paper asserts.
In particular, any proposed aircraft
must be able to compete on an op-
erating cost basis against the Airbus
A320neo or Boeing 737 Max “while
achieving a useful range which is as
high as possible”, it argues.
430nm
Range Elysian believes a 90-seater
full-electric aircraft can achieve,
according to its latest analysis
Elysian’s resulting concept
design, the E9X, envisages a low-
wing aircraft with a slim fuselage
– roughly the same size as the 3m
(9ft 11in)-wide Embraer E-Jet – with
a 2+2 seating layout.
It also features a large 42m-span
wing, swept at 7.5°, with fold-
ing tips like those on the 777X
to enable compliance with the
36m limit for Category C airport
gates. By way of comparison, the
180-passenger A320neo has a
wingspan of 35.8m.
The batteries are located in the
wing-box to reduce the root-bend-
ing moment, allowing a lower wing
structural weight, the study says.
Or, as Wolleswinkel notes: “We put
the load where the lift is”.
A “modest” aspect ratio helps
to keep the span down and leaves
“more volume for batteries and
other powertrain components
inside the wing”, as well as lead-
ing to “less critical aeroelastic and
landing loads”. The main landing
gear is also attached to the wing
rather than the fuselage.
Energy reserves
Thrust comes from eight 3.7m-
diameter propellers powered by
1.5MW direct-drive electric motors.
A turbogenerator located in the
rear fuselage will provide a 45min
reserve. Although technically this
makes the E9X a hybrid-electric
design, Elysian insists the turbine is
there solely as a reserve, not as a
range-extender.
The aircraft is also heavy for its
size: maximum take-off weight is
around 76t – including 35t of bat-
teries and their packaging, or 46%
of the total – broadly in line with
an A320neo but with range and
capacity roughly equivalent to that
of a large twin-turboprop.
But Wolleswinkel argues that
rather than any modern equiva-
lent, inspiration for the E9X design
comes from first-generation nar-
rowbodies such as the 707 or
Douglas DC-8. “While these jets
were fuel-inefficient, they were
designed for long ranges and car-
ried a high energy mass relative to
the total aircraft mass.”
While Elysian is confident in the
robustness of the design so far, it
has identified 10 critical issues –
what Wolleswinkel calls “hot pota-
toes” – that need to be overcome if
the E9X is to enter production.
These include the ability of
the batteries to be recharged in

30-45min to meet airline turn-
around requirements. Feedback
from cell producers is that this
should be achievable: “We are not
talking victory yet, but I think we
are pretty close,” he says.
Elysian is also considering how
to package and integrate the cells
into the wing in such a way that
they can be swapped out in around
12h during base maintenance.
Other key issues to be re-
solved are thermal management,
the high-voltage architecture,
propeller-wing integration, and
the design and certification of the
reserve energy system.
“Several decisions remain re-
garding the design of the reserve
energy system,” says the study.
“For example, it is undecided
whether for the envisioned appli-
cation, two gas turbines would be
required for redundancy.
“Although that would have a sub-
stantial impact on aircraft weight
and costs, it remains a much lighter
solution than to use the batteries
to cover reserves.”
“Large battery-electric aircraft can
carry much more energy and are
aerodynamically more efficient
than originally assumed”
Rob Wolleswinkel Co-chief executive and chief technology officer, Elysian Aircraft
Work to
overcome these
hurdles is being carried
out alongside the universities
of Twente and Delft, and national
aerospace research institutes in the
Netherlands and Germany.
Elysian is backed by French fi-
nance firm Caravelle and Panta
Holdings – a Dutch investment
company that also owns MRO and
completions providers Fokker Tech-
niek and Fokker Services, plus Fok-
ker Next Gen: a company bidding
to revive the legacy aircraft brand,
albeit using hydrogen propulsion.
Funding needs
Panta’s director of aerospace
Daniel Rosen Jacobsen is also
Elysian’s chief business officer
and co-chief executive alongside
Wolleswinkel. He estimates it will
take $5-8 billion to bring the E9X
into production; to date, it has
raised $10 million.
Environment Concept
Low-wing design features slim fuselage
and distributed propulsion system
Under the company’s 10-year
roadmap, the preliminary design
review milestone should be
reached in around 2027-2028,
with the design freeze coming
“pretty quickly after that”, says
Wolleswinkel, ultimately leading to
service entry in 2033.
Elysian is still considering all
options for aircraft production,
including potentially partnering
with established OEMs, says Jacob-
sen. However, in the meantime, it is
looking to forge agreements with
tier one aerospace suppliers for
various systems such as avionics
and landing gear.
“After we have got reasonable
green lights from those hot potato
projects this will be the logical next
step to actually assess the market
and work with those tier one
suppliers to see who could be part-
ners for these kinds of systems,”
adds Wolleswinkel.
If it can deliver the promised
performance, particularly compet-
itive economics against existing
narrowbodies, Elysian is confident
there will be a substantial market
for the E9X. Talks are already under
way with potential airline custom-
ers, Jacobsen says. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 37
 The airline industry’s exceptional performance in
2023 illustrates how much safety has improved
over recent decades – but the new year’s opening
week delivered a stark wake-up call

Warning
signs
Aviation Wire/AFLO/Shutterstock

Japan Airlines A350 struck a Coast Guard

Dash 8 as it landed at Tokyo on 2 January 2024

38 Flight International February 2024

 Review Airline safety

Yunish Gurung/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
Yeti Airlines ATR 72 crash on 15 January
2023 killed all 72 people on board

David Learmount London The 15 January Yeti Airlines ATR 72 crash, in which
68 passengers and four crew were killed (see accident

N
listings, p44) also was the only remarkable fatal loss
o sooner had 2023 ended – boasting an reported during the year.
exceptional world airline safety record – than A Nepalese investigation has concluded that the
the new year delivered a sharp reminder that pilot monitoring, who was an instructor checking the
relaxing vigilance is not an option for the avia- pilot flying the approach to Pokhara’s new airport,
tion industry, even when things seem to be going well. when asked to select the flaps from 15° to 30° to
On 2 January 2024, two aircraft were destroyed prepare for landing, instead retarded both the engine
at Tokyo’s Haneda airport in a runway collision at condition levers, which shut the engines down.
night between a landing Japan Airlines (JAL) Airbus Having done that, it looks as if neither pilot
A350 and a Japan Coast Guard De Havilland Canada understood what had happened, because they did
Dash 8 that appears to have been lining up for an
un-cleared take-off.
Fortunately, all 387 on board the A350 were
evacuated before fire consumed the hull, but five out World airline fatal accidents
of the six crew on board the Dash 8 died. The survivor
tally for the widebody is a testament to modern
and fatalities, 2014-2023*
aircraft design and construction, and also to the JAL Fatal accidents Fatalities
crew’s skill during its evacuation.
As for 2023, it was a very safe year: even better 35 700
than a string of excellent years over our decade-long 30 600
review period since 2014 (see graph, right). 25 500
Using Flight International’s long-accepted definition of
commercial airline flights – whatever the aircraft size or 20 400
power unit – there were only six fatal accidents globally 15 300
in 2023, with these resulting in 115 onboard deaths. That 10 200
followed 2022’s respective figures of 12 and 229.
5 100
There were no fatal accidents involving jet
airliners, and the largest aircraft lost was an ATR 0 0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
72-500 twin-turboprop. The other accidents
involved small twin-engined commuter types Fatal accidents Fatalities
– specifically the Beechcraft C99 and Embraer
Source: FlightGlobal
EMB-110 – plus single-engined Cessna Caravans and *Including fatal events known to be caused by deliberate action
an Antonov An-26.

February 2024 Flight International 39


“Boeing designs and
builds aircraft that must
operate safely every
second of every day
in every region of the
world. We take that
responsibility seriously”
Elizabeth Martin Vice-president enterprise safety and
mission assurance, Boeing
not act to correct it and the aircraft stalled and
crashed. It is difficult to know how the airline training
department, when studying the report to learn from
it, could usefully react to what looks like complete
absent-mindedness on the part of the instructor.
Writing in her forward to the latest Boeing
Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Ac-
cidents (STATSUM), Elizabeth Martin, the airframer’s
vice-president of enterprise safety and mission assur-
ance, observes that accident rates continue to drop –
in all regions. Boeing believes that the reasons for the
improvement are many, but that global collaboration
and sharing best practice is a consistent contributor.
Radical rethink
Boeing itself, in the traumatic aftermath of two fatal
crashes of 737 Max 8 airliners in Indonesia and Ethio-
pia in 2018 and 2019, has undergone a radical rethink
of its approach to literally everything about its role
as an aircraft designer, builder, and provider of global
customer support for its products in the modern era.
The company now sees itself as a maker of prod-
ucts for a diverse global marketplace, and has set up
Julian Martin/EPA/Shutterstock
Britannia Airways 757 accident in 1999
exemplified a different era for aviation safety
40 Flight International February 2024
a much closer customer support system to improve
feedback from operators.
“Boeing designs and builds aircraft that must oper-
ate safely every second of every day in every region
of the world. We take that responsibility seriously,”
Martin says. “Data is a powerful tool to proactively
manage safety risks, and it helps the entire industry…
to continue to enhance safety in the worldwide fleet”.
“This year’s [STATSUM] report offers a deeper, more
global view of actionable data to help us make that
progress,” she says, for the first time organised by
region, in alignment with ICAO practice.
Global approach
Previously, the report had presented these statistics
in a two-region format: US and Canada, and rest of
the world. Martin notes of the adjustment: “With air
traffic in every region of the world expected to grow
at a rate faster than that of North America, it is time
for a more globally diverse approach when reviewing
the data.”
The world has become so accustomed to safety
figures like those for the year just ended that a
reminder of how bad things used to be – and not that
long ago – might put them in perspective.
In Flight International’s safety review of 1999, the
number of fatal accidents recorded was 48, with 730
fatalities. The respective average annual figures for the
1990s as a whole were 48 and 1,195.
It is useful to review how the industry got its safety
performance from 1990s levels to where it is now,
because a full understanding of what it takes to
produce high standards of safety should help the
industry to remain safe.
As the 1990s progressed, increasingly ICAO, IATA
and civil aviation authorities in Europe and the USA set
in train a succession of safety oversight systems and
technical advances that laid the foundations for major
safety performance advances in the new century.
The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
set up its International Aviation Safety Assessment
programme, and Europe its Safety Assessment of
 Review Airline safety

Foreign Aircraft, while ICAO ramped up its Universal

Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP).
Those actions put pressure on states and
carriers everywhere to implement auditable safety
management systems – they had to do so if they
wanted their airlines to operate into the two biggest
air travel markets in the world.
Meanwhile, the USOAP is now a regular audit of
each state’s safety oversight and of their capability
to ensure adherence to ICAO Standards and
Recommended Practices, with the results published.
In the USA, the FAA initiated its Commercial Aviation
Safety Team with a view to eliminating fatal accidents,
and the EU’s then-Joint Aviation Authorities – now
succeeded by the European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) – set up its equivalent, the European
Plan for Aviation Safety.
Following the loss of an American Airlines
Boeing 757 at Cali, Colombia in December 1995 in
a controlled flight into terrain accident, the FAA
encouraged the rapid entry into service of the
first terrain awareness warning systems, almost
eliminating a category of accident that had been the
biggest killer of airline passengers and crew.
Finally, in the 2000s IATA made its Operational
Safety Audit compulsory for all member airlines.
That is how the industry got here, but now it must
stay here – or get even better.

Published concerns
It is probably not a coincidence that the dramatic
runway incursion collision at Haneda followed the
An emergency door plug blew out on an
FAA publishing its concerns following a series of
NTSB

Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 on 5 January 2024

near-miss runway incursion incidents in the USA in

the last several years, but particularly during the
winter of 2022-2023.
In aviation, safety trends discovered domestically
are often international issues also. Fortunately, the
FAA has initiated a study to work out the best way to
deal with this real risk, but its inquiry was in danger
of becoming just another bureaucratic exercise. Now,
the Haneda collision has emphatically delivered proof
that the runway incursion risk is real, meaning the
study is more likely to be acted on.
A parallel report by the FAA looked into the
effectiveness of the US National Airspace System
– in other words air traffic control and airport
infrastructure, for which it is directly responsible. It
concludes that it is suffering from chronic lack of
investment and shortages of expert staff.
The review team, which included National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) members,
wrote to FAA administrator Michael Whitaker
reporting that “these serious incidents illuminate
significant challenges to the provision of air traffic
services by the ATO [Air Traffic Organization].
These challenges – in the areas of process integrity,
staffing and facilities, equipment and technology –
all have ties to inadequate, inconsistent funding.”
Controllers are often working “historically high
levels of overtime”, it adds, increasing the risk of
fatigue-related mistakes. “Together, these challenges
contribute to increased safety risk and should be re-
garded as incident precursors,” the report states.
The FAA, therefore, finds itself extremely busy, but
may not have the resources to carry out recommenda-
tions following the studies it has commissioned.
1,195
Average fatalities per year due to aviation accidents over
the decade 1990-2000 – in 2023, 115 people were killed
Meanwhile, 2024’s arrival rapidly delivered another
warning to the industry – and particularly to the FAA
and Boeing, both of whom have been under huge
pressure since the 737 Max crashes late last decade.
On 5 January, an Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 suffered a
rapid decompression passing 16,500ft in the climb out
of Portland, Oregon airport as a result of a mid-cabin
emergency door plug blowing out. No-one was hurt
and the aircraft returned to land safely at Portland, but
a boy sitting not far from the exit had his shirt torn off
by the rush of air escaping the aircraft.
Photographs of the exterior of the aircraft after
landing show the doorway plug to have separated
cleanly, not causing visible damage to the airframe
structure as it departed.
NTSB chair Jennifer Homendy has insisted the
depressurisation event be classifiable as an accident,
not an incident, pointing out how much more serious
it would have been if it had happened at cruising
altitude, where the pressure differential is much higher,
and passengers might have released their seatbelts.

February 2024 Flight International 41

 Review Airline safety
Leah Walton/NTSB
The FAA swiftly issued an emergency airworthiness
directive requiring the grounding of all 737 Max 9s that
are equipped with emergency exit door plugs, pending
inspection and determination of the cause of the door
plug separation.
The accident aircraft had been delivered new to its
operator about three months before the event. Safety
consultant and former NTSB member John Goglia
has speculated that the fault is likely to be a quality
control problem either at Boeing, or at 737 fuselage
supplier Spirit AeroSystems.
Another safety concern that the international
aviation community agrees needs to be addressed is
pilot mental health.
The 2015 Germanwings Airbus A320 crash in the
French Alps emphasised the danger of not ad-
dressing it: a mentally troubled co-pilot deliberately
crashed the aircraft he was flying, killing all on board.
This put the subject in the spotlight, but it was not
the first nor the only such disaster.
Assessment methods
EASA says: “Currently, there are no specific, validated
mental health assessment methods for aviation use, in-
corporating the specific operational needs, to address
the issues identified. Research is needed to further
detail the specific needs, and to develop and validate
assessment methods or to assess the applicability of
existing methods for use in the aviation environment.”
Both EASA and the FAA are concerned that the
way pilot mental health is approached at present has
the effect of making pilots – and air traffic controllers
– hide the problem and fail to seek treatment for fear
of losing their job.
Homendy, who set up a roundtable discussion
on pilot mental health in December 2023, has
commented: “It’s somewhat of an open secret that
current rules incentivise people to either lie about
their medical history when it comes to mental health
or avoid seeking help in the first place.” She adds: “I
am frankly concerned about the safety consequences
of a system that unintentionally shames and silences
people who are struggling.”
42 Flight International February 2024
“I am concerned about
the safety consequences
of a system that… shames
and silences people who
are struggling [with their
mental health]”
Jennifer Homendy Chair, NTSB
The USA has seen recent examples of non-fatal
events that highlight the issue. In 2022, a Delta Air
Lines first officer threatened a captain with a gun in
flight. The incident came to light when, in October
2023 he was charged with the offence.
In November 2023 an Alaska Airlines pilot
travelling in the jump seat of a San Francisco-Seattle
flight attempted to shut down the engines, but the
crew prevented him. He later claimed to have taken
“magic mushrooms”, which have a psychedelic
effect, because he was having a nervous breakdown.
He has been charged with attempted murder.
In the UK, the Air Accidents Investigation Branch
published a report into a fatal event involving a
Cessna 210M (G-TOTN) on the Isle of Man on 17 July
2023. The lone pilot took off from Ronaldsway airport
and deliberately flew it into the cliffs at Bradda Head
shortly afterwards.
Pilot suicide on commercial flights in the last three
decades has not involved only Europeans and North
Americans. A Japanese, a Moroccan, an Egyptian,
a Mozambican, a Botswanan, and a Singaporean,
among others, have all been afflicted.
The Flight Safety Foundation’s Aviation Safety
Network accident database shows a marked
acceleration in the number of flights brought down
by pilot suicide since the beginning of the 1990s, and
this acceleration has continued in the new century. It
is undoubtedly a modern flight safety hazard.
Perhaps Homendy should have the last word on the
subject: “In practice, if not on paper, the FAA’s system
for certifying pilots and mechanics has not kept up
with the science around mental health, let alone
modern attitudes.
“Regardless of their profession, people must feel
safe getting the help they need when they need
it. And leaders like us need to talk about it, get
comfortable being uncomfortable, to help provide a
safe space for others to get treatment.” Z
● Our annual accident listing uses data from Flight
International’s research, in association with Ascend
by Cirium
 Yeti Airlines ATR 72 crashed after
pilot feathered both propellers
Xinhua/Shutterstock

Fatal accidents:

Non-scheduled flights
Date: 16 Sep O Carrier: Manaus AerotaxiO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer EMB-110 (PT-SOG)O Location: Barcelos, Amazonas, Brazil
Fatalities (crew/pax): 2/12O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/12O Phase: Landing

The aircraft landed long on runway 27 at Barcelos. It overran, across with reduced visibility in heavy rain. Runway 27 has an asphalt surface,
an unpaved road, and struck an earth embankment about 50m (164ft) 1,200m long. The aircraft was operating a charter from Manaus with a
beyond the end of the runway. The accident happened in daylight but group of sport fishermen.

Date: 29 OctO Carrier: ART Taxi AereoO Aircraft type/registration: Cessna Caravan (PT-MEE)O Location: Rio Branco International airport, Brazil
Fatalities (crew/pax): 12O Total occupants (crew/pax): 12O Phase: Climb

According to reports, soon after take-off the chartered aircraft crashed into forest. All 12 occupants were killed. Details have not yet been confirmed.

Fatal accidents:

Regional and commuter flights

Date: 15 JanO Carrier: Yeti AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: ATR 72-500 (9N-ANC)O Location: Near Pokhara International airport, Nepal
Fatalities (crew/pax): 4/68 O Total occupants (crew/pax): 4/68O Phase: Runway approach

Inbound from Kathmandu, the aircraft descended to join a visual
downwind leg for runway 12, positioned to turn left onto base leg and
final approach. The pilot flying (PF), in the left-hand seat, was being
checked out on the Pokhara approach by the pilot monitoring (PM),
an instructor. According to the Nepalese investigator’s report the
crew selected flaps to 15° and gear down, and the PF disengaged the
autopilot at about 700ft above ground level (AGL). The PF called for
flaps 30, and the PM responded “flaps 30 and descending”. According
to the flight-data recorder, however, the flaps remained at 15°, but at
the same time the propeller RPM and engine torque on both sides
decreased dramatically, and the Master Caution alert chimed. The
Nepalese authorities have now reported their acceptance that the
instructor had retarded the propeller condition levers while intending
to lower the flaps. The crew began the ‘Before Landing’ checklist just
before turning left onto the base leg. The PF reacted to the decreasing
airspeed by advancing the power levers, but there was no reaction.
Then the flaps were extended to 30° with no announcement. The
aircraft was passing 500ft AGL, and shortly after that the air traffic
control tower cleared it to land. The PF exclaimed that there was no
power, and he advanced the power levers to the maximum setting.
There was a click sound, and the high-pressure turbine speed on both
engines increased, but the PF repeated that there was no power from
the engines, and the PM took control. The stick-shaker activated twice,
the left wing dropped dramatically, and the aircraft plunged to earth
more or less on the runway extended centreline, hitting a river ravine
1nm (2km) short of the threshold. All 72 on board were killed.

Date: 23 Jun O Carrier: SAM AirO Aircraft type/registration: Cessna Caravan (PK-SMW) O Location: Yalimo Regency, Papua, Indonesia
Fatalities (crew/pax): 2/4O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/4O Phase: Climb

The aircraft took off from Elelim bound for Ilaga, but air traffic control contact was lost after 8min. It was found in high ground 6.4nm (12km) from Elelim.

44 Flight International February 2024

 Safety 2023

Fatal accidents:

Regional and commuter flights

Date: 23 JulO Carrier: UnknownO Aircraft type/registration: Antonov An-26 (unknown)O Location: Port Sudan airport, Sudan
Fatalities (crew/pax): 9O Total occupants (crew/pax): 10 O Phase: Take-off

The aircraft, reported to be civilian but carrying up to four military occupants were killed. Details are sparse because of the administrative
personnel, crashed during take-off and suffered serious damage after breakdown in Sudan while two factions of the Sudanese military contin-
bursting into flames. One child on board survived with injuries; all other ue to fight for control of the country.

Fatal accidents:

Non-passenger flights
Date: 22 AugO Carrier: Wiggins AirwaysO Aircraft type/registration: Beechcraft C99 (N55RP)O Location: Near Litchfield, Maine, USA
Fatalities (crew/pax): 2O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2O Phase: Manoeuvring

The aircraft was on a training flight, carrying an instructor and a
newly-recruited commercial pilot on his third instructional trip. Wiggins
Airways is a regional freight airline in the Ameriflight Group. The aircraft
crashed about 1.6nm (3km) east of Litchfield during a local training
flight from Auburn, Maine, in daylight (17:40 local time) visual mete-
orological conditions. After take-off the aircraft positioned for an ILS
or localiser approach to Auburn’s runway 04 and carried out a missed
approach, followed by departure to the northeast. At the Moyer missed
approach fix it entered a left-hand holding pattern at 3,000ft above
mean sea level. While completing the first turn of the holding pattern
the aircraft entered a steep descent which continued until impact with
the ground. The first impact was with mature oak trees, penetrating
them at an estimated descent angle of 20°, with wings fairly level. The
aircraft broke up but there was no fire.

Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 1 Jan O Carrier: Flair AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737 Max 8 (C-FLRS)O Location: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/148O Phase: On ground

Preparing to depart from Region of Waterloo International airport, a belt Driverless, it continued under the aircraft, damaging the aft belly skins
loader driver inadvertently selected a forward gear instead of reverse and proceeding across the ramp until it struck a parked Sunwing Airlines
while attempting to move his vehicle away from the aft cargo hold. The Boeing 737-800 (C-GFEH). The accident happened in darkness (07:00
belt loader ran forward into the aircraft, knocking the driver off his seat. local time). The aircraft was due to operate a flight to Cancun, Mexico.

Date: 5 JanO Carrier: PionairO Aircraft type/registration: BAE Systems BAe 146-200QT (VH-SFV)
Location: Rockhampton airport, Queensland, AustraliaO Injuries (crew/pax): 0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2O Phase: Final approach

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has ruled that crew
fatigue was a major contributory factor in a night approach during which
the aircraft was allowed to descend well below its sector safety altitude,
setting off a terrain alert from the ground proximity warning system. The
crew had elected to go around from their first approach, then attempt-
ed a second, but began it from a holding pattern at 3,500ft when the
approach procedure required that they cross their initial approach fix at
the SARUS waypoint at 5,000ft. The crew began a 3° approach profile
at that point, which led to them crossing waypoint BRKSI well below
AirTeamImages
their sector safe altitude. The ATSB states: “As the aircraft continued
descending toward the [minimum descent altitude], along a descent
profile consistent with it being one approach segment further along
than it actually was, the flightcrew recognised that the ground lighting
appeared different to the first approach and that distance measuring
equipment indications were not as expected.” The crew at that point
began to realise that the DME reading and the ground lighting ahead
was not what they should be seeing, so they carried out another
go-around and diverted to Mackay, where they landed safely.

Flair-operated 737 Max 8 was damaged

by a belt loader at Kitchener, Ontario

February 2024 Flight International 45

 Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 12 Jan O Carrier: Delta Air LinesO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A330-300 (N802NW)
Location: Amsterdam Schiphol airport, the Netherlands O Injuries (crew/pax): 0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The aircraft, inbound from Detroit, the USA, touched down short of the the aircraft taxied to the gate for normal passenger disembarkation.
runway threshold on approach to runway 22 and struck the approach The accident happened in daylight (07:53 local time), but with a gusting
lights, causing minor damage. The landing was completed safely and wind and poor visibility.

Date: 16 JanO Carrier: Kamaka AirO Aircraft type/registration: Cessna Caravan (N236KA)O Location: Kaunakakai airport, Molokai, Hawaii, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/0O Phase: Final appproach

The cargo aircraft impacted the ground well short of the runway at Kaunakakai airport and was substantially damaged.

Date: 26 JanO Carrier: SAM AirO Aircraft type/registration: De Havilland Canada Twin Otter (PK-SMS)O Location: Beoga, Papua, Indonesia
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

Inbound from Timika, the crew lost directional control during the off the right-side of the runway, sustaining substantial damage. The
landing roll at Beoga, Puncak Regency, Papua, and the aircraft ran accident happened in daylight (07:30 local time).

Date: 27 JanO Carrier: Fly Air AfricaO Aircraft type/registration: Aircraft Industries L410 (EY-473)O Location: Juba airport, South Sudan
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/3O Phase: Early climb

Despite officially being a cargo flight to Langkien, the aircraft was airport, but no-one on board was injured. The aircraft, however, was
carrying three passengers. Soon after take-off from runway 31 substantially damaged. The accident happened in daylight, visual
the aircraft force-landed in scrub about 2nm (3.7km) west of the meteorological conditions.

Date: 9 FebO Carrier: Allied Air CargoO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737-400SF (5N-OTT)O Location: Brazzaville, Congo
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3/0O Phase: Landing

Inbound from Libreville, Gabon at night, a tyre on the aircraft’s left main airport, Brazzaville. Both wheels and the axle on the left main gear leg
undercarriage reportedly failed during landing at Maya-Maya International separated. The aircraft was brought to a safe stop on the runway.

Date: 16 FebO Carrier: AeromasO Aircraft type/registration: Cessna Caravan (CX-MAX)O Location: Near Berisso, Argentina
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/0O Phase: En route

En route at night across the River Plate estuary from Montevideo, but they were unable to see it in the dark and attempted a forced
Uruguay to Buenos Aires airport, the engine of the Cessna Caravan landing on a well-lit road. During the landing the wings struck trees
lost power. The crew attempted to locate La Plata airport, which was and telegraph poles. The crew escaped the aircraft, which was then
close to the Argentinian coast not far to the left of their planned track, destroyed by fire.

Date: 19 FebO Carrier: Eurowings DiscoverO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A330-200 (D-AXGB)O Location: Windhoek, Namibia
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 11/263O Phase: Landing

Inbound from Frankfurt, Germany to the Namibian capital, the aircraft stabilised approach, the landing flare was initiated ‘late’ and the aircraft
sustained damage in a hard landing on runway 26 at Windhoek subsequently touched down hard. The landing was performed by the
International airport. The accident happened in daylight and good co-pilot on his first flight on the A330 following initial type rating.
visibility. The preliminary investigation reported that, following a Airfield elevation is 5,640ft.

Date: 20 FebO Carrier: American AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 787-9 (N839AA)O Location: Dallas/Fort Worth airport, Texas, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: En route

The aircraft, inbound from Tokyo Narita, Japan, suffered a lightning strike heat damage covering an area of about 0.5m x 0.2m. The aircraft landed
to the top of its fuselage at some point on the journey. There was visible safely and the passengers disembarked normally at the gate.

Date: 20 FebO Carrier: Skylink ExpressO Aircraft type/registration: Beech 1900 (C-FJXO)O Location: Winnipeg airport, Manitoba, Canada
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Final appproach

The aircraft was inbound from Regina, but when the undercarriage
was selected down on approach to runway 36 at Winnipeg the nose-
gear did not extend. The crew put the aircraft into a hold while they
attempted to troubleshoot the problem, but they were unable to resolve
it. The aircraft returned and landed with its nose-gear retracted. The
accident happened in darkness (20:33 local time). During subsequent
gear retraction tests it was noted that the nose-gear nitrogen charge
had decreased such that the oleo piston collapsed once the gear
was retracted into the nose-wheel well. In the collapsed position, the
nose-gear will not extend to the down-locked position becaused of
interference with the nose-gear compartment structure. There was
damage to the aircraft’s nose and left propeller.

Date: 22 FebO Carrier: Thai SmileO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (HS-TXG)O Location: Phuket airport, ThailandO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The aircraft suffered a hard, bounced landing and tail strike on runway 09 at Phuket in daylight and good weather. It was operating a flight from Bangkok.

Date: 2 MarO Carrier: Emirates AirlineO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A380 (A6-EVJ)O Location: Singapore Changi airport
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

Inbound from Dubai to runway 02L in heavy rain, the aircraft was carrying
out an ILS approach with autopilot engaged until 180ft, when the pilot
flying (PF) disengaged it. At this point both the crew noticed that the
aircraft was drifting to the right of the extended runway centreline. At 30ft
above touchdown the pilot monitoring (PM) called “go-around”, and the PF
responded “no, it’s OK”, but later said he had not heard exactly what the PM
had said. At touchdown the PM repeated his call to go around, but again
the PF continued with the landing. The aircraft hit some runway edge lights,
damaging them and blowing one of its main landing-gear tyres. No-one
was injured. Once the Singapore Transport Safety Investigation Bureau had
reported on the event, Emirates publicised the details among its crews and
reminded them that if the PM calls for a go-around, it must be executed.

Date: 3 MarO Carrier: SLJ Aeronautica CongoO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer ERJ-135 (D2-FIA)
Location: Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of CongoO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3/30O Phase: Landing

The aircraft overran the landing on runway 07 and came to rest, bogged 50m left of the extended centreline. The accident happened in daylight,
down, in a field about 300m (984ft) beyond the end of the runway, some visual meteorological conditions.

46 Flight International February 2024

 Safety 2023

Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 22 MarO Carrier: United AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (N1902U)
Location: George Bush International airport Houston, Texas, USAInjuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/151O Phase: Landing

The aircraft suffered a tail-strike when landing on runway 27. The landing there was a gusting crosswind from the left. The tail-strike damage was
was completed safely and the aircraft taxied to the gate for normal only discovered after seven more sectors, and it was grounded at Dallas/
passenger disembarkation. It was operating a flight from Mexico City, and Fort Worth airport on 25 March.

Date: 4 AprO Carrier: ScootO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (9V-TRH)O Location: Hat Yai airport, Amphe, Thailand
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The aircraft, inbound from Singapore Changi International airport, and light wind, and taxied safely to the gate for normal passenger
was damaged by a tail-strike landing on runway 26 in good visibility disembarkation. The rear fuselage suffered skin abrasion.

Date: 11 AprO Carrier: Air KasaiO Aircraft type/registration: Antonov An-26 (9S-AFP)O Location: Lisala, Democratic Republic of Congo
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The aircraft, which was operating a daytime flight from Kinshasa, of an anti-malaria programme. The landing took place in poor weather
overran runway 05 by about 200m (656ft) and came to rest in tall with heavy rain and strong winds. Runway 05 at Lisala is 2,200m
grass, suffering significant damage, including to its nose cone. The (7,200ft) long with an asphalt surface, although this is reported to be in
freighter was carrying insecticide-impregnated mosquito nets as part poor condition.

Date: 14 AprO Carrier: IndiGoO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A321neo (VT-IML)O Location: Nagpur, IndiaO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): 7/225O Phase: Landing

The aircraft, inbound from Mumbai, bounced while landing in daylight on runway 32, and suffered a tail-strike during a second touchdown.

Date: 15 AprO Carrier: CargoluxO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 747-400ERF (LX-ECV)O Location: LuxembourgO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The freighter was inbound from Dubai landing on runway 06 at An inquiry determined that there was a significant shift in the wind
Luxembourg airport, when the No 1 and 2 engines struck the ground. speed and direction at the time of the flare for landing, and the engine
The crew flew a successful go-around and returned for a safe landing. strike was not the result of crew control inputs.

Date: 16 AprO Carrier: TAG AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Saab 340A (TG-TAI)O Location: Mundo Maya airport, Flores, Guatemala
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3/14O Phase: Landing

Inbound from Cancun, Mexico, landing on runway 10, the right main land- confirmation from the control tower. On landing the aircraft veered off the
ing gear failed to extend. The crew performed two flyovers to get visual runway onto rough ground. No-one on board was injured.

Date: 21 AprO Carrier: FlytecO Aircraft type/registration: Beechcraft 200 Super King Air (LV-WPM)
Location: Martin Miguel de Guemes airport, Salta, ArgentinaO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/7O Phase: Landing

The crew of the chartered aircraft was unable to lower the undercarriage and made a belly landing. There were no injuries.

American Airlines 787-9 suffered a lightning

strike to its upper fuselage en route from Tokyo
AirTeamImages

February 2024 Flight International 47

 This Delta Air Lines 717 suffered a landing-
gear failure at Charlotte Douglas airport
AirTeamImages

Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 23 AprO Carrier: Pel-Air AviationO Aircraft type/registration: Saab 340A (VH-KDK)O Location: Cobar, New South Wales, Australia
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/0O Phase: En route

Thick smoke entered the aircraft’s cabin and cockpit in cruise flight at descent and diverted to Cobar, where a safe landing was made. The
22,000ft about 54nm (100km) northeast of Cobar, New South Wales, airport fire service reported that there was smoke coming from the
on a cargo flight from Wagga Wagga to Charleville, Queensland. The right side of the aircraft, “under the wing area”. The batteries were
crew donned oxygen masks and the pilot carried out an emergency isolated and the fire extinguished.

Date: 5 MayO Carrier: American AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A321 (N921US)O Location: Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 5/172O Phase: Landing

Inbound from Fort Lauderdale, the aircraft suffered a tail-strike meteorological conditions. It subsequently taxied to the gate for normal
landing on runway 18L at Charlotte Douglas airport in daylight, visual passenger disembarkation.

Date: 6 MayO Carrier: UPSO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 747-400F (N580UP)O Location: Tokyo Narita airport, Japan
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3/0O Phase: Landing

The aircraft was operating a flight from Shanghai, China to Narita airport, causing some damage. The crew carried out a successful go-around, then
Tokyo. The freighter touched down ‘hard’ on runway 16L and bounced, returned and landed safely.

Date: 10 MayO Carrier: AzulO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer 195 (PS-AED)O Location: Salvador, BrazilO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): 5/100O Phase: Landing

Landing on runway 17 inbound from Sao Paulo, the aircraft overran and end. The accident happened in darkness (01:25 local time). The aircraft
became bogged down on flooded ground about 50m (164ft) beyond the suffered minor damage.

Date: 12 MayO Carrier: Bar AviationO Aircraft type/registration: Cessna Grand Caravan (5X-RBR)O Location: Kajjansi airfield, Uganda
Injuries (crew/pax): 2O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/0O Phase: Landing

The aircraft took off from Kajjansi on a ferry flight to Mweya where it was reported problems and returned to Kajjansi. On landing the aircraft left the
to pick up passengers and fly them to Entebbe. After take-off the crew runway and overturned, damaging it terminally and injuring both crew.

48 Flight International February 2024

 Safety 2023

Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 14 MayO Carrier: CargoluxO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 747-400F (LX-OCV)O Location: Luxembourg Findel airport, Luxembourg
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/0O Phase: Landing

Soon after take-off from Luxembourg airport for Chicago O’Hare, the around 10-15min. The right inboard main undercarriage bogie separated
USA, the crew of the freighter selected the gear up but it failed to from the fuselage on landing and the crew was able to halt the aircraft
retract. They elected to return to Luxembourg after dumping fuel for on the runway.

Date: 31 MayO Carrier: United NigeriaO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer ERJ-145 (5N-BWW)
Location: Murtala Muhammad airport, Lagos, NigeriaO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3/50O Phase: Landing

Inbound on a domestic flight from Ebonyi State airport, Abakaliki, to runway 18L and came to rest in the grass with its nose undercarriage
Lagos Murtala Muhammad airport, the aircraft ran off the right side of partially collapsed.

Date: 28 JunO Carrier: Delta Air LinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 717 (N955AT)
Location: Charlotte Douglas airport, USAO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 5/99O Phase: Landing

On final approach to Charlotte Douglas, using the ILS for runway 36L, various attempts to get the nose gear to deploy. When this failed, they
when the crew selected the landing gear down the nosewheel indicated made another approach and came to a halt safely on the runway. The
“unsafe”, and air traffic control told them they could not see the fire and rescue service cooled the nosewheel area with water, and the
nosewheel. The crew carried out a go-around, and before returning made passengers were evacuated via slides at the two front doors.

Date: 11 JulO Carrier: Halla AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer EMB-120 (6O-AAD)O Location: Mogadishu Aden Adde airport, Somalia
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/2O Total occupants (crew/pax): 4/30O Phase: Landing

The aircraft, inbound on a domestic flight from Garowe, Somalia, landed touchdown, the crew lost directional control and the aircraft swerved left
on runway 05 with a tailwind of 15kt (28km/h). A video shows that, after off the runway, coming to rest badly damaged against a low wall.

Date: 12 JulO Carrier: Allegiant AirO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (N249NV)O Location: Near St Petersburg-Clearwater airport, Florida, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 2/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/179O Phase: Initial descent

During the descent to St Petersburg the crew was alerted to heavy descent, but cabin crew were carrying out the passenger seatbelt checks
precipitation ahead, but the aircraft’s weather radar did not show anything when the aircraft hit heavy turbulence. All the cabin crew were projected
to worry about. The crew followed air traffic control advice on the rate of at the ceiling and then the floor, and two were injured badly.

Date: 20 JulO Carrier: Air Canada RougeO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A321 (C-GYFM)O Location: Approaching Toronto Pearson airport, Canada
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/161O Phase: Descent

Inbound from Kelowna and descending through 8,000ft, the aircraft main windshield to crack and the electronic centralised aircraft monitor
went through an active weather front that had not shown as such on the showed a windshield heat. The crew made the approach safely, but there
weather radar. Turbulence and heavy precipitation caused the captain’s was considerable hail damage to the radome and stabiliser leading edges.

Date: 24 JulO Carrier: Delta Air LinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 767-300ER (N189DN)O Location: Near Milan Malpensa airport, Italy
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Climb

The aircraft encountered “severe turbulence” and was damaged by hail where a safe landing was made. The accident happened in daylight
as it climbed after take-off from runway 35R at Malpensa airport. The (12:30 local time). The aircraft was operating a flight to John F Kennedy
climb was stopped at 23,000ft and the crew elected to divert to Rome, airport, New York, the USA.

Date: 28 JulO Carrier: United AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737-900ER (N77431)O Location: Over sea off South Carolina, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 2/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 185O Phase: En route

The aircraft encountered unreported and unforseen severe turbulence Myrtle Beach. Weather radar showed only minor convective build-up of
while en route from Newark to Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, clouds, and there were no pilot reports nor significant meteorological
severely injuring two cabin crew. The aircraft subsequently diverted to reports for that part of the route.

Date: 29 JulO Carrier: United AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 767-300ER (N641UA)
Location: George Bush International airport, Houston, Texas, USA Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 202 O Phase: Landing

Following a stable approach to runway 26L, the aircraft was damaged
in a heavy landing. A preliminary review of the flight-data recorder
confirmed that, after the initial touchdown, the aircraft rolled to the left
and the right main gear lifted off the runway before the nose wheel
touched down with a force of 1.4g and bounced. The speed brakes
deployed and the nose wheel hit the runway a second time at about
1.6g and bounced again. The right thrust reverser deployed and the
nose wheel impacted the runway a third time at 1.6g, followed by the
deployment of the left thrust reverser. The rest of the landing rollout was
normal, but the aircraft’s fuselage suffered buckling at its centre top.

Date: 3 AugO Carrier: United AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 767-300ER (N676UA)O Location: Washington Dulles airport, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Take-off

The aircraft took off for London Heathrow airport at about 22:30 local the crew made a gear-down low pass over runway 19 so the tower could
time. After retracting the undercarriage, the crew observed a “gear inspect the undercarriage, then safely landed on 19L. The aircraft was
disagree” message, and set up a holding pattern. About 2h 15min later found to have been damaged during an earlier heavy runway contact.

Date: 7 AugO Carrier: Federal AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Cessna Caravan (ZS-JEM)O Location: Arethusa Safari Lodge, South Africa
Injuries (crew/pax): 0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 9O Phase: Landing

The aircraft landed long, and a hydraulic leak in the right brakes caused a braking failure, which saw the aircraft overrun the runway. It was undamaged.

Date: 15 AugO Carrier: AmeriflightO Aircraft type/registration: Beechcraft C99 (N261SW)O Location: Lansing airport, Michigan, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 1O Phase: Take-off

As speed increased during the take-off roll the aircraft began to drift right, visibility made this difficult, and the aircraft came to rest to the right of
and left rudder input by the pilot and reduction in engine power failed to the taxiway, seriously damaged. In the investigation it emerged that the
control it. The aircraft had got airborne and drifted clear of the runway rudder trim had been subjected to maintenance (lubrication) and had not
to the right over a taxiway, so the pilot attempted to land on it, but poor been re-set to neutral, and the pilot missed this in the pre-start checklist.

February 2024 Flight International 49

 Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 18 AugO Carrier: Emirates AirlineO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A380 (A6-EOM)O Location: Nice Cote d’Azur airport, France
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?O Phase: Final approach

On final approach to runway 04L, just after the crew had selected the the approach and landing. After parking, one of the right wing leading
first slat/flap setting, they noticed an unexpected noise and vibration, edge slats was discovered to be badly damaged. Investigation into
but the aircraft’s handling seemed unaffected so they safely completed reports of a drone-strike is continuing.

Date: 20 AugO Carrier: Alaska AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737-800 (N516AS)
Location: Santa Ana John Wayne airport, California, USAO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/106O Phase: Landing

Arriving from Seattle, the captain reported that – from touchdown – the
aircraft was pulling hard toward the left. At the end of the landing run
the aircraft was left-wing-low, so the captain stopped it and selected the
parking brake on. Having opened his direct view windscreen the captain
could see that the left wing was resting on the engine cowling, so he
shut that engine down. As the auxiliary power unit had been started, he
also shut down the right engine. The tower was not operating, so the
captain broadcast the aircraft’s situation on the common traffic advisory
frequency, and the crash and rescue team attended. The passengers were
disembarked using mobile air stairs. The left main landing gear had failed
on landing because the aft trunnion pin had failed. The gear had collapsed
rearward, forcing structural components through the top of the wing.

Date: 24 AugO Carrier: Air AntillesO Aircraft type/registration: De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter (F-OMYS)
Location: St Barthelemy airport, French AntillesO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/25O Phase: Landing

The aircraft veered off the left side of runway 28 while landing at St in daylight (11:42 local time), visual meteorologcal conditions, wind
Barthelemy, and its left wing struck a parked Helivet Airbus Helicopters 020°/8kt (14km/h) and temperature 33°C (91°F). The aircraft was
H125 (F-HMYL) causing significant damage. The accident happened operating a flight from Pointe-a-Pitre, Guadeloupe.

Date: 2 SepO Carrier: TUI fly BelgiumO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737 (OO-JAO)O Location: Oudja, MoroccoO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The aircraft made a night landing on runway 13, during or shortly after a struck and damaged the leading edge of the right horizontal stabiliser, and
heavy rain storm. It encountered deep standing water, mud and debris water and mud entered the belly holds and the electronics bay, causing
that had been washed onto the runway. An object, possibly a tree branch, some damage. The aircraft was operating a flight from Lille, France.

Date: 6 SepO Carrier: United AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737 Max 9 (N37531)O Location: En route near Cincinnati, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 1/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 71 O Phase: En route

The aircraft encountered unexpected turbulence near Cincinnati, seriously injuring one of the cabin crew.

Date: 7 SepO Carrier: Perimeter AviationO Aircraft type/registration: Fairchild Metro (C-GJVW)O Location: Detour Lake airport, Ontario, Canada
Injuries (crew/pax): ?/?O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/8O Phase: Landing

The aircraft’s right wing struck the ground while landing on runway 10, sustaining substantial damage. The accident happened in daylight (09:30
then veered to the right, off the runway and slid down an embankment, local time). The aircraft was operating a flight from Toronto via North Bay.

Date: 12 SepO Carrier: Ural AirlinesO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (RA-73805)O Location: Near Kamenka, Russia
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/161O Phase: En route

The aircraft was operating a flight from Sochi, but its crew reported a fuel state and decided to carry out a forced landing in a wheat field near
“hydraulic failure” during the approach to Omsk. The pilot carried out a Kamenka, about 108nm west of Novosibirsk. The landing was successful
missed approach and diverted to Novosibirsk, some 340nm (630km) away. and the aircraft came to rest on its undercarriage. The accident happened
However, while en route, the crew became concerned about the aircraft’s in daylight (09:44 local time), visual meteorological conditions.

Date: 21 SepO Carrier: DHL InternationalO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 767-300ERBDSF (A9C-DHAB)O Location: Beirut airport, Lebanon
Injuries (crew/pax): 0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3O Phase: Landing

The aircraft was damaged in a hard night landing at Rafic Hariri International, Beirut. It was dark, but visibility was good, and wind 270°/4kt (7km/h).

Date: 25 SepO Carrier: JetBlue AirwaysO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (N569JB)O Location: En route near Jamaica
Injuries (crew/pax): 1/7O Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: En route

Over the Caribbean Sea the aircraft passed through an isolated storm cell aircraft climbed 800ft before resuming its cruising level at 34,000ft. One
that was not showing on the weather radar. During the disturbance the of the cabin crew and seven passengers were injured.

Date: 4 OctO Carrier: FedEx ExpressO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 757-200SF (N977FD)O Location: Chattanooga Lovell Field airport, USA
Injuries (crew/pax): 0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 3 O Phase: Landing

The aircraft took off normally from Chattanooga for Memphis. The
undercarriage retracted and locked up, but when the flaps were retracted
the Master Caution light came on, with the crew alerting system showing
“TE FLAP DISAGREE”. The crew carried out checklist procedures, and
succeeded in getting the flaps to retract fully. But the EICAS showed “L
HYD SYS PRESS”, with zero pressure and hydraulic fluid near empty. The
captain decided to return to Chattanooga, but the gear failed to deploy,
and following a fly-by, the tower reported no sign of gear deployment.
The alternate gear extension procedure did not produce results, so the
crew declared an emergency and prepared to land on runway 20. The
aircraft slid beyond its end and into the localiser antennae, and when the
crew attempted to open the front left door it only half-opened before
becoming jammed. Despite problems with the right-hand front door, the
crew managed to open it, deploy the slide, and evacuate safely.

Date: 20 OctO Carrier: TUI UKO Aircraft type/registration: Boeing 737 (G-TAWD)O Location: Leeds Bradford airport, UKO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): 6/189O Phase: Landing

Inbound to Leeds Bradford from Corfu, Greece, directional control was side of the runway onto soft ground. It was daylight but there was a
lost during the landing roll on runway 14, and the aircraft ran off the left crosswind from the left of 070°/17kt (31km/h), gusting to 32kt.

Date: 22 OctO Carrier: Air Arabia MarocO Aircraft type/registration: Airbus A320 (CN-NMI)O Location: Tangiers, MaroccoO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0
Total occupants (crew/pax): ?/?O Phase: Landing

The aircraft, inbound from Barcelona, Spain, suffered a hard, bounced the surface. It was daylight in rain, with a crosswind from the right of
landing on runway 10 at Ibn Battouta airport, and its right engine struck 190°/25kt (46km/h), gusting to 45kt.

50 Flight International February 2024

 Safety 2023

Emirates A380 suffered a damaged wing

in August, with a drone strike suspected
AirTeamImages

Significant non-fatal accidents/incidents:

All commercial airline categories

Date: 25 OctO Carrier: Westair AviationO Aircraft type/registration: Reims-Cessna F406 (V5-WAI)O Location: Near Osire, Namibia
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 1/5O Phase: En route

While the chartered flight was en route from Windhoek to a landing to make a forced landing on open ground, but the aircraft suffered
strip at the Otjikoto mine an elevator cable failed. The crew elected considerable damage.

Date: 3 NovO Carrier: RICO Taxi AereoO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer EMB-110 (PT-OCV)O Location: Eduardo Gomes airport, Manaus, Brazil
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/13O Phase: Landing

The crew reported a hydraulics failure while en route from Manaus to aircraft ran off the left side of the runway. Its nose undercarriage ran
Barcelos, Amazonas and the pilot elected to return to Manaus. However, through a drainage ditch beside the runway, failed and collapsed. There
directional control was lost during the daylight landing roll and the were no injuries.

Date: 28 NovO Carrier: Unity Air ZanzibarO Aircraft type/registration: Embraer EMB-120 (5H-FLM)O Location: Kikoboga airstrip, Mikumi, Tanzania
Injuries (crew/pax): 0/0O Total occupants (crew/pax): 4/30O Phase: Take-off

The aircraft was chartered to carry tourists from the Mikumi National Park suffering a nosewheel collapse. Another EMB-120 from the same airline
to Zanzibar, but something went wrong during the take-off run and it (5H-MJH) also had a runway excursion at the same airstrip the same day,
collided with a structure, damaging its right wing and landing gear and suffering serious damage. No-one was injured in either of the events.

Date: 27 DecO Carrier: Air TindiO Aircraft type/registration: De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter (C-GMAS)
Location: Notheast of Yellowknife, CanadaO Injuries (crew/pax): 0/8O Total occupants (crew/pax): 2/8O Phase: En route

The ski-equipped Twin Otter departed Margaret Lake, North West
Territories bound for Lac de Gras in the same province. Air Tindi, a
specialist in providing air services to isolated communities, had been
chartered to carry a team of people tasked with preparing winter roads
from Yellowknife to diamond mines in the area. Official details of the acci-
dent are still sparse, but the aircraft appears to have crashed on approach
to the ice-covered lake, injuring eight out of the 10 people on board, with
two of them suffering broken bones. The location is about 8.6nm (16km)
south-east of the Diarvik diamond mining community where there is an
airstrip, but the aircraft occupants needed equipment to survive until
rescue was possible. The Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) provided a
Lockheed Martin C-130, which circled the site and dropped equipment and
two survival and rescue paramedics by parachute, although it was already
dark and the winds were high. The accident aircraft’s precise position was
known via satellite tracking. The survivors were found huddled in a tent
provided in the aircraft’s survival pack, but the RCAF rescue team erected
heated tents. In the morning two helicopters evacuated the passengers
and crew to Diarvik, and an Air Tindi aircraft took them to Yellowknife.

February 2024 Flight International 51

 Domestic
defences
Ahead of the Singapore air show, we review how
the city-state and its regional neighbours are
bolstering their fleets to deter expansionist China
Greg Waldron Singapore
I
n the Harry Potter fantasy series characters are
reluctant to name the chief villain. When they
refer to him it is often as “He-Who-Must-Not-Be-
Named” or “You-Know-Who”.
Similarly, Southeast Asian governments are
reluctant to name – or even allude to – the regional
Voldemort that is pushing them to take air power
more seriously.
But although the name ‘China’ is unlikely to pass
the lips of regional air chiefs and defence ministers
in public, Beijing’s massive defence build-up is con-
tributing to a sense of urgency with combat aircraft
procurement in the region. Air forces are ordering
new equipment and eyeing more potent capabilities.
Another spur is Russia’s war against Ukraine.
Southeast Asian governments, having enjoyed
decades of peaceful economic growth, have
Republic of Singapore Air Force
received a stark reminder that major conventional
wars can and do still happen.
Although the Chinese mainland lies well to the
north of Southeast Asia, Beijing claims virtually
the entire South China Sea – in contravention of
international law. Despite assurances that it would
52 Flight International February 2024
not militarise the strategic body of water, it has built
air bases on Fiery Cross Reef and Subi Reef in the
Spratly Islands, as well as two in the Paracel Islands,
which are contested with Vietnam.
These strategic islands, as well as Beijing’s ambi-
tions to build a fleet of aircraft carriers, put South-
east Asia within easy range of its vast aerial armada.
“The PRC’s [People’s Republic of China’s] outposts on
the Spratly Islands are capable of supporting military
operations, including advanced weapon systems, and
have supported non-combat aircraft,” the US Depart-
ment of Defense wrote in a recent report to Congress.
Regular harassment
While Beijing has yet to make a full-scale
deployment of combat aircraft to the South China
Sea air bases, its assets regularly harass foreign
aircraft operating in international airspace over the
contested waterway.
As the main victim of China’s expansion, the
Philippines has been the most vocal about its
concerns, but other countries are more wary of
Beijing’s ire. China is, by a considerable margin, the
region’s biggest trading partner, giving it profound
economic leverage. Southeast Asian governments
take considerable pains not to offend Beijing.

Still, a greater emphasis on fighter procurement
shows that governments are worried.
Malcolm Davis, senior analyst, defence strategy
and capability at the Australian Strategic Policy
Institute, has been vocal about the security
challenge that Beijing represents.
“In terms of accelerating the growth of fighter
capability acquisition, I’d argue it would have to
be the rapid growth and expansion of the People’s
Liberation Army Air Force [PLAAF] and People’s
Liberation Army Navy Air Force [PLANAF] and
China’s more assertive posture and actions in the
South China Sea,” says Davis.
“There are no other security challenges in the
region or facing Southeast Asia that would warrant
a more ambitious growth of national air forces.
Another contributing factor could be the need to
replace older generation combat aircraft, and a
degree of national prestige would factor into that
policy choice as well.”
The Southeast Asian nation most serious about
defence is the region’s business and financial
hub, Singapore. While the city-state has good
relations with its neighbours and with Beijing,
it also has close defence ties with the USA and
the broader Western world. By a considerable
Singapore Defence
F-15SGs represent the mainstay of the
Republic of Singapore Air Force’s fleet
margin Singapore possesses Southeast Asia’s most
advanced air force.
The mainstay of the Republic of Singapore Air
Force (RSAF) fleet is the Boeing F-15SG. Officially
the country admits to operating 24 examples, but
it is understood that 40 are in service, including
examples based in the USA.
Cirium fleets data suggests that the average age
of Singapore’s F-15SGs is 11.8 years. While Singapore
has not announced any plans for upgrades, it is
probably observing advances with the F-15EX, the
much-upgraded version of the F-15 that is poised to
enter service with the US Air Force.
Upgrade path
Singapore is also in the process of upgrading about
60 Lockheed Martin F-16C/Ds to the F-16V standard,
with the first upgraded example delivered in 2021.
The upgraded F-16 features a new active
electronically scanned array (AESA) radar in the
form of the Northrop Grumman APG-83. It also has
new mission computers, updated avionics, and the
Link 16 datalink.
The upgraded type made its debut at the Forging
Sabre Exercise in the USA in September 2023. Pilots
interviewed by the Ministry of Defence’s in-house
February 2024 Flight International 53

publication, Pioneer, said that the improvements
make the aircraft far more lethal.
Singapore is also set to become the first Southeast
Asian nation to operate a stealth aircraft through
its planned acquisition of 12 Lockheed F-35Bs.
Singapore likely opted for the short-take off and
vertical landing version of the F-35 owing to the
country’s small geographic size and lack of large air
bases. The first four examples will be delivered in
2026 to support training.
The aircraft will be co-located with upgraded
F-16Vs at Ebbing Air National Guard Base in
Arkansas, allowing the RSAF to experiment with
operating the two types together.
Finally, Singapore’s fighter fleet has invaluable
back-up in the form of key support types, specifically
six Airbus Defence & Space A330 Multi-Role Tanker
Transports (MRTTs) and four Gulfstream G550
airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft.
According to the defence ministry, the G550-AEW’s
AESA radar – the Israel Aerospace Industries
EL/W-2085 – has a detection range in excess of
174nm (322km).
While Singapore has been assiduous about maintain-
ing and advancing air combat capabilities, the same
cannot be said of its northern neighbour, Malaysia.
Greg Waldron/FlightGlobal
Malaysia employs its Hawk 208s
primarily for ground-attack duties
54 Flight International February 2024
KAI recently added Kuala Lumpur as a
customer for its light-attack FA-50
While Kuala Lumpur has tended to dither about
defence procurements, it received a rude jolt in June
2021, when 16 PLAAF Xian Y-20 and Ilyushin Il-76
strategic transports flew an unprecedented sortie
deep into the South China Sea region. The large for-
mation flew southwards toward the coast of Borneo,
approaching to within 60nm of Malaysian territory.
Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) BAE Systems Hawk
208 ground-attack aircraft intercepted the intruders.
In a report into the event, analyst Euan Graham
offered a few possibilities. Beijing may have wanted
to give Malaysia pause about exploiting new offshore
oil resources in Kuala Lumpur’s exclusive economic
zone. He also speculates that Beijing may have been
conducting airlift training, and possibly probing
Malaysia’s air defence capabilities.
Sustainment issues
On paper the RMAF is impressive, with a fleet of 18
Sukhoi Su-30MKMs. Although these have suffered
sustainment issues over the years, air force officials
and local industry have said that the type can be
kept airworthy.
Aerospace Technology Systems – a locally
controlled joint venture between National Aerospace
& Defence Industry and Russia’s RAC MiG and
Rosoboronexport – has conducted service life
extension work for the fleet.
Kuala Lumpur also operates eight Boeing F/A-
18D Hornets. It acquired a number of spares and
other equipment when the Royal Australian Air
Force retired its F/A-18A/Bs in favour of the F-35A.
In 2022, Malaysian defence minister Hishamuddin
Hussein said that MYR2.4 billion ($687 million)
would be invested on Hornet sustainment in 2023, in
co-operation with the USA.
In the late 2000s and early 2010s Malaysia had
an ambition to replace its now retired MiG-29s. It
looked at a number of advanced fighters under its
Multi-Role Combat Aircraft requirement. After years
of delay, this was eventually dropped and replaced
with a watered-down requirement for a Trainer-Light
Combat Aircraft, or FLIR-LCA.
Having observed the glacial pace of Malaysian de-
fence procurement, sceptics were surprised in Febru-
ary 2023 when the Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI)
FA-50 was selected for FLIR-LCA. A contract was
signed at the Langkawi International Maritime and

Aerospace exhibition last May covering 18 aircraft,
with deliveries starting in 2026. Long-term plans call
for an additional 18 examples to be obtained.
While FLIR-LCA is a step in the right direction,
Malaysia lacks vital support assets, such as an
AEW&C aircraft or dedicated tankers. This limits the
capability afforded by its fighters.
Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s largest country by
population, is also nervous about China – and is
investing in its air combat capabilities.
In February 2022, shortly before the last iteration
of the Singapore air show, Jakarta committed to
42 Dassault Aviation Rafales. The €8.1 billion ($8.7
billion) package also includes crew training, logistical
US Air Force
support, base modernisation and a training centre
with two full-mission simulators.
On 8 January, Jakarta activated an order for
its third and final tranche of 18 aircraft, adding to
commitments concluded in 2022 and 2023.
The Rafales will offer a significant capability upgrade
to Indonesia’s current combat fleet, the mainstay of
which are 11 Su-30MK2s and five Su-27SK/SKMs with
an average age of 14 years. Jakarta also operates
32 F-16s with an average age of over 36 years. This
fleet comprises nine F-16A/Bs, which are subject to a
mid-life upgrade programme, and 23 C/Ds.
In addition, Jakarta has 22 Hawk 209s and 13
Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucanos earmarked for the
ground-attack mission.
Prior to the Rafale buy, Indonesian officials had
suggested that the choice was between the French
type and the F-15EX. Simultaneously with the Rafale
order, the US government cleared Indonesia for the
possible acquisition of 36 F-15EXs for up to $13.9 billion.
An Indonesian F-15EX buy appears to have traction.
In August 2023, Jakarta entered a memorandum of
understanding (MoU) with Boeing about the acquisition
of up to 24 of the type during a visit by defence minister
Prabowo Subianto to the USA. The pact was signed at
Boeing’s production site in St. Louis, Missouri.
Dassault Aviation
Singapore Defence
“The state-of-the-art
F-15EX will protect and
secure our nation with its
advanced capabilities”
Prabowo Subianto Defence minister, Indonesia
“We are pleased to announce our commitment to
procure the critical F-15EX fighter for Indonesia,” said
Subianto. “This state-of-the-art fighter will protect
and secure our nation with its advanced capabilities.”
Finalising the deal is contingent on the blessings of
the US government.
Additionally, in June 2023 Jakarta confirmed that
it will obtain 12 ex-Qatar Emiri Air Force Dassault
Mirage 2000-5s for $735 million, to cover for the
planned retirement of its Northrop F-5s and Hawk
100/200s. However, its defence ministry in January
indicated that a funding shortfall will delay the deal.
Sanctions threat
Jakarta formerly had plans to replace the F-5s
with Su-35s, but the threat of US sanctions under
Washington DC’s Countering America’s Adversaries
Through Sanctions Act legislation killed the
potential acquisition.
As with Malaysia, Indonesia is light on support assets
for its fighter fleet. It lacks a dedicated AEW&C capa-
bility, but could be close to ordering the A330 MRTT.
In September 2023, the nation’s defence ministry indi-
cated that four Airbus types are in “effective contract”.
While Airbus Helicopters’ AS565 and H225M
are already in service and Jakarta has a firm order
for two A400M tactical transports, no formal
commitment for the A330 tanker/transport has
Indonesia has confirmed orders for 42
Rafales, in major boost for its air force
February 2024 Flight International 55
 Singapore Defence
The Royal Thai Air Force operates a
fleet of upgraded but ageing F-16A/Bs
Commonwealth of Australia
been announced. Airbus, for its part, indicated that
Indonesia has selected the MRTT, but suggested that
details still need to be finalised.
The Rafale order and F-15EX MoU raised
eyebrows in South Korea, where Jakarta is a 20%
partner in KAI’s KF-21 development programme.
Although Indonesian officials periodically state their
commitment to the twin-engined fighter, persistent
media reports suggest that Jakarta is chronically
behind on payments.
Jakarta’s clear interest in expensive, high-end
western fighters is a further cause for doubt about its
commitment to the KF-21.
79
Vietnam’s total combat aircraft fleet, with its 35
Su-30MK2V fighters being the most modern assets
Davis feels that old patterns of rather ad hoc
procurements are still a challenge in the region.
“As is usual with Southeast Asian approaches to
capability development, it is likely to be lacking in
coherency in terms of how Southeast Asian air forces
can maintain multiple types of aircraft – usually
bought in small numbers – and ensure they are an
effective capability,” he says.
“This is particularly the case with states such as
Indonesia and Malaysia. Clearly Singapore gets things
right, and I think the Philippines is taking defence
much more seriously in the face of challenges from
China,” he adds.
Despite facing a daunting security challenge
from Beijing, the Philippines has been slow to
reconstitute its fast jet capability, operating
just 12 FA-50s. Still, this is a big improvement:
after retiring its F-5s in 2004, it lacked a fast jet
capability until the FA-50s started arriving in 2015.
Manila also operates six Super Tucanos.
For years the Philippines has been considering a
fighter buy, with the Saab Gripen and F-16 mooted
56 Flight International February 2024
as potential candidates. An F-16 buy appears more
likely: last April, the USA said discussions were under
way for “a fleet of multi-role fighter aircraft for the
Philippine air force” – reportedly to total a dozen.
Other Southeast Asian states, namely Thailand and
Vietnam, are also assessing their air power needs.
Bangkok was interested in the F-35, but the US
government reportedly denied its request and the
Thai government has other funding priorities.
The Royal Thai Air Force operates 112 fixed-wing
combat aircraft, the majority of which are ageing
F-16A/Bs and F-5E/Fs, although both types have
been subject to modernisation work. The service also
operates 11 Gripen C/Ds, and 18 Dassault/Dornier
Alpha Jets in the ground-attack role.
Thailand is the only Southeast Asian nation apart
from Singapore to support its fighter fleet with
an AEW&C capability, in the form of two Erieye
radar-equipped Saab 340Bs.
Vietnam, also under pressure from China, faces
the challenge of relying on a distracted Russia for its
combat aircraft fleet, which comprises 79 aircraft. The
Vietnam People’s Air Force operates 35 Su-30MK2Vs,
six Su-27SKs and five Su-27UBK trainers, while its
ground-attack capability resides in 33 Su-22s.
Hanoi could, however, look to the west for its next
fighter investment. In September 2023, Reuters
reported that US President Joe Biden had raised
the possibility of selling F-16s to Vietnam following
a summit in Hanoi. However, it could be some years
before any such deal comes to fruition.
Step change
While the activity around regional fighter fleets is
definitely a step change from the 2000s and 2010s, it
is debatable whether China can truly be deterred.
“In terms of missions, clearly the Southeast Asian
states want a minimal air defence capability to deter
lower-level threats by China, and to protect their
airspace and offshore territories,” says Davis.
“Whether their planned acquisitions will actually
deliver such a deterrent capability is quite another
thing, and goes back to the individual state’s ability
to sustain and operate the types of aircraft they are
buying. But all of these acquisitions are likely to be
piecemeal capability – and certainly won’t be a huge
challenge to a large PLAAF/PLANAF capability.” Z
 Asia-Pacific carriers have seen a slower return to
pre-pandemic levels of passenger demand than
in other regions, but positive signs are at last
beginning to emerge
Revelling in
recovery
Alfred Chua Singapore
T
he mood at the Association of Asia Pacific
Airlines’ (AAPA’s) annual Assembly of
Presidents, held in Singapore last November,
could perhaps be described as jubilant.
Members including Cathay Pacific, Singapore
Airlines (SIA) and Thai Airways International all
returned to profitability, on the back of a strong
post-pandemic recovery.
SIA had several consecutive quarters of profits,
almost all of which smashed pre-pandemic records,
while Cathay – which had once lagged behind its
regional peers – was on track to report its first
full-year profit in three years.
Indeed, member airlines – and other Asian carriers
at large – expect to make a full pre-pandemic
recovery in 2024, with some already seeing it in
parts of their network.
IATA passenger traffic data for November 2023
shows Asia-Pacific carriers led other regions in
year-on-year growth. However, the region still
lagged behind in achieving full recovery, especially in
international travel demand.
“In particular, Asia-Pacific carriers’ international
demand is 19.5% behind 2019,” says IATA director
general Willie Walsh. “This could reflect the late
lifting of [Covid-19] restrictions in parts of the
region, as well as commercial developments and
political tensions.”
The industry body adds in its forecast for 2024 that
Asian carriers are expected to collectively swing to a
58 Flight International February 2024
$1.1 billion profit, from a “small loss” of around $100
million in 2023.
“While some of the region’s main domestic markets
(China, Australia and India) recovered quickly from
the pandemic, international travel to/from the region
was subdued as China only eliminated the last of its
international travel restrictions in mid-2023,” IATA says.
Separately, AAPA data for October 2023 shows the
region’s carriers doubling their passenger volumes
year on year, to 25.3 million. That figure is around
80.5% of pre-pandemic 2019’s performance.
The association, which tracks traffic data from
40 Asian carriers, says a “healthy travel appetite”
– especially in the short-haul market – boosted
international passenger traffic. It also notes that
the near-term prospects for Asian carriers re-
main positive, even amid uncertainty in the global
macro-economic and geopolitical environment.
“Some of the service
providers laid off
their staff during the
pandemic, so that means
they are starting from
scratch again”
Chai Eamsiri Chief executive, Thai Airways

Indeed, it was strong travel demand – coupled with
an early headstart in capacity injection before the
recovery’s emergence in 2022 – that buoyed SIA to
record profits quarter after quarter.
In its half-year results for the period to 30 Septem-
ber 2023, SIA Group posted a 26% jump in operating
profit. It expects full capacity recovery in 2024.
The Indian airline sector also has seen significant
growth over the past year, led by the country’s two
largest carriers: IndiGo, and Air India. More significantly,
Air India is undergoing what some have called “the
largest corporate turnaround in history”, following its
successful privatisation under Tata Sons in 2022.
Both carriers placed record orders in 2023 – Air
India for more than 400 Airbus and Boeing aircraft,
and months later, IndiGo for 500 Airbus jets.
Merger plans
Air India chief executive Campbell Wilson says it is
taking “one new aircraft every six days” from its large
orderbook, and will continue to do so for the next
two years. It is also working through a merger with
compatriot Vistara, which is also owned by Tata.
Speaking at the AAPA meeting, Cathay chief
executive Ronald Lam contended that while the
carrier was “one of the hardest-hit airlines” from the
pandemic, it is making progress.
“Although we started late… so far we’ve been
catching up very fast,” he says, outlining the “two
missions” Cathay will focus on in 2024: rebuilding its
network, and “catching up on our investments”.
The airline on 8 December ordered six Airbus A350
freighters as part of its cargo fleet renewal plans. It
Singapore Airlines
Asian carriers are expected to collectively
make a $1.1 billion profit in 2024
AirTeamImages
26%
Increase in operating profit reported by SIA Group in its
half-year results for the period to 30 September 2023
also has kick-started its medium-haul fleet renewal
project, following a commitment for more A321neos
months earlier.
Yet, for all the relief that the darkest of the pandemic
is but an episode of the past, airline leaders are very
well-aware that more challenges loom ahead, and
none more so than supply chain woes.
Thai Airways chief executive Chai Eamsiri sums up
how deep the impact can be.
The airline is in the process of rebuilding its
operations after a business restructuring which has
seen its fleet size significantly cut back. As it returns
stored aircraft to service and inducts second-hand
jets to boost capacity, Eamsiri concedes there are
many challenges.
“Some of the service providers… laid off their
staff during the pandemic, so that means they
are starting from scratch again,” he says. As an
example, he notes that it takes about six months to
modify “just the logo on the screen” of an in-flight
entertainment system.
And then there are the lavatories. Noting that
new electronic contactless taps are a convenient
February 2024 Flight International 59
 (Second from left) Thai’s Chai Eamsiri, Cathay chief Ronald Lam,

AAPA
Philippine Airlines’ Stanley Ng and Air India boss Campbell Wilson

amenity, Eamsiri says that when bringing aircraft
back to service, “we could not find the spare parts”.
“We were thinking, maybe we should just [install]
mechanical taps… it’s more reliable, and easier to
maintain,” he quips.
Wilson also alludes to supply chain woes, especially
when Air India returned aircraft that had been in
long-term storage. “[Some] of those aircraft have
individually required 4-5,000 parts to get back up
into the air,” he says.
“It has been a long, painful journey for us, to get
these aircraft back to [working condition], and that has
not been helped by supply chain issues… it’s not fun.”
Reliability challenges
There are also engine reliability and aircraft delivery
challenges facing AAPA carriers. Delivery delays – and
reliability issues on new-generation engines – have
come to a head as the airlines regain momentum.
Malaysia Airlines, for instance, faced delays in
taking delivery of its new Boeing 737 Max 8s. The
type was supposed to enter service in late August
2023, but this was pushed back until mid-November.
“The global supply chain network has been
disrupted heavily, which impacts both manufacturing
as well as the logistics,” says Izham Ismail, chief
executive of parent Malaysia Aviation Group. “Lead
time, freight charges, schedules and route have been
so volatile in the past two years; that led to the delay
in receiving our 737-8s, consequently impacting our
projected network expansion.”
Scoot, the low-cost unit of SIA, also has had to
ground two A320neo-family narrowbodies because
of issues with Pratt & Whitney’s PW1100G engine
which have affected operators globally.
Chief executive Leslie Thng tells FlightGlobal Scoot
“has some flexibility” in its fleet, including options
to extend the leases on older aircraft, as well as
investing in spare engines.
But other operators like Air New Zealand and Cebu
Pacific have had to make operational cuts into 2024 –
and trimmed their fleet and capacity growth targets
– as a result of the engine issues.
Meanwhile, Philippine Airlines chief executive
Stanley Ng says a bigger challenge for the carrier
is that of airport infrastructure, especially at its hub
airport of Manila.

“The global supply

chain network has
been disrupted heavily,
Urbanansport/NurPhoto/Shutterstock

which impacts both

manufacturing as well as
the logistics” Air India is taking delivery of
a new aircraft every six days
Izham Ismail Chief executive, Malaysia Aviation Group

60 Flight International February 2024


“[Infrastructure] is something we have to work
closely with… [the] government [and] private-public
partnerships to increase the slots,” Ng says.
A similar picture plays out in the Asian MRO sector,
where recovery has come head to head with supply
chain challenges. MRO providers, like those in Singa-
pore, have seen steady demand as operators emerge
from the pandemic, leading to big expansion plans.
ST Engineering in September 2023 announced it
would be building its fourth airframe MRO facility in
Singapore, which will also be its newest facility in the
city-state in more than 10 years.
Expansion plans
Amid its overseas expansion plans, which include facil-
ities in China and the USA, ST Engineering commercial
aerospace chief Jeffrey Lam notes that “there is still
a long-term future for airframe maintenance in Singa-
pore”, despite challenges such as land constraints.
“[The Singapore] workforce is very good, competent
and competitive… [so] Singapore obviously is a hub
with a strong aerospace industry presence… which
supports the whole industry,” Lam says.
Another Singapore-based company, SIA Engineering,
has expanded its regional presence through sharehold-
ing acquisitions of aerospace companies, including
Malaysia’s Pos Aviation Engineering Services, as well as
Singapore-based JAMCO Aero Design & Engineering.
Malaysia-based Asia Digital Engineering, a sister
unit to low-cost group AirAsia, is expanding hang-
ar capacity at its Kuala Lumpur headquarters, with
construction slated to complete this year.
Like their airline compatriots, the MRO providers
also acknowledge there are “teething issues” – as one
executive puts it – lingering around.
At an industry event last September, leaders from
Asian MRO providers flagged the challenges surround-
ing manpower and an acute shortage of aircraft parts.
“There should be more options in the supply chain,
rather than a sole supplier,” said ADE chief executive
Mahesh Kumar. “[This] will reduce the burden on
any single OEM… any single supplier, because it has
become a bottleneck now.”
Singapore Airlines
ST Engineering ST Engineering has announced it will
build a fourth MRO facility in Singapore
Joshua Ng, a director at Alton Aviation Consultancy,
says the supply chain issues are likely to normalise and
ease up from 2025, “as manufacturers take steps to
alleviate the situation, including turning to nearshoring
and tackling workforce recruitment and retention”.
Still, he believes the ongoing issues around supply
chain and delivery bottlenecks are a silver lining for
MRO providers in the region.
Delayed retirements
“[Airlines] are delaying retirement of older aircraft
to mitigate new aircraft delivery shortages. The
delayed retirement of older aircraft will drive near-
term demand for MRO as older aircraft have higher
maintenance needs,” Ng tells FlightGlobal.
“MRO supply chain challenges are expected to
ease ahead of production-related supply chain
issues. Production rates will likely be the slowest to
recover,” he adds.
The issue of manpower has also been flagged by
MRO providers, but it is a mixed picture across the re-
gion, with some markets – like Indonesia and the Phil-
ippines – less affected owing to younger workforces.
Ng concurs: “Aviation career and compensation
prospects are still well regarded in the region, and
there has been less issue recruiting new talent and
retaining existing talent in the APAC [Asia-Pacific]
MRO workforce.”
The idea of ‘nearshoring’ – where airlines move
their maintenance works nearer to reduce costs and
supply chain risks – is an opportunity for the region’s
MRO firms, says Ng.
This, coupled with forecasts for large fleet growth
among operators in Southeast Asia, is good news for
Singapore-based MRO providers.
“Singapore has established itself as an MRO hub for
the region, anchored by two large local MROs… [and]
complemented by the presence of many OEMs estab-
lishing their regional MRO centres in the country, and
increasingly, aerospace manufacturing as well,” says Ng.
He notes that while there are “numerous uncertain-
ties” in the near-term, the “long-term trajectories” for
the MRO sector remain positive, thanks to a resilience
in air traffic growth. ◗
February 2024 Flight International 61
 From yuckspeak to tales of yore, send your offcuts to murdo.morrison@flightglobal.com

William Barton/Shutterstock
Diversionary
tactics
“We departed Lagos about an hour ago… to Abuja
and, upon arrival, the cabin crew confidently
announced that we’ve arrived [in] Abuja,” stated a
passenger on social media while travelling with United
Nigeria Airlines on 26 November, “only for us to realise
that we landed in Asaba”.
The passenger in question, a former Kano political
candidate, suggested the pilot had been given the
wrong flightplan.
But the airline insisted that there had been no
such operational cock-up – the aircraft, apparently a
wet-leased Airbus A320, had been diverted owing to
“poor destination weather”.
“The pilot of the aircraft was aware of the temporary
diversion and was properly briefed,” the carrier states.
It admits, however, that its flying customers were not
as well briefed. “A wrong announcement was made
by cabin crew upon landing safely in Asaba, creating
eHang

confusion among the passengers,” it says.

Mystery solved. Well, maybe. Because Abuja lies
northeast of Lagos, yet the aircraft’s flightpath
shows it only flew due east to Asaba, with no
indication of a course change. And a quick check
of Abuja airport’s METAR suggests it was being
hammered by, er, light winds, excellent visibility, and
no significant weather conditions.

Self-loading cargo
Congratulations to eHang for achieving Chinese
certification for its electric vertical take-off and landing
air taxi, but surely its press release description of its
EH216-S (pictured right) as a “passenger-carrying
unmanned aerial vehicle” is a bit of a contradiction?

From the archive

1924 Russian espionage

100
A thrilling drama—in true “movie” style—has
1949 Plastic surgery
75
Following our description of the air ambulance
appeared in the press early this week. It was demonstration held at Brize Norton, during which
reported that some important designs of a new various light aircraft were shown adapted for
aero engine—which was apparently going to stretcher-ferrying, we have learned that the versatile
revolutionise aviation—had been stolen from the D.H. Tiger Moth was, during the war, converted
Breguet works. However, the Breguet firm had for casualty evacuation by the R.A.F.’s Research
previously been warned, and the thief, a French and Development Unit at Cawnpore, India. Many
engineer employed at the works, was caught with observers who witnessed the performance of the
the documents on his person as he was leaving Sikorsky Hoverfly 2 with an external, uncovered
the factory, and was thereupon arrested. Further stretcher fitted, suggested that this rather breezy
enquiries led to the arrest also of a young (and mode of travel might have unwelcome effects on
beautiful?) Russian girl together with an engineer- the exposed patient. Their apprehension should
fitter, likewise Russian, from a rival aircraft firm. It is be allayed, however, by the assurance that plastic
not yet certain whether this deed is the work of the covers will be used to protect casualties as and when
German, Russian or Hottentot Governments. helicopters are required for rescue work.

62 Flight International February 2024


Nova good place to base our
rogue parts distribution company?
Flagging fortunes
Until recently, Boeing used flag emojis for each of its
country or regional pages on its web site. In the light of
recent events, it seems to have revised its choice of the
Palestinian colours for its Middle East section, choosing
to remove all flags from the pages.
1974 China leaves the nest
50
The Civil Aviation Administration of China is emerging
from its shell of limited domestic operations and
will become a fully-fledged international carrier
following major purchases and deliveries of British
and American jet aircraft. For its planned international
operations, the Chinese have bought ten Boeing
707s from Boeing; four -320Bs and two -320Cs have
already been delivered, while four more 707-32OCs
will be taken on strength at a rate of one a month
until June. There are plans to serve those countries in
Asia, Western Europe and North America which have
established diplomatic relations with Peking. They will
include Britain, Canada, Italy, West Germany, Japan
and France. At present CAAC only serves North Korea,
North Vietnam, Burma and the Soviet Union.
Straight & Level
Part fiction
Ever since the scandal broke surrounding UK-based
AOG Technics’ alleged distribution of unapproved
engine parts, online reviews for the company have not
been kind.
AOG Technics supposedly had a business address
in the futuristic Nova building around the corner from
Buckingham Palace – in reality, a rented mailbox – and
Google Maps still marks it as the company’s offices.
But the accompanying user reviews are not
encouraging. “I ordered a GE90 for a Boeing 777,”
says one, above a photo of a huge rusting cargo
ship propulsion screw. “I received what seems to
be a used one… I installed it anyway, and it works,
although the aircraft seems a bit wobbly in the air.
Wouldn’t recommend.”
Another one-star rating states: “I asked for a flux
capacitor but received a food-processor instead. But it
does make good guacamole.”
AOG’s plush London base may have been made up.
So too, it seems, were many of its staff. An investigation
by the Daily Mail found that employees listed by AOG
Technics on LinkedIn appear to be stock images found
on the internet.
A woman purporting to be one Martina Spencer, a
London-based account manager, pops up in an Amazon
advert for women’s reading glasses. Meanwhile, chief
commercial officer Ray Kwong is the spitting image of
“factory owner Mr Wang” discovered elsewhere online
enthusiastically providing a customer testimonial.
Yuckspeak
SpaceX spokesperson, quoted in another aerospace
journal: “We had a rapid, unscheduled disassembly of
both the super heavy booster and the ship…”
= Both stages blew up.
Thanks to spotter RP Czachor.
1999 Asteroid prospector
25
SpaceDev’s plans to mine asteroids and return
resources from other parts of the solar system to the
Earth have been put on a backburner while it places
emphasis on more cost-effective commercial space
science. The Denver-based company aims to bring
back “more science per dollar than achieved by NASA,
which spends $1 billion a year on space science”, says
chairman Jim Benson. The first SpaceDev mission, the
Near Earth Asteroid Prospector (NEAP), is on target
with a budget of $50 million, aiming for an April 2001
launch date. The private commercial space exploration
company has awarded NASA’s Jet Propulsion
Laboratory a contract to provide analysis and
planning services for the NEAP, which will rendezvous
with the asteroid 4660 Nereus in mid-2002.
February 2024 Flight International 63
 Reader Services
EDITORIAL
1st Floor, Chancery House,
St Nicholas Way,
Sutton, Surrey, SM1 1JB, UK
flight.international@flightglobal.com
Editor Craig Hoyle
+44 7795 486691
craig.hoyle@flightglobal.com
Deputy Editor Dominic Perry
+44 20 8912 2164
dominic.perry@flightglobal.com
Head of Strategic Content
Murdo Morrison FRAeS
+44 20 8722 8389
murdo.morrison@flightglobal.com
Consulting Editor David Learmount
+44 7785 901787
david.learmount@ntlworld.com
Contributing Editor Mark Pilling
markpilling55@gmail.com
Magazine Enquiries
flight.international@flightglobal.com
AIR TRANSPORT TEAM
Executive Editor Graham Dunn
graham.dunn@flightglobal.com
Editor – Airline Business Lewis Harper
lewis.harper@flightglobal.com
Air Transport Editor
David Kaminski-Morrow
david.kaminski-morrow@flightglobal.com
AMERICAS
Americas Managing Editor
Jon Hemmerdinger
+1 617 397 2809
jon.hemmerdinger@flightglobal.com
Americas Air Transport Editor
Pilar Wolfsteller
pilar.wolfsteller@flightglobal.com
Americas Defence Reporter
Ryan Finnerty +1 802 373 5720
ryan.finnerty@flightglobal.com
Americas Aviation Reporter
Howard Hardee
+1 530 354 5365
howard.hardee@flightglobal.com
ASIA/PACIFIC
Asia Editor
Greg Waldron +65 9489 4153
greg.waldron@flightglobal.com
Asia Air Transport Editor
Alfred Chua +65 9643 4228
alfred.chua@flightglobal.com
FLIGHTGLOBAL.COM
Head of Digital Engagement
& Development
Amber Elias +44 7816 991648
amber.elias@flightglobal.com
EDITORIAL PRODUCTION
Group Production Manager Isabel Burton
Art Editor Tim Noonan
Layout Copy Editor Tim Norman
Consulting Technical Artist Tim Hall
DISPLAY ADVERTISEMENT SALES
1st Floor, Chancery House,
St Nicholas Way, Sutton, Surrey, SM1 1JB, UK
ASIA-PACIFIC
Business Development Manager APAC
Clara Wong +65 9780 6839
clara.wong@flightglobal.com
64 Flight International February 2024
EUROPE Flight International is one of FlightGlobal’s
(publishing, events and FlightJobs)
Commercial Director
products and services.
Andrew Walker +44 7823 887015
andrew.walker@flightglobal.com
European Sales Director Flight International welcomes unsolicited
Katie Mann +44 7792 152097 contributions from readers but cannot
katie.mann@flightglobal.com guarantee to return photographs safely.
© and Database Rights 2024 DVV Media
NORTH & SOUTH AMERICA International Ltd. All rights reserved.
Sales Director, USA No part of this publication may be
Robert Hancock +1 703 795 5155 reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
robert.hancock@flightglobal.com transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without the prior
ITALY permission in writing of the publishers.
Sales Manager Riccardo Laureri Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper
Published by DVV Media International Ltd,
+39 (02) 236 2500
1st Floor, Chancery House, St Nicholas Way,
media@laureriassociates.it
Laureri Associates SRL, Via Alessandro Sutton, Surrey, SM1 1JB, UK.
Volta, 40, 22100 Como, Italy Newstrade distributed by Marketforce (UK),
2nd Floor, 5 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf,
London, E14 5HU, UK. For enquiries, please
ISRAEL email mfcommunications@futurenet.com
Sales Executive Asa Talbar Classified advertising prepress by CCM.
+972 77 562 1900 Printed in Great Britain by William Gibbons
Fax: +972 77 562 1903 talbar@talbar.co.il and Sons
Talbar Media, 41 HaGiva’a St, PO Box 3184,
Flight International published monthly 12 issues
Givat Ada 37808, Israel a year.
This periodical is sold subject to the following
RECRUITMENT conditions: namely that it is not, without the
written consent of the publishers first given,
Senior Business Development Manager lent, re-sold, hired out or in any unauthorised
Nick Lee +44 7786 851880 cover by way of trade, or affixed to, or as
nick.lee@flightglobal.com part of, any publication of advertising, literary
or pictorial matter whatsoever. No part of
Commercial Director – Jobs
the content may be stored electronically, or
Louise Rees +44 20 3957 4566
reproduced or transmitted in any form without
louise.rees@personneltoday.com the written permission of the Publisher.
ISSN 0015-3710 (Print)
ADVERTISEMENT PRODUCTION ISSN 2059-3864 (Online)
Production Manager
Sean Behan +44 20 8092 4078
PUBLISHING MANAGEMENT
Managing Director Andy Salter
Divisional Director
Sophie Wild +44 7715 364765
sophie.wild@flightglobal.com
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Flight International Subscriptions,
Abacus, 107-111 Fleet Street,
London, EC4A 2AB
Next month: March
Subscription Enquiries
If you have any subscription queries,
please contact customer service:
+44 20 8955 7034
FlightGlobal@abacusemedia.zendesk.com
To purchase a FlightGlobal Premium
subscription, visit FlightGlobal.com/
subscribe
Print & Digital Subscription Rates
(best rates are quoted)
1 year: £230/€250/$325
2 years: £485/€525/$690
3 years: £650/€700/$920
Quarterly: £63/€65/$85 Flight-test exclusive:
Digital Subscription Rates Paramount’s Mwari
(best rates are quoted)
1 year: £195/€210/$280 Plus: We report from the
Paramount Group
2 years: £410/€470/$605
3 years: £575/€625/$805
World Defense Show
Only paid subscriptions available. On sale 29 February
Cheques payable to Flight International
 Senior engineer Emma Galarza is helping Delta
Air Lines to revolutionise its aircraft maintenance
processes by pioneering advanced inspection and
machine learning technologies

Working smarter
Pilar Wolfsteller Las Vegas maintaining the high safety standards that are
integral to commercial aviation.
“The area of technology that I own is advanced

D
elta Air Lines, one of the world’s largest
commercial carriers by fleet size, operates
numerous aircraft types – from Airbus A350s
all the way down to 9kg (20lb) DJI M300
autonomous drones.
But the Atlanta-based carrier’s two drones –
named “Dolly” and “Reba” – are not just for fun.
They are central to a new programme designed to
inspection and machine learning, and the drone pro-
ject is the first application there,” Galarza says.
Delta works with Dutch company Mainblades, which
specialises in using small drones to inspect aircraft. Af-
ter earning a Federal Aviation Administration Part 107
drone operator certificate, Galarza spent time learning
at the company’s headquarters in the Netherlands.
“Since then, we’ve been basically designing exper-

Delta Air Lines

revolutionise the airline’s maintenance operations, iments [and] testing the programme. We want to
and Emma Galarza is spearheading that effort. understand if it’s equivalent to our current processes,
Galarza is a senior engineer with Delta TechOps, and build a data package,” she says. “It’s something
the division responsible for aircraft repair and very new for the industry, so we’re just learning about
maintenance. She studied mechanical engineering at it all – basically making sure we’re covering our bases.”
Georgia Institute of Technology and first landed at Drone inspections do not completely replace their
Delta in 2018, while still in school. manual equivalent but could become a significant
“It can be difficult to get your foot in the door, but time-saver for the airline and its technicians. For
I ended up at a career fair talking with one of just a instance, drones can assist with inspecting jets after
few people at Delta who worked in fatigue and failure lightning strikes.
analysis. That was how I got my first role.” “Any time a plane flies through a storm, a pilot
might report a suspected lightning strike. When that
Employment experience happens, when the plane has landed, maintenance
The job was a so-called “co-op” role – meaning has to inspect the whole aircraft.”
Galarza worked full time at Delta while still a student. Thoroughly inspecting a widebody A350 after such
At the end of the programme she had logged a full an event takes up to 16h of labour, with mechanics
year of employment at the airline.
“Internships are usually extremely short, and
engineering work typically takes longer than that to Inspections made by drone can
make an impact. So it was a unique opportunity to save hours versus manual process
really work like a full-time engineer at a company, but
still also go back to school,” Galarza says.
She worked on a team that dabbled in new technol-
ogies, and quickly took a liking to drones. The compa-
ny was considering investing further in that emerging
technology, although this was still “a side task that the
engineers could do when they had time”, she says.
After graduating and working at other jobs
to broaden her horizons – including developing
plant-based cheese products at food giant Kraft
Heinz – Galarza in late 2022 received a call from a
former manager at Delta. The airline, it seemed, was
ready to go all-in on some innovations.
Delta Air Lines

She rejoined the company in January 2023, and

her job now is to examine how new tools can im-
prove and speed up maintenance tasks, while also

66 Flight International February 2024

 Women in aviation

“I’m creating tools that are

helping our people do their
jobs safer and more efficiently.
That’s something I hope to
continue in the future”

Galarza loves the opportunities

that the industry offers engineers

on lifts or suspended by harnesses above an aircraft
that, at its tallest point, is as high as a four-storey
building. They must examine every inch of the
airframe to ensure nothing has been damaged.
“Not only is it very time consuming, but any time
we have mechanics working at height it’s also a safety
concern,” Galarza says. “The autonomous drone is able
to fly around the entire aircraft and take photos of
everything in about an hour and 15 minutes.”
Inspectors and technicians then scrutinise the
images on the ground.
When storms strike, several airframes may have to
be removed from service for inspections simultaneous-
ly. The drone’s quick work can expedite getting them
back in the air by helping technicians prioritise repairs.
Delta has approval from US regulators to fly the
drones indoors and outdoors at maintenance facilities
in Atlanta, Detroit and Minneapolis. But as things now
stand, it can only use the remote aircraft for non-safe-
ty critical inspection work, such as looking for paint
blemishes. In the future, the team hopes for approval
to use the drones for critical aircraft inspections.
Aviation was not on Galarza’s initial list of top
career choices, but she has grown to love the
industry, and the diversity of jobs it offers engineers.
“I thought it’d be great to go work at Porsche or
Mercedes, designing cars, or working in the biomedi-
cal field, making prosthetics. Aviation and aerospace
came to me later on, after a bit more experience and
understanding of what types of careers there are.”
High flyer
She wants to keep working with cutting-edge
technologies and the maintenance teams that keep
the fleet flying.
“I’m creating tools that are helping our people on
the ground do their jobs safer and more efficiently.
It’s unique to have an engineer who gets to spend
time with [them]. And that’s something that I hope to
continue in the future here.” ◗

Subscribe today at www.FlightGlobal.com/subscribe

February 2024 Flight International 67