US Airways Plane Down in Hudson River; All On Board Reported Rescued

January 28th, 2009

[Reuters photo]

A US Airways flight has gone down in the Hudson River. All on board — US Airways said that there were 150 passengers and five crew — are reported to have been rescued.

The live pictures I was looking at shortly after the crash showed lots of passengers on both wings of the partially submerged Airbus A320. Rescue boats surrounded the plane, which had just taken off from LaGuardia Airport bound for Charlotte.

The temperature in New York was about 25 degrees at the time of the accident around 3.15 p.m. The water temperature in the Hudson River was below 35 degrees.

The sheer number of passengers seen out on those wings as rescue boats surrounded the partially submerged airplane was the first sign that flight attendants did a great job in getting people out, that passengers did a great job following calm evacuation procedures — and that the pilots managed to put that airplane down in the river with consummate skill.

And the next time I hear that familiar, always ignored, in-flight safety announcement about how seat cushions can be used as flotation devices, I’m paying attention.

[UPDATE: Incidentally, the media are pitching the guess that the plane experienced engine trouble right after takeoff due to a so-called "bird strike," a flock of birds sucked into an engine. But upon examination, this theory seems to be just that, pure speculation. The only reports I see of it, like one currently running on the New York Daily News Web site, say the pilot reported running into a "flock of geese" -- but I don't see any attribution for that information.

A bird strike may well have been the cause, but we'll see once we have some actual evidence.]

Also, as I said, a statement by US Airways, before updates on the crash oddly disappeared from the US Air Web site just before 6 p.m., said that 155 people — 150 passengers and five crew — were on the plane. Other media reports have slightly different numbers, from 151 to 153, and they may well be right.

[UPDATE 2 -- Ah, here's some better information -- attributed, if anonymously -- from the Wall Street Journal online about the possible bird-strike cause:

"A person familiar with conversations between the flight crew and air traffic controllers said that the crew reported flying through a flock of geese, sucking birds into both engines. The engines continued to run, but at that point they were chewing themselves up and not making enough power to continue flight."]

###

November Airline Ontime Stats

January 28th, 2009

Here are the November numbers for on-time performance by domestic airlines, from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

Airline On-Time Arrival Pct November 2008

Carrier On-Time Arrival Pct.
1 Hawaiian 89.59
2 Southwest 87.22
3 Northwest 86.75
4 United 85.51
5 SkyWest 85.11
6 Pinnacle 84.90
7 American 84.40
8 Frontier 83.65
9 American Eagle 83.52
10 ExpressJet 83.01
11 JetBlue 82.94
12 US Airways 81.98
13 Alaska 81.37
14 Mesa 81.31
15 Continental 80.73
16 AirTran 80.19
17 Delta 77.40
18 Comair 77.07
19 Atlantic Southeast 75.30
All Airlines 83.33

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics

###

United p.s. Joining Inflight Internet Trend

January 28th, 2009

United Airlines says its premium “p.s.” flights between New York and California will offer the expanding Gogo inflight Internet service.

The 13 757s used on the p.s. flights between New York and San Francisco and Los Angeles will begin offering the service in the summer. United says it will consider rolling Gogo out further after evaluating initial customer response on the p.s. flights.

Gogo is a service provided by Aircell, which calls it a “mobile WiFi hot-spot” for airplanes.

It was introduced last year on American Airlines flights between New York and California and New York and Florida. Virgin Atlantic also offers it on New York-California flights and on flights between Los Angeles and San Francisco and Seattle. And both Delta and Air Canada have said they plan to offer it later this year — in Delta’s case on its mainline fleet, by summer.

###

What an Honorable Pilot Would Never Do…

January 28th, 2009


[Above: Our hero]

…that is, abandon a flightworthy plane on auto-pilot in an occupied area.

This big slob couldn’t find a way to fake his demise without endangering people on the ground by deliberately abandoning an aircraft in flight? This is the year’s new candidate for the 2009 top-10 list of most-vile Wall Street clowns (candidates accepted daily).

I’ve known pilots all of my adult life, since joining the Navy in 1966. Pilots may be characters, and some are truly eccentric (more so than in the general population, I would say. I’m thinking here of a former military pilot nicknamed Choo-Choo, who could not resist swooping down to trail a train at a distance when he spotted one in the rural Southwest. But he also made it a point to pull up before he scared the conductor.)

The one thing the vast majority of pilots share is a deep sense of responsibility, and personal honor, in the air.

Every pilot I know, civilian and military, would put an airplane into a mountain, with themselves in the cockpit, rather than pull a despicable stunt like this, recklessly endangering innocent people for his own shabby, sorry benefit.

###

Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Back to Life in Senate

January 28th, 2009


[Photo: Kate Hanni, founder of passengers rights movement]

The long-languishing Airline Passengers Bill of Rights, legislation that would require airlines to adhere to certain customer-service procedures when planes full of people sit on tarmacs during extended delays, is back.

U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) reintroduced the legislation today. It had died during the last Congress. Basically, the bill requires airlines to ensure that travelers are not unnecessarily trapped on airplanes for excessive periods of time, or deprived of food, water, or adequate restrooms.

The airlines fiercely fought the legislation last year and will do so again now, in a new legislative environment that may be more supportive of the initiative than was the case in the last Congress.

The legislation is the brainchild of Kate Hanni, a California woman who was stranded with her husband and son for almost 10 hours on a parked plane in Texas in late 2006, along with thousands of other passengers on flights affected by bad weather. As the airline system strained in 2007 and 2008, literally thousands of other planes sat parked for up to 12 hours, with conditions deteriorating, during bad weather or amid other problems at airports throughout the country.

Hanni has spent the last two years organizing a grassroots coalition — and pushing the national television and print publicity buttons — to press for the legislation. She’s also tirelessly worked the halls of Congress and various state legislatures.

I have known Kate since she started her drive, and she’s a genuine political phenomenon, though a controversial one.

Her group’s Web site is at www.flyersrights.org

Boxer and Snowe issued a joint statement announcing reintroduction of the legislation.

Passengers have been stranded for long periods “without access to food, safe drinking water or functioning bathrooms,” said Boxer. “People deserve to be safe and comfortable, and know that airlines and the Department of Transportation are going to protect and accommodate them in the event of excessive delays.”

Snowe said, “Whether it is the record length of delays, lack of access to adequate food and water or the overbooking of flights, the U.S. airline industry has time and time again failed to protect the basic rights of the flying public. “Given the amount of money Americans are paying for airline fares and the unconscionable litany of fees and surcharges being tacked on to the price of a ticket, Congress has an obligation to step in and set a standard for airline consumer protections in this country. This legislation is a common-sense solution that will ensure the safety of travelers and guarantee their basic needs.”

The legislation would require:

—Airlines to offer passengers the option of safely deplaning once they have sat on the ground for three hours after the plane door has closed. This option would be provided every three hours the plane continues to sit on the ground.

—Airlines to provide passengers with food, potable water, comfortable cabin temperature and ventilation and adequate restrooms while a plane is delayed on the ground.

—That the Department of Transportation create a consumer complaint hotline so that passengers can report delays.

—Airports and airlines to develop contingency plans for delayed flights to be reviewed and approved by the transportation department.

The bill also allows the transportation department to fine air carriers and airports that do not submit or fail to comply with contingency plans.

The bill provides two exceptions to the three-hour option — “to ensure passenger safety and airport efficiency,” the statement says.

Pilots may decide to not allow passengers to deplane if they believe safety or security would be at risk due to weather or other emergencies. Additionally, pilots may delay deplaning up to a half hour beyond the three hour period if they reasonably believe the flight will depart within 30 minutes.

Boxer and Snowe first introduced the bill in the Senate in 2007.

Provisions of their Airline Passengers’ Bill of Rights were included in the Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization bill, which was passed by the Commerce Committee but blocked on the Senate floor.

The case for federal action was strengthened when the U.S. Court of Appeals struck down a New York State law protecting passengers’ rights.

The New York law provided for health and safety measures, but did not address what I regard as the third rail of Hanni’s passengers-rights initiative, which is the mandate that passengers must be allowed to leave a plane stuck on the tarmac after three hours.

In overturning the New York law shortly after it went into effect last year, the federal court cited the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, which greatly restricts the ability of government to legislate any aspect of airline operations.

The bill has strong industry opposition. The best argument the industry can muster, to my mind, is that requiring a pilot to return a plane to the gate after x-number of hours could have unintended consequences. That it, it might well introduce a new level of chaos into airline operating schedules, since that flight will have lost its place for take-off and may well end up canceled rather than badly delayed.

On the other hand, the airline industry’s wingeing and caterwauling about other aspects of the bill — requiring working toilets and adequate food and drink on board stranded planes — is an example of tone-deafness at its worst, in my opinion. If the airlines can’t find a way to treat stranded passengers humanely, and so far most of them have not, then the government damned well needs to step in. Period.

The aviation forecaster Michael Boyd, who has derided Hanni and her movement, seems resigned to the likelihood of some form of passengers rights law taking effect this year.

In his weekly essay yesterday at the web site of his company, Boyd Group International, Boyd excoriates the airlines for not raising hell about the basic cause of delays: An antiquated air-traffic control system and what he regards as a hopelessly inept Federal Aviation Administration, which he says has wasted billions trying to develop a new, long-delayed, obsolete-before-it-even-arrives air-traffic system called NextGen, which he and other critics have derided as “yesterday-Gen.”

###

Brazil Report on ‘06 Mid-Air Amazon Disaster Disputed by World Air-Traffic Controllers Group

January 28th, 2009

The professional group representing the world’s air traffic controllers is taking issue today with the widely publicized, and deeply flawed, report by the Brazilian Air Force that lays most of the blame for the 2006 mid-air collision over the Amazon with the American pilots flying the business jet that landed safely.

The International Federation of Air Traffic Control Associations (IFATCA), in a statement to be released today, expresses “disappointment” with the lengthy Brazilian report, compiled by an aviation investigations panel called CENIPA, which operates under the aegis of the Brazilian Air Force — which runs that country’s long-troubled commercial air-traffic control system.

As have others, IFATCA wonders why the CENIPA, the Brazilan panel, devoted so much time and effort in its 266 pages to “events in the cockpit of the Legacy private jet” that collided with a Brazilian Gol Airlines 737 at 37,000 feet on Sept. 29, 2006, killing all 154 on the civilian airliner. (The two pilots and five passengers on the badly damaged Legacy private jet, of whom I was one, managed to land at a jungle air strip 25 minutes after the collision.)

IFATCA expresses its “disappointment that the well-evidenced failures and safety problems of the Brazilian air-traffic control system, including its contribution to the fatal chain of events of the accident,” have not received the required attention and detailed scrutiny” from CENIPA.

From day one, I have said here that Brazilian air-traffic control, especially over the Amazon, is notorious for communications and radar failures. Merely stating what every international pilot who flies over the Amazon knows has made me publicly reviled in Brazil, where from day one the authorities unwisely “criminalized” the accident and unscrupulously campaigned to blame the two American pilots, who are currently on criminal trial in absentia in Brazil under a charge of unintentional homicide that can lead to three-year prison sentences on conviction.

Notably, while the Brazilian military and federal police continue their criminal approach (which included charges against four low-ranking military air traffic controllers), there has been no significant effort in Brazil to address the obvious systemic problems of the air-traffic control system, or even to acknowledge them.

IFATCA’s statement makes note of this, saying that it is “disappointing, as in the aviation community there was hope that the final accident report would shed a neutral light on the problems and shortcomings of the Brazilian air-traffic control system.”

Last month, on the same day CENIPA issued its report focusing on the American pilots and an apparent equipment failure on the Legacy, the internationally respected U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, which had been an observer in the CENIPA investigation and which also conducted its own independent investigation, issued a report with strikingly different conclusions.

The NTSB report found that the primary cause of the accident was air traffic control failures, among them a fatal order from an air traffic controller who instructed the Legacy to fly at 37,000 feet — on what would be a collision course with the approaching 737 airliner over the Amazon.

The NTSB report found that a transponder device that failed to signal on the Legacy, and thus inactivated the on-board anti-collision system that would have been the last chance to avert a crash already set in motion by air traffic control errors, was a “contributing factor” in the disaster.

Here’s a link to the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board findings on the Brazil crash. (10 pages).

And here is a link to the disputed Brazilian CENIPA report. (Warning, it’s 266 pages).

###

Mesa Air Seeks to Head Off Nasdaq Delisting

January 28th, 2009

Mesa Air Group confirmed today that it has received a notice from Nasdaq stating that the company’s finances don’t meet the minimum standards to comply with Nasdaq rules and that its securities are subject to being delisted from the exchange.

Under Nasdaq rules, Mesa has 60 days from the date of the letter, Jan. 5, to submit a plan to regain compliance.

Mesa’s shares are currently trading at about 29 cents, which gives it a market capitalization — the value the stock market currently attributes to the company — of about $7.5 million.

Mesa said that the Nasdaq notice is “a result of Mesa’s failure to timely file its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008.” Mesa said it “intends to file its Form 10-K later today and announce its earnings tomorrow, and therefore remedy the deficiency.”

Mesa has 159 aircraft with over 800 daily departures to 124 cities, 38 states, the District of Columbia, Canada, the Bahamas and Mexico. Mesa operates as Delta Connection, US Airways Express and United Express under contract with Delta Air Lines, US Airways and United Airlines, respectively, and independently as Mesa Airlines and go!.

In June 2006 Mesa launched inter-island Hawaiian service as go!. Go! links Honolulu to airports in Hilo, Kahului, Kona and Lihue.

###

How Many Seats?

January 28th, 2009

That’s the big question as we slog through an off-peak travel season. How many fewer airline seats are there, and how many fewer are there going to be once travel demand picks up (as it should) in the spring?

In an example of how to do it right online, USA Today has an excellent interactive chart showing OAG figures for the number of scheduled seats on airline domestic departures from all over the country, state by state and city by city. Here’s the link.

Some key points (seats on departing flights scheduled as of March 2009 compared with March 2008):

Honolulu — Down 17.7 percent

Las Vegas — Down 12.2

Orlando — Down 8.5

Reno — Down 26.6

LAX — Down 7.9

Chicago O’Hare — Down 8.5

Tucson — Down 26.6

Cincinnati — Down 27.7

Those are flights already in the schedule. From everything I’m hearing, airlines are considering cutting capacity even further, so these numbers are by no means firm.

###

The Incredible Shrinking Air-Traffic System

January 28th, 2009

The numbers keep adding up, or down. Air travel is off sharply, and the airlines continue to shrink their capacity.

American Airlines reported its December operating results today, and its competitors will be showing similar trends.

At American, revenue passenger miles (a basic measure of traffic) were down 9.6 percent domestically and, in a trend that really has U.S. airlines worried because they staked so much on foreign capacity expansion, down 5.7 percent internationally. The comparisons are to Dec. 2007.

American’s domestic seat capacity also is off sharply, down 11.8 percent domestically in December — and down 3.2 percent internationally.

American Eagle, meanwhile. flew 13 percent fewer passenger miles in November, with 13.5 percent fewer seats.

United Airlines also reported its December numbers today. Domestic passenger miles were down 9.5 percent (and 12 percent internationally). There were 13.8 percent fewer domestic seats on United in December, and 9.6 percent fewer on its international routes.

Continental Airlines had similar results, with domestic revenue miles down 9.3 percent (and down 4.9 percent internationally) and seat capacity down 12.1 percent domestically and down 5.6 percent internationally.

Watch the other airline December numbers as they come in tomorrow. The future shape (short-term at least) of our air-travel system is coming into clear focus.

Increasingly, it is going to be less convenient to get from here to there, by any measure. The big question is can airlines maintain current fare levels if passenger demand continues to drop as it has been in these last two tumultuous months?

###

I Stopped Reading…

January 28th, 2009

this puff piece on some TV anchorwoman when I saw it reporting her grousing about Continental Airlines charging for food.

Naturally, the comments were paraphrased, a habit that will be among the unindicted co-conspirators when quality journalism finally dies in this country.

But just for the record: Along among its peers, Continental Airlines continues to serve meals, without charge. OK, in coach it’s generally either the dread Cheese Pizza or the actually-not-bad Chicken Sandwich, but the meal comes with a salad and a snack. And in first class, here the grub is actually pretty good, Continental still rolls out the silverware and cloth napkins.

Now if I could only figure out a way to get from Tucson to Houston this week without making a two-day trip out of it. No can do, and make my 10.30 a.m. meeting Wednesday at the absurdly named George Bush “Intercontinental” Airport, which the wise-guy pilots one-up as “Intergalactic.”

###