Flight Safety Information - October 29, 2024 No. 215 In This Issue : Incident: Ryanair B738 and Binter E195 at Tenerife on Oct 21st 2024, loss of separation on takeoff/go around : Incident: Serene B738 near Karachi on Oct 25th 2024, engine problem : Incident: Delta A332 and Jetblue BCS3 at Boston on Oct 27th 2024, loss of separation on runway, go around : Pilots: Don’t Get Trapped in an Illegal Air Charter Operation : Are automated systems ready? FAA to replace meteorologists at key traffic centers : Cockpit Screens Went Blank as Chemical Odor Filled Flight Deck of Frontier Airlines Plane That Made Dramtic Emergency Landing in Las Vegas : Missoula Airport Scare: Man Breaches TSA, Attempts to Enter Cockpit : Frontier A321 crew smelt burning rubber odor before fiery LAS landing: NTSB : LATAM Orders 10 Boeing 787 Aircraft, Eyes New Sydney Flights : India invokes penalty clause as US aerospace giant delays jet engines : Calendar of Events Incident: Ryanair B738 and Binter E195 at Tenerife on Oct 21st 2024, loss of separation on takeoff/go around A Ryanair Boeing 737-800, registration EI-DYD performing flight FR-4199 from Madrid,SP to Tenerife North,CI (Spain) with 182 passengers and 6 crew, was on final approach to Tenerife's runway 30. A Binter Canarias Embraer ERJ-195, registration EC-OEA performing flight NT-6062 from Tenerife North,CI to Madrid,SP (Spain) with 116 passengers and 5 crew, was cleared for takeoff from runway 30. In the moment the aircraft rotated for takeoff, tower cleared FR-4199 for landing on runway 30, the crew however elected to go around. Spain's CIAIAC reported: "... a loss of separation occurred. The crew of the BOEING 737-800 aircraft was instructed to increase the climb rate and maintain an altitude of 5,000 ft and performed an airfield circuit north of the runway, subsequently landing normally. The EMBRAER 195 aircraft continued with the scheduled takeoff and continued the flight to Madrid Barajas Airport (LEMD). There was no personal or material damage." and opened an investigation into the occurrence. https://avherald.com/h?article=51f88ea3&opt=0 Incident: Serene B738 near Karachi on Oct 25th 2024, engine problem A Serene Air Boeing 737-800, registration AP-BNA performing flight ER-522 from Karachi to Lahore (Pakistan) with about 180 people on board, was climbing through about FL320 out of Karachi when the crew decided to return to Karachi reporting a problem with the right hand engine (CFM56). The aircraft landed safely back on Karachi's runway 25L about one hour after departure. The aircraft remained on the ground in Karachi for about 30 hours before returning to service. https://avherald.com/h?article=51f88855&opt=0 Incident: Delta A332 and Jetblue BCS3 at Boston on Oct 27th 2024, loss of separation on runway, go around A Delta Airlines Airbus A330-200, registration N855NW performing flight DL-59 from London Heathrow,EN (UK) to Boston,MA (USA), was on final approach to Boston's runway 33L. A Jetblue Bombardier C-Series CS-300, registration N3125J performing flight B6-531 from Boston,MA (USA) to San Juan (Puerto Rico), was cleared to line up runway 33L at 16:40:21Z immediately after the preceeding departure had departed and aligned with the runway at 16:41:38Z, when DL-59 was about 2.8nm before the runway threshold. Tower cleared DL-59 to land on runway 33L at 16:40:48Z. At 16:42:00Z tower cleared B6-531 for immediate takeoff from runway 33L advising the arriving traffic was 1.5nm behind them (ADS-B data show DL-59 about 1.9nm before the runway threshold at that time). At 16:42:32Z tower instructed DL-59 to go around, the crew acknowledged. B6-531 started to accelerate for takeoff at 16:42:45Z when DL-59 was about 0.7nm before the runway threshold. DL-59 began to climb again about 0.15nm past the runway threshold at 16:43:05Z, at that time B6-531 was accelerating through about 110 knots over ground about 0.55nm down the runway. Climbing through 500 feet at 16:43:28Z DL-59 began to turn to the right onto a diverging trajectory, B6-531 was climbing through 400 feet about 0.13nm past the runway end, the minimum separation between the aircraft according to ADS-B data was 100 feet vertical and 0.89nm horizontal. DL-59 positioned for another approach to runway 33L and landed safely about 12 minutes after the go around. B6-531 continued to destination for a safe landing. The FAA reported: "An air traffic controller instructed Delta Air Lines Flight 59 to perform a go-around at Boston Logan International Airport because another aircraft was departing at the same time the Airbus 332 was attempting to land. The event happened around 12:45 p.m. local time on Sunday, Oct. 27. There was no loss of safe separation." https://avherald.com/h?article=51f87f3f&opt=0 Pilots: Don’t Get Trapped in an Illegal Air Charter Operation By FAA’s Safe Air Charter Team Illegal charter operations in the National Airspace System continue to put the flying public in danger and undercut the business of legitimate operators. The FAA, together with our industry partners, has carried out public outreach efforts directed at pilots, owners, passengers, operators, and others to provide emphasis and education about the specific regulations required to keep the airspace safe and legal. Safe air charter education is aimed at prevention before there is an issue or incident. As pilots, you are often the first line of defense to ensure safety. These are three persistent safety issues: • For private pilots, it is a misinterpretation of privileges and limitations regarding the application of 14 CFR sections 61.113(b)(1) and (2) regarding compensation for flights in connection with a business or employment. • For commercial pilots, especially for those newly certificated, it is the failure to correctly identify the operational rules required for the flight, which may require greater authorization and/or certification than simply their privilege of receiving compensation for flying under 14 CFR part 61. • For all pilots, it is a general lack of understanding of their responsibility to possess full knowledge of the nature of the flights they conduct. • 🛩️ Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations Regarding 61.113(b) When compensation is exchanged for transportation, the flying public expects, and the regulations demand, a higher level of safety. It is generally understood that private pilots may neither act as pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft for compensation or hire nor act as PIC of an aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire according to 14 CFR section 61.113(a). The section that follows, 61.113(b) is often misunderstood or misapplied. A private pilot must meet both conditions of 61.113(b)(1) and (2) before they can receive compensation in connection with any business or employment. For example, Shelly works for a company whose business is not related to air transportation. She wants to fly her Cessna 182 to a meeting for her company in Las Vegas and wants to be reimbursed for the cost of using her own aircraft to fly herself to the meeting. Shelly must look at both 61.113(b)(1) and (2) to make sure she is legal. A flight to a meeting would be considered incidental to that business or employment thereby meeting (b)(1). Next, she is only flying herself to the meeting, so no persons or property are on board, therefore (b)(2) is met. Modifying this scenario, Shelly’s colleague now wants to ride with her to the meeting. Can Shelly take her friend along on the aircraft and still be reimbursed for the flight? No, she cannot because (b)(2) prohibits passengers or property being carried for compensation or hire — her reimbursement from her employer for the flight is compensation. (See legal interpretation Mangiamele 2009.) ✈️ Commercial Pilots Must Adhere to All Operational Flight Rules Photo of a twin-prop airplane as dusk. Photo by Solomon Crowe. Newly certificated commercial pilots often misunderstand their privileges under 61.133 when receiving compensation for flights carrying persons or property. A commercial pilot must meet the qualification requirements of 14 CFR part 61, and the operator, which may be the pilot or a different company, must hold the proper operating certificate for the flight operation conducted. Most operations involving the carriage of persons for compensation require the operator to hold a certificate under part 119 authorizing those flights to be conducted under parts 135 or 121. A pilot for a flight operated under parts 135 or 121 must meet additional qualification requirements like training, testing, and flight experience. In addition to ensuring compliance with the applicable pilot privileges and limitations in part 61, prior to conducting any operation, the pilot must also determine what operational rules the flight is conducted under or should be conducted under to prevent a possible illegal charter. The pilot must also verify whether the operator has the appropriate operational certification (part 119), and whether the pilot has the proper qualifications. Unless a valid exception from operational certification rules applies in accordance with section 119.1(e), operators (could be the pilot under certain circumstances) cannot engage in common carriage, e.g., holding out, unless they are operating in accordance with an air carrier certificate or commercial operating certificate. 👨‍✈️ Pilot Responsibility to Inquire into the Nature of a Flight Photo of a passenger with a puppy in the back of a small airplane. Once FAA enforcement action has been initiated, a common reaction from pilots is that they only went off the information on a flight given to them by their employer or representative and didn’t ask questions or inquire as to the circumstances of the flight. As the pilot, you are accountable for your flight, even if it turns out to be unauthorized air transportation based on information relayed to you. While it certainly can be awkward or consequential when inquiring from an employer, boss, supervisor, or chief pilot as to the circumstances surrounding any flight, consider that it is your pilot certificate being used to operate that flight, not your employer’s. It is NTSB precedent that pilots have a duty to inquire and understand the nature of their flight. In NTSB Order EA-3549 (Hagerty) in April 1992, the Board stated: “A certificate holder is fairly expected to have a working knowledge of the regulations applicable to any operation he undertakes, and it is incumbent upon the pilot in command to ensure that any flight he conducts meets applicable regulations.” In NTSB Order EA-4306 (Croy and Rich), in December 1994, the board stated: “As we said in Hagerty, pilots may not avoid liability simply by not asking any questions. They have a reasonable duty to inquire into the status of the flight and the passengers.” If you have questions regarding any of these topics, please review the regulations under Title 14 in the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), advisory circulars, and legal interpretations referenced above. You may also contact your local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) for assistance or seek the advice of a qualified aviation attorney. Learn More See FAA Advisory Circular 61–142, Paragraph 10, for more information about holding out. See FAA Advisory Circular 120–12A for more information about private carriage versus common carriage of persons or property. Explore how the FAA is working to eliminate the risk of illegal air charter at faa.gov/charter. https://medium.com/faa/pilots-dont-get-trapped-in-an-illegal-air-charter-operation-6824e95369a3 Are automated systems ready? FAA to replace meteorologists at key traffic centers The Federal Aviation Administration is ousting all National Weather Service meteorologists from its air traffic control centers to rely solely on automated software for its weather-related decision-making – a shift some experts say raises safety concerns. The FAA announced it will end its over 40-year-old partnership with the NWS, effective on April 20, according to a news release by the National Weather Service Employees Organization. The termination will remove the on-site meteorologists at each of the 21 U.S. Air Route Traffic Control Centers who provide weather forecasting support to help prevent aviation accidents in lieu of a 24/7 accessible software. Through computer models, radar and satellite data, these meteorologists currently provide daily briefings and real-time advising on quickly evolving weather events to assist air traffic control with route decision-making. The release said there are no current plans for the FAA to replace the in-person meteorologists. A view of the air traffic control tower at O’Hare International Airport after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ordered airlines to pause all domestic departures due to a system outage, in Chicago, Illinois, U.S., January 11, 2023. "The FAA and NOAA are working on a path forward on the interagency agreement," the FAA said in a statement to USA TODAY. "The weather safety of our national airspace remains our shared top priority and there will be no change in service that will impact this goal." The National Weather Service Employees Organization said the move "will endanger flight safety across the National Air Space for the traveling public and airline industry crews" and that due to understaffing, "this new directive will increase risk" in a letter to U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown. In the early 1980s, Congress authorized the FAA to establish on-site meteorologist positions following a 1977 Southern Airways crash in New Hope, Georgia after the FAA was unable to share weather information to flight crews in time. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/news/2024/10/28/faa-air-traffic-control-weather-safety-risk/75900358007/ Cockpit Screens Went Blank as Chemical Odor Filled Flight Deck of Frontier Airlines Plane That Made Dramtic Emergency Landing in Las Vegas The Safety Board (NTSB) has published its preliminary report into a dramatic emergency landing of a Frontier Airlines Airbus A321 at Las Vegas Harry Reid Airport on October 5 which resulted in flames and smoke shooting out of the main landing gears as it came to a halt on the runway. Frontier Airlines flight 1326 was in its final minutes of flight from San Diego to Las Vegas, but as an otherwise uneventful flight drew to an end, the flight attendants told the pilots that they could smell a chemical-like odor in the cabin. A short while later, the pilots could smell the same odor in the cockpit. As the smell became increasingly pungent and acrid, the pilots quickly donned their oxygen masks and began working through an emergency checklist to deal with a possible onboard fire. As the two pilots began working through the checklist, the First Officer told NTSB investigators that he noticed some of the aircraft systems starting to malfunction or “degrade.” To make matters worse, the emergency checklist advised the pilots to place the aircraft into the ‘electrical emergency configuration’ because they were still to work out the source of the smell. Doing this took out the display screens, radio and transponder on the First Officer’s side of the flight deck. “The crew described their workload as high and the environment as increasingly hectic and stressful,” the NTSB’s report says of the incident. “The captain opted to focus on landing the airplane and relied on outside visual references during the approach.” “During this time, the first officer noted that the captain’s primary flight display (PFD) had ‘limited data represented.’ The captain recalled that they used the speeds placard on the instrument panel when configuring the airplane because the speed symbols on the PFD airspeed indicator were not present.” After successfully touching down on runway 26L at Las Vegas Airport, witnesses described hearing two loud bangs at tires in the main landing gears exploded. Smoke and flames started to shoot out of the main landing gear, although the fire extinguished on its own shortly before the aircraft came to a stop on the runway. The airport fire department arrived almost immediately, having been on standby due to the declared emergency, and sprayed the landing gear with foam. The cause of the smell onboard is yet to be determined, although the onboard computer system recorded that just two minutes before the First Officer declared an emergency, there had been a fault with a fan that cools the avionics compartment. The NTSB noted in its preliminary report that the emergency checklist used by the pilots includes a provision to restore electrical systems prior to landing to allow for recovery of inoperative systems. This could have included wheel brake anti-skid, engine reversers, and the nosewheel steering system that could have made the aircraft a lot easier to land without incident. https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2024/10/28/cockpit-screens-went-blank-as-chemical-odor-filled-flight-deck-of-frontier-airlines-plane-that-made-dramtic-emergency-landing-in-las-vegas/ Missoula Airport Scare: Man Breaches TSA, Attempts to Enter Cockpit Missoula, MT (KGVO-AM News) - On October 22, 2024, a Missoula Airport Police Officer heard TSA officers yelling “Stop him!” Those yells were followed by more yells: “breach, breach, breach!” At this same time, Alaska Airlines Flight 697 had recently landed and was in the process of deplaning at gate A1. A male, later identified as 34-year-old Justin Seymour, entered the airport and unlawfully breached the TSA security line. TSA officers and the airport officer began chasing Seymour as he ran toward the aircraft boarding gates. At gate A1, Seymour started moving down the jet bridge when a Horizon employee stood in his way to intentionally block him from entering the plane. Seymour then ran into the employee and pushed her out of the way and into the ground. In doing so, Seymour caused bodily injury to the employee. Specifically, it is believed that Seymour’s shove caused the employee to strain her tendon muscles connected to her clavicle. With the employee no longer in his way, Seymour boarded the aircraft and headed toward the cockpit. An Alaska Airlines flight attendant saw Seymour enter the plane, and she could only think about blocking him from the flight deck. Seymour approached and shoved the flight attendant into the cockpit door. Another flight attendant attempted to distract Seymour to get him to momentarily face away from the cockpit door. While they tried to distract Seymour, the other flight attendant attempted to rotate the deadbolt on the cockpit door to secure the cockpit from Seymour’s entry. Seeing this, Seymour again attempted to enter the cockpit, and in doing so, he crushed the flight attendant’s hand and fingers between the cockpit door and its door frame. Law enforcement officers finally caught up to Seymour. As they entered the aircraft, Seymour was yelling he had to go to Estonia. Law enforcement officers grabbed Seymour’s arms, took him off the aircraft, and placed him in handcuffs. According to court documents, Seymour told officers that “all I had to do was fly the plane but I didn’t. . . I thought I was going to be able to. ” Seymour further advised that “bad people” told him to take the aircraft to Seattle, and then to Estonia. When asked if he knew he ran through the security checkpoint, Seymour advised “I ran through.” Seymour was also asked if he knew how to fly a plane and advised that “It seems easy enough to learn.” Seymour was placed under arrest and was transported to the Missoula County Detention Facility. He is currently being charged with felony robbery and felony aggravated burglary. His bond was set at $500,000. https://newstalkkgvo.com/missoula-airport-scare-cockpit/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral Frontier A321 crew smelt burning rubber odor before fiery LAS landing: NTSB Frontier Airlines crew members reported a chemical smell that became increasingly pungent before an emergency landing at Harry Reid International Airport (LAS) in Las Vegas that resulted in a dramatic brake fire. Details about the incident were released by the National Transport Safety Bureau (NTSB) in a preliminary report published on October 28, 2024, which suggested that the cause of the emergency may have been a fault in a fan unit that cools the avionics compartment. The Frontier Airlines Airbus A321-200, registered N701FR, departed San Diego International Airport (SAN) on October 5, 2024, shortly after 15:00, with 170 passengers and seven crew onboard. Just prior to descent, the chemical smell was detected in the forward section of the aircraft by cabin crew staff and then by the captain and the first officer in the cockpit. The odor was initially described as “chemical and acrid in nature, or mildew-like” and evolved to smell like “burning rubber and/or petroleum products, such as plastics”. Wearing their oxygen masks the captain turned to the quick reference handbook (QRH) to perform a checklist which helped establish there was no visible smoke in the cockpit or in the aircraft cabin. The NTSB report said: “As they proceeded through the QRH checklist, the first officer noted that ‘aircraft systems began to degrade’ which included the unavailability of the autopilot and autothrottles. He recalled that it was unclear if the degradations were the ‘result of damage to equipment from a possible fire, or a result of systems isolations [specified] in the checklist[s]’.” As the source of the odor could not be established, the electrical emergency configuration procedure was initiated. Both the captain and first officer acknowledged this would deploy the ram air turbine. As a result, the display screens, radio, and transponder stopped functioning on the first officer’s side and control was moved to the captain’s side. The flight data recorder also lost power as part of the emergency procedure. Working under an “increasingly hectic and stressful” situation the captain used outside visual references during the approach with the first officer calling out airspeeds, altitudes and configuration information. As the Frontier A321 touched down on runway 26L at LAS a witness close by reported “two loud bangs in quick succession” due to the tires exploding. “The tires exploded about 3 seconds after touchdown. Then there was a large screen of smoke behind them and fire around the tires,” the witness told the NTSB investigators. Video captured of the landing supported the witness statement with flames clearly visible around the landing gear. An emergency evacuation was judged to not be unnecessary after fire crews assured the flight crew the fire was extinguished. Passengers left the aircraft via stairs brought to the aircraft. Post-incident investigation A fan unit that cools the avionics compartment has been retained for further examination after an aircraft monitoring system flagged a fault around 20 minutes before the flight touched down at LAS. While the cockpit voice recorder captured the flight, the flight data recorder lost power about nine minutes prior to landing as part of the electrical emergency configuration procedure. The investigation continues and a full report on the incident will be published in due course. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/frontier-airlines-airbus-brake-fire-las-vegas LATAM Orders 10 Boeing 787 Aircraft, Eyes New Sydney Flights Since its 2011 commercial debut, the 787 Dreamliner fleet has enabled airlines to establish over 400 new direct routes worldwide. SANTIAGO- LATAM Airlines Group has secured a definitive agreement with Boeing to acquire 10 787 Dreamliner aircraft, with potential expansion to 15 orders through additional options. The South American aviation leader strengthens its position as the region’s dominant 787 operator through this strategic investment. LATAM Airlines Group has secured a definitive agreement with Boeing to acquire 10 787 Dreamliner aircraft, with potential expansion to 15 orders through additional options. The airline’s current fleet consists of 37 787-8 and 787-9 aircraft, with projected growth to 52 Dreamliners anticipated by 2030. This expansion empowers LATAM to enhance capacity on high-demand routes while pioneering new destinations, exemplified by their direct service to Sydney (SYD), Australia. The procurement of these fuel-efficient 787-9 jets advances LATAM’s commitment to sustainable aviation practices. LATAM Airlines Group Chief Financial Officer Ramiro Alfonsín emphasizes the aircraft’s superior efficiency and its role in reducing the company’s environmental impact. The delivery schedule ensures LATAM receives a minimum of two aircraft annually from 2025 through 2030, supporting the airline’s long-term growth strategy. LATAM Airlines Group has secured a definitive agreement with Boeing to acquire 10 787 Dreamliner aircraft, with potential expansion to 15 orders through additional options. The Boeing 787 family achieves a groundbreaking 25% reduction in fuel consumption and emissions compared to predecessor aircraft models. The enhanced 787-9 variant expands operational capabilities, offering increased passenger capacity and extended range for global routes. Mike Wilson, Boeing’s vice president of Commercial Sales for Latin America and the Caribbean, confirms LATAM’s strategic expansion of international routes from major South American hubs in Santiago, Sao Paulo, and Lima. Boeing pledges continued support for LATAM’s global connectivity objectives and growth initiatives across Latin America. Since its 2011 commercial debut, the 787 Dreamliner fleet has enabled airlines to establish over 400 new direct routes worldwide. The aircraft’s advanced technology has prevented 173 billion pounds of carbon emissions, demonstrating significant environmental impact reduction in commercial aviation. Boeing’s 2024 Commercial Market Outlook projects Latin American air travel to experience 5% annual growth over the next two decades, effectively doubling the current market size. The forecast anticipates nearly 2,300 new aircraft deliveries, expanding the regional fleet to exceed 3,000 aircraft by 2043. The new order comes as Boeing faces a month-long machinists strike. Recently the worker union voted 64% to reject the new contract offered by Boeing. The strike affects 737 MAX, 767, and 777 production directly. However, it also has some impact on 787 production. LATAM recently equipped its Boeing 777 fleet with Lufthansa Group subsidiary Lufthansa Technik developed AeroSHARK Film. This made LATAM as the first carrier in Latin America to have AeroSHARK films. https://aviationa2z.com/index.php/2024/10/28/latam-orders-10-boeing-787-dreamliner/ India invokes penalty clause as US aerospace giant delays jet engines GE is learnt to have told the Indian side that one its South Korean suppliers that manufactures parts of the engine was facing a crisis, which had delayed the supply of aero-engines Facing a delay of more than 18 months in the supply of aero-engines from General Electric (GE), the Ministry of Defence has invoked a penalty clause against the US aerospace giant. Sources said the penalty clause had to be invoked as there was no other option left. “The contract and its clauses have to be enforced lest the CBI and the Central Vigilance Commission will hound the MoD officials,” the sources said. GE is learnt to have told the Indian side that one its South Korean suppliers that manufactures parts of the engine was facing a crisis, which had delayed the supply of aero-engines. India has asked the US company to source the part from India to overcome this disruption of supplies, sources said, adding that metallurgically casted products could be manufactured in India too. The US firm has promised to start supplying 24 engines each year from April 2025. In 2021, GE had signed a $716 million contract with the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to supply 99 F404-GE-IN20 engines for the Tejas Mark-1A jets. As per the contract, the company was to supply 16 engines per year beginning April 2023. India and the US are looking at long-term partnership through GE engines. Last year, a memorandum of understanding was signed with HAL to produce GE 414 engines for Indian Air Force fighter jets. The GE 414 is 35 per cent more powerful than its predecessor F404. “As of now, a commercial clause is being negotiated between GE and HAL,” the sources said. The contract, once signed, will be a major milestone and mark a geo-strategic shift. It would possibly mean US-origin engines could be put on more than 400 fighter jets, which are scheduled to be made in India over the next two decades or more. So far, Russia-made jets flying with Russian engines dominate the inventory of the Indian Air Force and the Indian Navy. The India-US agreement includes the potential joint production of GE Aerospace’s F414 engines in India. The F414 engine will be used in Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas Mark-2 jets and some 108 of these jets are planned to be made by HAL. The GE engine F414-INS6 has been selected for prototype development, testing and certification of the Indian Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA). “In addition, GE will continue to collaborate with India on the AMCA Mk2 engine programme,” the company had said last year when the deal was announced. In all, approximately 500 jets are planned to be made in India over the next two decades or more. This includes 180 Tejas Mark 1A, followed by 108 Tejas Mark 2 and 100 twin-engine deck-based fighters (TEDBF) for the Indian Navy. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/india/india-invokes-penalty-clause-as-us-aerospace-giant-delays-jet-engines/ CALENDAR OF EVENTS • INTERNATIONAL AVIATION SAFETY SUMMIT - November 5 - 7, 2024 (Rio De Janeiro) • NATA’s Aviation Business Conference (ABC) - November 12-13,2024, Nashville, TN • Elevate Your Organization's Safety Practices with ERAU’s SMS Course in Daytona Beach Nov. 19-21 • The Gulf Flight Safety Association (GFSA) - 26/27 of November 2024; Manama, Bahrain • Sponsor the 2025 Fuzion Safety Conference! March 4 & 5, 2025 (Orlando) • Annual Women in Aviation International Conference, Gaylord Rockies Resort & Conference Center | Denver Colorado, March 27-29, 2025 • Air Charter Safety Foundation (ACSF) Safety Symposium April 7-9, 2025 • AIA Conference: The Aviation Insurance Association's annual conference in Orlando, Florida from April 25–28, 2025 • Sixth Edition of International Accident Investigation Forum, 21 to 23 May 2025, Singapore • The 9th Shanghai International Aerospace Technology and Equipment Exposition 2025; June 11 to 13, 2025 Curt Lewis