Flight Safety Information - November 22, 2024 No. 233 In This Issue : Incident: TAROM B737 near Bucharest on Nov 21st 2024, packs problem : Incident: DHL B752 at Geneva on Nov 9th 2024, engine shut down in flight : Incident: Safair B738 at Lanseria on Nov 21st 2024, bird strike : FAA eyes new Boeing 737 MAX pilot instructions after smoke emergencies : Internal Debate Over CFM Leap Safety System Prompts FAA Review : Boeing Asks FAA To Extend More Exemptions Targeting International Aircraft Sales : LifeFlight of Maine targeted by laser strike warns of danger to aircraft safety : Justice Department Orders DEA to Halt Airport Searches Because of 'Significant Issues' With Cash Seizures : Delta’s 757s Could Be Sticking Around : Pilot examiner shortage persists : Air India to set up aircraft maintenance training institute in Bengaluru : Advance Your Aviation Career with Purdue's Online Master's Program : POSITION AVAILABLE: Senior Survival Factors Investigator (NTSB) : Calendar of Events Incident: TAROM B737 near Bucharest on Nov 21st 2024, packs problem A TAROM Boeing 737-700, registration YR-BGG performing flight RO-381 from Bucharest Otopeni (Romania) to Paris Charles de Gaulle (France), was enroute at FL320 about 130nm northwest of Bucharest when the crew decided to return to Bucharest advising ATC they had a problem with their packs. The aircraft descended to FL310 for the return and landed safely on Bucharest's runway 26L about 30 minutes after the decision to return. The rotation was cancelled, the passengers were rebooked onto alternate flights. The occurrence aircraft returned to service about 8 hours after landing back. https://avherald.com/h?article=5209b24f&opt=0 Incident: DHL B752 at Geneva on Nov 9th 2024, engine shut down in flight A DHL Air Boeing 757-200, registration G-BMRA performing flight D0-4982 from Leipzig (Germany) to Geneva (Switzerland), was descending towards Geneva when the crew needed to shut an engine (RB211) down due to its failure. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on Geneva's runway 22. The aircraft is still on the ground in Geneva standing Nov 21st 2024. Switzerland's SUST is currently conducting preliminary clarification to decide about whether an investigation will be opened. https://avherald.com/h?article=5209aebb&opt=0 Incident: Safair B738 at Lanseria on Nov 21st 2024, bird strike A Safair Boeing 737-800, registration ZS-ZWA performing flight FA-474 from Lanseria to Durban (South Africa), was climbing out of Lanseria's runway 07 when the crew stopped the climb at FL110 and decided to divert to Johannesburg (South Africa) reporting a bird strike causing problems with the right hand engine (CFM56). The aircraft landed safely on Johannesburg's runway 03R about 25 minutes after departure. A replacement Boeing 737-800 registration ZS-FGD reached Durban with a delay of about 2:15 hours. The airline reported the aircraft suffered a bird strike on departure from Lanseria and diverted to Johannesburg where it landed safely. The passengers embarked another aircraft and resumed their journey to Durban. https://avherald.com/h?article=5209aa0e&opt=0 FAA eyes new Boeing 737 MAX pilot instructions after smoke emergencies The Federal Aviation Administration is weighing whether to require all pilots of 737 MAX aircraft to take off with the air flow from the main engines into the aircraft’s interior turned off — to avoid a risk of smoke flooding the plane if one of the engines hits a bird. Such a change in takeoff procedure for pilots would be temporary until Boeing comes up with a permanent fix. Devising that could further delay certification of the Renton-built MAX 7 and MAX 10 models. The FAA said in a statement Thursday that it “will convene a Corrective Action Review Board in the coming weeks to examine the data and develop a path forward” and assess the options to prevent the risk of smoke entering the cockpit or passenger cabin. In the meantime, the FAA said that because pilots have been alerted to the procedure they should follow if smoke enters the plane, “this is not an immediate flight-safety issue.” The proposed FAA action is a response to the safety risk exposed by two serious incidents on Southwest Airlines MAXs last year. In those two incidents, a bird collided with an engine during takeoff and the damage caused an oil leak. The oil ignited in the hot engine, sending heavy smoke and fumes into the interior of the airplane. Airflow off an aircraft’s engines — known as “bleed air” — is normally directed to the airplane interior and passed through air conditioning packs to control the air pressure and temperature inside. Turning off the airflow from the two main engines mounted on the wings will reduce cabin pressurization, though some pressurization will be maintained via a small auxiliary engine in the aircraft’s tail, the auxiliary power unit. However, changing standard pilot takeoff procedures cannot be done lightly. To avoid unintended consequences, a careful risk assessment must be completed. The National Transportation Safety Board said it is still “gathering information” about the 2023 incidents. Southwest Airlines spokesperson Chris Perry said the airline “is in close contact with the Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing, as well as the engine manufacturer.” On Thursday, the airline issued a bulletin to its pilots stating that while “existing procedures are designed to manage smoke-related events effectively … we are fully prepared to take any additional steps as directed by the FAA, NTSB or other safety regulators.” The proposed action by the FAA would be a temporary accommodation, typically issued via an airworthiness directive to MAX operators. If the FAA issues such a directive, Boeing and engine-maker CFM International would then have to develop a permanent fix to the problem. Boeing spokesperson Bobbie Egan said the company will ensure that airlines and pilots are informed of any approved changes to 737 operating procedures. Both Boeing and CFM said they are working with the regulators investigating the two incidents. Sign up for Evening Brief Delivered weeknights, this email newsletter gives you a quick recap of the day's top stories and need-to-know news, as well as intriguing photos and topics to spark conversation as you wind down from your day. Dennis Tajer, spokesperson for the American Airlines pilots union, said that the FAA and CFM previously indicated this issue was “no big deal for the pilots” because they are trained to handle smoke emergencies. Yet he said it’s clear that in the two prior incidents, the smoke that poured in was “swift and thick, and it put at risk the safety margin.” “We are now learning that it is a big deal to the pilots,” Tajer said. “Now they’re saying we’re going to try to mitigate that.” He added that he assumes the Boeing MAX 7 and MAX 10 models, still uncertified, won’t be approved to fly passengers without a permanent fix in place. Smoke-filled airplanes On a March 2023 flight taking off from Havana, smoke poured into the passenger cabin after a bird struck the right engine on takeoff. In December, on a flight out of New Orleans, a bird struck the left engine on takeoff and smoke from the engine filled the cockpit. In both cases, the pilots safely made emergency landings back at the airports. Afterward, Boeing issued an alert to airlines instructing pilots on the precise actions needed to stop smoke ingestion in such circumstances. This requires following the instructions in a standard checklist used when an engine is on fire or severely damaged. In that procedure, the pilot shuts down the engine and pulls a fire handle. This second step cuts the flow of air from the engine, closing off the source of the smoke. The FAA’s consideration of the new takeoff instructions indicates unease as to whether pointing to that standard checklist is sufficient. However, how pilots should be instructed to avoid the problem is not a straightforward decision. Making a change to the usual takeoff procedure raises other questions that must now be considered by FAA experts. We need your support In-depth journalism takes time and effort to produce, and it depends on paying subscribers. If you value these kinds of stories, consider subscribing. Tajer said an airline pilot would typically have the bleed air system on as the plane taxis before takeoff, with the two air conditioning units fed by the two main engines “keeping the people cool and comfortable.” What’s called an “Engine Bleed Off Takeoff” is a rare procedure. A pilot in command of a heavy jet might choose such a takeoff from an airport that is hot and at high elevation, such as Mexico City. Cutting off the bleed air to the interior provides additional thrust from the engines to allow for the required safety margin on takeoff in such extreme conditions. To turn off the flow of bleed air for takeoff, the pilot would have to reach behind and up to the overhead instrument panel. Is it advisable to introduce this nonintuitive step during a critical stage of flight to address a risk from a rare event? The auxiliary power unit would provide some pressurization during takeoff, though it is not essential to flying and could be inoperable on a given flight. If that were the case, the takeoff would be entirely unpressurized. That could cause some ear pain to passengers, especially anyone with a cold, Tajer said. Pilots must turn the bleed air back on once the plane rises above 3,000 feet. Tajer said there is a risk attached to depending on the pilot to remember to do that. For now, if smoke ingestion occurs, airlines must stick to the checklist used when an engine is on fire or suffers severe damage. Southwest’s Perry said that after the two smoke ingestion incidents, the airline “reiterated the importance of following established safety procedures that are part of the company’s recurrent pilot training.” Tajer said pilots are most interested in learning about the permanent fix. The bulletins issued in February to Southwest and American pilots said that the bird strikes had damaged the oil sump in the MAX engine. That points to a design flaw in the engine; that it’s “not able to sustain the shock of a bird strike,” Tajer said. He said pilots need answers: “What is the fix? When will it be retrofitted? How will pilots be trained for this new procedure? And how long do we have to wait?” https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-weighs-new-boeing-737-max-pilot-instructions-to-avert-safety-risk/ Internal Debate Over CFM Leap Safety System Prompts FAA Review The FAA plans to review the risks of a common but rarely needed engine safety system that prompted a rare set of urgent internal recommendations calling for new procedures and design changes for the Boeing 737 MAX family. At issue is the CFM Leap load reduction device (LRD)—a purpose-built weak link that separates the fan rotor from its surrounding supports when a fan blade breaks or the fan suffers major damage, such as from a large-bird strike. On the Leap 1B-powered 737 MAX family, in certain scenarios LRD activation causes oil to be ingested into the environmental conditioning system (ECS), which delivers air directly from the left (No. 1) engine to the cockpit and from the right (No. 2) engine to the cabin. The FAA's office of accident investigation (AVP) is concerned that both scenarios create unacceptable risk, and should be addressed with short- and long-term steps. AVP officials took the unusual step of issuing recommendations to its own agency. In an Oct. 28 memo to FAA's Safety Recommendations Branch which normally manages correspondence from the NTSB and similar external sources, AVP made six “emergency” recommendations. Key among them is to adopt new, temporary pilot procedures that prohibit using the No. 1 engine ECS pack until the aircraft is above 3,000 ft. The FAA accident investigation experts also want Boeing and CFM to re-design the system so the affected ESC pack is de-activated or bleed pressure regulating shut-off valve (PRSOV) is closed as soon as an LRD-triggering event is detected. The current LRD logic closes the affected PRSOV, but not immediately. The No. 2 engine ECS pack can feed both the cockpit and cabin during departures, the AVP memo said. Another alternative, considered “the most conservative approach” in the memo, is to keep both packs off and use the auxiliary power unit (APU) for bleed air. AVP also pointed out its “very concerning” discovery that 737 MAX flight or training manuals do not reference the LRD or potential hazards of an activation. AVP's findings stem from examining two Southwest Airlines 737-8 bird-strike incidents with similar results: one fractured fan blade and a subsequent LRD activation. One, in March 2023, happened when a turkey vulture struck the No. 2 engine as the aircraft was departing Havana. The second occurred in December 2023, when a bald eagle flew into the aircraft's No. 1 engine as it was departing New Orleans. Cuban authorities opened a formal investigation into the March incident. NTSB has not announced a formal probe of the December occurrence. In both incidents, the pilots followed appropriate procedures, a Southwest memo issued in February said. “They performed as trained, methodically maintained aircraft control, donned oxygen masks when necessary, and executed,” the appropriate non-normal checklists (NNCs), the Southwest memo added. The Southwest bulletin emphasized that an engine failure accompanied by smoke in the cockpit or cabin should prompt pilots to follow the “Engine Fire or Severe Damage or Separation” NNC first, followed by two smoke, fire and fumes NNCs. American Airlines, which also operates 737-8s, provided a similar bulletin to its pilots. “An engine failure on takeoff followed by the presence of smoke or fumes must be dealt with promptly, but in a methodical manner,” the American bulletin said. “Maintaining aircraft control while donning oxygen masks is essential while executing the Engine Fire or Engine Severe Damage or Separation NNC. Once [that NNC] is complete, the Smoke, Fire or Fumes NNC and the Smoke or Fumes Removal NNC should be completed as required.” Both airline memos were based in part on an Operations Manual Bulletin issued by Boeing in February that highlighted the existing NNCs. AVP's memo spotlighted the issue and seemingly helped spur wider agency action. “The FAA is addressing the CFM Leap 1B engine issue through our standard continued operational safety process, which includes close collaboration with Boeing, CFM and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA),” the agency said late Nov. 21. “We will convene a Corrective Action Review Board (CARB) in the coming weeks to examine the data and develop a path forward. The FAA determined this is not an immediate flight-safety issue.” While the FAA statement does not mention AVP's memo, the recommendations, which apparently were not coordinated with others in the agency, will surely be discussed. Airline sources familiar with the debate said a key unknown about the AVP's solution is the risk of adding a required task—toggling ECS packs on—below the critical flight phase threshold of 10,000 ft. It is unclear what, if any, changes will result from the FAA CARB. Boeing said it is “working with the authorities that are investigating these incidents.” CFM said it is “collaborating with FAA, EASA and Boeing to determine if there are any learnings from recent events.” Sources with knowledge of each manufacturer's thinking said no design or procedural changes are in the works based on findings to date. Neither Boeing nor CFM would comment on potential LRD system changes. LRD devices are not new. In addition to engines made by CFM International, a 50-50 joint venture of GE Aerospace and Safran, GE-family engines with the devices include the GE90, GEnx, CF34-10 and GE9x, as well as the GP7200 made by GE and Pratt & Whitney. In nearly 275 million flight hours, GE-family engines have seen four reported LRD activations, data shared with Aviation Week shows. In each case, the aircraft landed safely. While the AVP memo focuses on the 737 MAX incidents, it references Leap 1A-powered Airbus A320neo-family aircraft as posing a similar risk. One provider of 737 pilot guidance has developed new procedures based in part on the AVP recommendations. Subscribers of the 737 Cockpit Companion (CC) book and app, which include pilots at airlines of all sizes, will soon see an LRD overview and new NNC for scenarios involving systems activations, CC co-founder and former 737 pilot Bill Bulfer told Aviation Week. The CC approach is to use the APU for bleed air when departing in a suspected large-bird environment. “That really should be the first choice,” Bulfer said. “It's easy to do and it's approved.” Its new checklist, “Engine Failure During Takeoff—Bird Environment,” calls for the non-flying pilot to immediately turn off the affected bleed switch. It also calls for immediate donning of oxygen masks at the first sign of cockpit air contamination. Bulfer does not often add bespoke checklists to his CC content, but the LRD issue is unusual. “This one just struck me right away,” Bulfer said. “I told [co-founder Robert Dorsett], 'This has to go out the pilots, because this can happen anytime.'” https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/safety-ops-regulation/internal-debate-over-cfm-leap-safety-system-prompts-faa-review Boeing Asks FAA To Extend More Exemptions Targeting International Aircraft Sales Recent exemption requests from Boeing have shown how the aircraft manufacturer has to navigate certain parts of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to sell and/or market its products outside and inside the United States. Operating dealer-registered aircraft outside the US In one exemption request that Boeing filed with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on November 18, the aircraft manufacturer petitioned the regulator to extend an exception that had been granted to the company since at least January 8, 1982. The filing read that the FAA has previously granted exemptions to certain dealer’s aircraft registration certificate regulations, which have allowed Boeing to conduct flight testing and sales demonstrations outside the US using its aircraft registered under Boeing’s dealer’s aircraft registration certificate. The specific CFR subpart stated that such certificates are issued to US-based aircraft manufacturers to allow them to operate test flights and demonstrational or merchandising aircraft without having to obtain a certificate of aircraft registration. There are limitations to these certificates, including the fact that such aircraft can only be operated in the US unless the aircraft is being delivered to a foreign entity. “However, a prospective buyer may operate an aircraft for demonstration purposes only while he is under the direct supervision of the holder of the Dealer's Aircraft Registration Certificate or his agent.” When Boeing originally petitioned for the exemption in 1982, it said that as a manufacturer and seller of large commercial aircraft, it sometimes has to operate aircraft outside the US. This included demonstration flights and displays in foreign countries. “For example, to obtain either hot or cold weather may require us [Boeing – ed. note] to go outside the US to obtain the required conditions. This flexibility is reflected in lower overall costs to our customers.” In addition, the aggressive pursuit of new customers will create jobs and tax revenues, Boeing added. When the FAA granted its last exemption in April 2023, it refused to grant a five-year extension and instead approved a two-year one due to Boeing's failure to show that it was in the public interest and allowing the regulator to evaluate both the circumstances necessitating the exemption and the safety of operations of aircraft operated under a dealer’s certificate. The FAA also attached certain conditions and limitations, including Boeing having to obtain permission from host countries to operate aircraft without a standard airworthiness certificate. During the last major trade event, Boeing did not bring any of its test aircraft, including the 737 MAX or 777X. Amidst the machinists’ strike that lasted from September 13 to November 4, when members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District Lodge 751 and District W24 voted to approve the contract, Boeing’s cost-cutting measures included minimizing appearances at airshows and other aerospace industry events. Among the initiatives, all employees will no longer be able to fly in first or business class if traveling essentially on company dime. Foreign airlines’ pilots participating in customer acceptance flights On the same day, Boeing filed another exemption extension request, which was tied to foreign carriers’ pilots' ability to obtain a private pilot certificate based on their licenses in their respective countries to allow them to participate in customer demonstration flights as the second in command (SIC), also known as a first officer. “As described in the prior petitions for exemption, […] renewal of Exemption 18767 will enhance Boeing’s ability to accomplish customer demonstration flights by removing the requirement for customer pilots to take the FAA Instrument written test with no reduction in safety.” In June, when the FAA extended the exemption to April 30, 2025, the regulator allowed customers’ pilots to fly as first officers during customer evaluation flights of Boeing aircraft that would be operated under a special airworthiness certificate with a special flight permit. However, the FAA attached a whole host of conditions and limitations. This includes, but is not exclusive to, the exemption not applying to delivery flights, the captain of the flight having to have a valid pilot’s license in the US, and the exemption not applying for flights outside the US. How Many Aircraft Has Boeing Delivered Since The Machinists' Strike? Excluding the non-unionized site in South Carolina, Boeing had delivered 14 aircraft during the strike. Differences in recorders' regulations The plane maker filed another exemption extension request on November 18, which was filed three days before, asking the FAA to allow the manufacturer to test its aircraft with cockpit voice (CVR) and flight data recorders (FDR) that do not meet specific regulations in the US. The exemption would continue applying to 737 Next Generation (NG), 737 MAX, 767, and 777 aircraft, allowing the manufacturer to test aircraft before they are delivered to airlines in countries where there are different CVR and FDR requirements. https://simpleflying.com/boeing-asks-faa-extend-more-exemptions-targeting-international-aircraft-sales/ LifeFlight of Maine targeted by laser strike warns of danger to aircraft safety Recently one of its crew, who was returning to home base, was struck by a laser beam. SANFORD, Maine — LifeFlight of Maine is calling attention to the dangers of laser strikes targeting aircraft after a recent incident endangered one of its crews. Henry Frank, director of communications for LifeFlight wrote in a news release that at approximately 7:45 p.m., while flying at 2,000 feet near Scarborough and en route to their Sanford base, a laser beam struck a LifeFlight helicopter. The crew immediately alerted Air Traffic Control and followed safety protocols, enabling the pilot to complete the mission without injuries. However, the incident underscores the growing threat of laser strikes nationwide. According to Frank, laser strikes can have catastrophic consequences for air ambulances that transport a skilled team of pilots, flight nurses, and flight paramedics, all trained extensively in safety measures, including responding to laser incidents. "Crew members can become temporarily or permanently blinded by the light, depending on how powerful the laser is. Sometimes, it can burn your retina," Michael Bonenfant, a helicopter pilot and aviation safety coordinator for LifeFlight of Maine explained. He said that all of the crew wear night vision goggles which attract any ambient light and amplify it. The Federal Aviation Administration reports that 8,863 laser hazards have been reported across the U.S. this year. This includes 24 incidents in Maine alone Frank revealed. To report a laser strike, email your information to LaserReports@faa.gov. Under the law, a person who knowingly aims the beam of a laser pointer at an aircraft or at the flight path of an aircraft could be fined, sentenced to up to five years in prison, or both. LifeFlight of Maine is a nonprofit and Maine's only air ambulance service. According to the service, LifeFlight has transported more nearly 40,000 patients. They list an airplane and five helicopters as being based in Bangor, Lewiston, and Sanford. They cover the entire state and its islands. https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/local/lifeflight-maine-laser-beam/97-316466bd-21d4-4347-92dc-2f49e8f5ab60 Justice Department Orders DEA to Halt Airport Searches Because of 'Significant Issues' With Cash Seizures The DEA paid one airline employee tens of thousands of dollars to snoop on travel itineraries and flag passengers for searches. The Justice Department has ordered the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to suspend most searches of passengers at airports and other mass transit hubs after an independent investigation found DEA task forces weren't documenting searches and weren't properly trained, creating a significant risk of constitutional violations and lawsuits. The deputy attorney general directed the DEA on November 12 to halt what are known as "consensual encounter" searches at airports—unless they're part of an existing investigation into a criminal network—after seeing the draft of a Justice Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) memorandum that outlined a decade's worth of "significant concerns" about how the DEA uses paid airline informants and loose criteria to flag passengers to search for drugs and cash. OIG Investigators found that the DEA paid one airline employee tens of thousands of dollars over the past several years in proceeds from cash seized as a result of their tips. However, the vast majority of those airport seizures aren't accompanied by criminal prosecutions. This has led to years of complaints from civil liberties groups that the DEA is abusing civil asset forfeiture—a practice that allows police to seize cash and other property suspected of being connected to criminal activity such as drug trafficking, even if the owner is never arrested or charged with a crime. The memo, released publicly today by the OIG, found that failures to properly train agents and document searches "creates substantial risks that DEA Special Agents (SA) and Task Force Officers (TFO) will conduct these activities improperly; impose unwarranted burdens on, and violate the legal rights of, innocent travelers; imperil the Department's asset forfeiture and seizure activities; and waste law enforcement resources on ineffective interdiction actions." The OIG memo and directive is a victory for advocacy groups that oppose civil asset forfeiture, such as the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm that is currently litigating a class action lawsuit challenging the DEA's airport forfeiture practices. Dan Alban, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, says the OIG memo "confirms what we've been saying for years, and it confirms the allegations in our ongoing class action lawsuit against DEA over precisely these sorts of abusive practices, where they target travelers based on innocuous information about their travel plans, and then interrogate them and search their bags in what they call a 'consensual encounter' that is really anything but consensual in the high security environment of an airport." The OIG launched an investigation earlier this year following the Institute for Justice's release of a video taken by an airline passenger who was detained and had his bags searched by the DEA at the airport. The passenger, identified only as David C., had already passed through a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint and was boarding his flight when he was approached by a DEA officer who demanded to search his carry-on. When David refused to give permission, the agent declared he was detaining the carry-on bag, and David could either board his flight or consent to a search. David missed his flight entirely and eventually consented to a search of his carry-on, which revealed no drugs or cash. The DEA agent told David he was suspected of illicit activity because he had booked his flight shortly before it took off. "When you buy a last-minute ticket, we get alerts," the officer explained. "We come out, and we talk to those people, which I've tried to do to you, but you wouldn't allow me to do it." The subsequent OIG investigation found that David was one of five passengers flagged that day by an airline employee who was paid by the DEA to flag travelers' itineraries if they met certain suspicious criteria. According to previous OIG audits, common red flags for passengers are "traveling to or from a known source city for drug trafficking, purchasing a ticket within 24 hours of travel, purchasing a ticket for a long flight with an immediate return, purchasing a one-way ticket, and traveling without checked luggage." Today's OIG memo noted that "it is hardly unusual for travelers, including business travelers and last-minute vacationers, to purchase tickets within 48 hours of a flight." This DEA's practice of obtaining passenger information from transportation companies, such as Amtrak and major airlines, was first revealed in 2014, with more information coming out in a 2016 inspector general audit. By combining a snitch network, loose criteria for searches, and the low evidentiary bar to seize property under civil asset forfeiture, DEA task forces have been able to seize an enormous amount of money from airline passengers, despite it being perfectly legal to fly domestically with large amounts of cash. In 2016, a USA Today investigation found the DEA had seized more than $209 million from at least 5,200 travelers in 15 major airports over the previous decade. A 2017 report by the Justice Department Office of Inspector General found that the DEA seized more than $4 billion in cash from people suspected of drug activity over the previous decade, but $3.2 billion of those seizures were never connected to any criminal charges. That 2017 report warned that that DEA's airport forfeiture activities were undermining its credibility: "When seizure and administrative forfeitures do not ultimately advance an investigation or prosecution, law enforcement creates the appearance, and risks the reality, that it is more interested in seizing and forfeiting cash than advancing an investigation or prosecution." But DEA cash seizures based on flimsy, evidence-free suspicions continued. The Institute for Justice launched its class action lawsuit in 2020. The suit argues the DEA has a practice or policy of seizing currency from travelers at U.S. airports without probable cause simply if the dollar amount is greater than $5,000. This practice, the suit argues, violates travelers' Fourth Amendment rights. One of the lead plaintiffs in the suit, Terrence Rolin, a 79-year-old retired railroad engineer, had his life savings of $82,373 seized by the DEA after his daughter tried to take it on a flight out of Pittsburgh with the intent of depositing it in a bank. After the case went public, the DEA returned the money. The DEA seized $43,167 from Stacy Jones, another of the plaintiffs in the Institute for Justice suit, in 2019 as she was trying to fly home to Tampa, Florida, from Wilmington, North Carolina. Jones says the cash was from the sale of a used car, as well as money she and her husband intended to take to a casino. The DEA returned her money after she challenged the seizure as well. Likewise, in 2021 the DEA returned $28,000 to Kermit Warren, a New Orleans man who said he was flying to Ohio to buy a tow truck when agents seized his life savings at the airport. In all these cases, DEA agents originally decided that the cash was connected to drug trafficking. Last year, Sens. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.) and Cynthia Lummis (R–Wyo.) urged the Justice Department to ban the DEA and other federal law enforcement agencies from using travel employees as sources for obtaining Americans' travel information without a warrant or subpoena. The Justice Department directive halts "all consensual encounters at mass transportation facilities unless they are either connected to an existing investigation or approved by the DEA Administrator based on exigent circumstances." Alban says the Justice Department directive will curb the majority of abusive "consensual encounter" searches, but it won't stop TSA screeners from flagging cash at security checkpoints. Furthermore, Alban says, only legislation can permanently stop the DEA from abusing asset forfeiture, noting a 2019 bill passed by Congress that stopped the IRS from summarily seizing small business' bank accounts. "It's that sort of reform that is really needed," Alban says, "because at any time this directive could be rescinded, and then DEA will be back to their regular practice of preying on travelers at airports." The DEA did not immediately respond to a request for comment. https://reason.com/2024/11/21/justice-department-orders-dea-to-halt-airport-searches-because-of-significant-issues-with-cash-seizures/ Delta’s 757s Could Be Sticking Around With 737 MAX deliveries uncertain, the carrier might extend the aging fleet’s life. Delta’s fleet of 121 Boeing 757-200 and 757-300 aircraft might remain in service longer than expected amid aircraft delivery delays. The airline has orders for 100 737 MAX 10 aircraft, which has yet to receive FAA approval. With an average age of 27 years old, some of Delta’s 757s are among the oldest aircraft still operating at major U.S. airlines. According to Cirium Fleet Analyzer data, the airline has retired just one 757-200 this year, registered as N671DN. During a recent earnings call, Delta’s finance chief, Dan Janki, said the airline would begin retiring aircraft again in 2024, adding that it hadn’t removed any in 2022 or 2023. Janki initially indicated that Delta would retire around 20 jets from its entire fleet this year. Flexibility Around Boeing At Delta’s Investor Day event on Wednesday, airline executives noted that the 737 MAX 10s aren’t in its near-term fleet plan. “We will have to continue to see where Boeing progresses related to the MAX,” Janki shared. “… We’ll see the progress that they’ve made. … [W]e have flexibility around that and how we could manage.” Delta CEO Ed Bastian noted some contract flexibility with the beleaguered manufacturer “if the [MAX] 10 isn’t produced.” He added that the carrier could extend the life of its 757s and 737-800s as needed; many have been retrofitted with newer interiors in recent years. “You’re also going to see us potentially extend lives on whether it’s the 757s or [737-800s],” Bastian said. “We have the capability to do that, and we’ve been known to do that over time … . [T]hat could also be part of the mix here too.” In its presentation to investors, the airline noted that it plans to reduce its fleet families from 13 to seven. It retired the MD-80 and MD-90 aircraft in 2020 and has announced plans to phase out the 767-300s sometime in the 2030s. https://airlinegeeks.com/2024/11/21/delta-s-757s-could-be-sticking-around/# Pilot examiner shortage persists AOPA continues to press FAA to address delays, issue guidance While the FAA has reported progress in reversing the yearslong shortage of designated pilot examiners, many pilots still struggle to schedule a checkride at an affordable price, and wait times are all too often measured in months. Congress has given the FAA additional directives to fix the problem. AOPA advocated before Congress to include measures in the recently passed 2024 FAA reauthorization designed to increase the number of DPEs and improve their management and oversight. The bill was signed into law on May 16. As a result, DPEs can now fly with BasicMed, and the BasicMed program was also expanded to include pilots flying aircraft with up to seven seats and weighing up to 12,500 pounds. The agency issued detailed guidance for examiners explaining how to implement the new policy November 14. With AOPA’s support, this year’s FAA reauthorization included another section designed to reform the DPE system as a whole. Section 833 of the 2024 FAA reauthorization directs the FAA to establish a new office to provide oversight and management of DPEs, standardize policy, deploy a code of conduct for examiners, and implement surveys to track DPE performance, among other measures. The law also calls on the FAA to implement additional recommendations made by the Designated Pilot Examiner Reforms Working Group. In 2022, the FAA responded to the working group’s recommendations, reporting progress on some, including improvement to the online designee locator system. AOPA was a member of that working group, advocating on behalf of pilots who have been subjected for years to long delays in scheduling checkrides. The FAA agreed in 2022 that some of the recommendations, including the establishment of a national survey system, “would be beneficial,” though the agency has yet to deploy such a survey. AOPA continues to press the FAA to act, and individual pilots are also speaking up in the absence of a formal survey. Southern California pilot Eric Heigis, who recently completed a flight instructor checkride after a three-month wait—and an exhaustive, multistate search for a qualified examiner—complained to the agency directly. Heigis also shared his experience in an email to AOPA sent two days before the FAA published the latest DPE policy guidance on BasicMed use by examiners: “I know I don’t have to tell you, but the DPE situation is really bad—especially in Southern California,” Heigis wrote to AOPA. “It’s not just scheduling issues: one of our scholarship recipients had a DPE schedule three checkrides in one day with the plan that at least one will be failed/discontinued. Of course the rescheduled checkride comes with a new exam fee, and the going rate is now a minimum of $1000 for a private checkride.” California, the nation’s most populous state with 39 million people, currently has 104 DPEs, according to a November 18 search of the FAA Designee Management System. That ranks California fourth in the nation for DPEs by state, behind Florida with 147, Texas with 130, and Arizona with 109 DPEs, according to the FAA database, but Heigis found during his search that only 83 DPEs currently conduct exams in California. Heigis said more than half of the DPEs he contacted never responded, and he found many listings have incorrect or outdated addresses, as well as DPEs who are no longer active but who have been unable to have their names removed from the directory. A much smaller subset of examiners in any given state are qualified to test pilots flying a particular combination of aircraft, seeking a particular certificate or rating. Six states had six or fewer DPEs listed in the online database during the recent search; a total of 28 DPEs were listed across six New England states. “This three to four month backlog is creating a vicious cycle,” Heigis wrote. Students are motivated to schedule their checkride before they start training, and some are then forced to cancel if their training is delayed. “Those cancellations—especially if last minute—waste a DPE’s day that … could have been spent with another applicant, further adding to the backlog.” “AOPA will continue to work with the FAA to address the long overdue reforms to the DPE program. Our goal is to promote and protect general aviation and to ensure pilots, new and experienced, have a seamless and timely examiner process. To make that a reality, we need a viable, efficient, and fair DPE system. AOPA will keep at it—you can count on that,” said Jim Coon, AOPA senior vice president of government affairs and advocacy. Congress gave the FAA 180 days after the reauthorization was signed (on May 16) to make its first biennial report on the use of DPEs systemwide, including analysis of the methodology by which examiners are deployed, and the average wait time for a checkride by region. That report may shed further light on the scope and persistence of a stubborn problem, and what else the FAA will do to address it. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2024/november/21/pilot-examiner-shortage-persists Air India to set up aircraft maintenance training institute in Bengaluru Air India to set up aircraft maintenance training institute in Bengaluru Bengaluru, Air India on Friday said it is setting up a Basic Maintenance Training Organisation , which will offer an integrated 2 2 years Aircraft Maintenance Engineering programme certified by the Indian aviation regulator Directorate General of Civil Aviation . The Air India BMTO is a step towards building a robust, future-ready aviation ecosystem in India, the company said. It will serve the ambitions of the airline as it moves ahead in its transformation journey, strengthening the availability of aircraft maintenance engineers as Air India expands its fleet, making it self-reliant, it said in a release. Air India has signed an agreement with Bengaluru Airport City Limited , a subsidiary of Bengaluru International Airport Limited , to develop a build-to-suit facility for the AME programme that will feature modern classrooms, well-equipped laboratories for practical training and a team of qualified trainers. The purpose-built campus, spread over 86,000 square feet at Bengaluru Airport City, is expected to be operational by mid-2026, it said. The aim of the BMTO is to foster a workforce of skilled professionals for aircraft maintenance and engineering operations where students will receive hands-on experience and training, adhering to industry standards and Air India’s specific requirements, it added. Till the new BMTO facility commences operations, Air India will implement a Cadet AME programme with other reputable institutions across Bengaluru and Hyderabad to ensure continuity in its commitment towards AME education and workforce development as well as to support its requirements for aircraft maintenance engineers. Air India, Director, Aviation Academy Sunil Bhaskaran said, “The BMTO will establish a pipeline of skilled engineers trained to Air India standards from the outset. This facility and programme, combined with proximity to Kempegowda International Airport, will enable our AME cadets to gain hands-on, real-world experience as part of their training, supporting their future as industry-ready professionals aligned with Air India’s ongoing fleet expansion needs.” The programme is designed to meet Air India’s growing fleet maintenance requirements and provides specialised career paths for its AME graduates, the company said. Students will also be encouraged to pursue a simultaneous bachelor’s degree through university partnerships, which will enhance their academic and career opportunities. https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/bengaluru-news/air-india-to-set-up-aircraft-maintenance-training-institute-in-bengaluru-101732265000717.html POSITION AVAILABLE: Senior Survival Factors Investigator National Transportation Safety Board Office of Aviation Safety The incumbent will serve as a Senior Survival Factors Investigator located in the Office of Aviation Safety (OAS), National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and serve as an expert Survival Factors Investigator in aircraft accident investigations and is responsible for the investigation of the survival factors aspects of aircraft accidents, planning and conducting survival factors examinations, studies, factual and analytical reports. Duties As a Senior Survival Factors Investigator, GS-1801-14, you will perform the following major duties: Serves as Group Chair responsible for documenting, analyzing, and evaluating survival factors issues described in the position summary above. These include but are not limited to cabin safety and flight attendant training, occupant protection, airport operations, and airport and community emergency management factors that may arise during major aviation accident/incident investigations. Organizes, supervises, and coordinates the activities of the representatives from the operators, manufactures, professional organizations, FAA, and other participating agencies, including experts in other fields in the course of a survival factors investigation. Independently identifies and assesses the significance of survival factors found during on-scene accident investigations. Analyzes and interprets the data uncovered. The purpose of such analysis is to l) advance the knowledge of survival factors in the operation of aviation systems; 2) provide practical applications of theory in the survival factors for the purpose of publication and general education; and 3) form a basis for the application of practical solutions to the prevention of future accidents of similar nature. Determines requirements for special tests, studies, and/or assistance that may be necessary in one or more aspects of a given investigation. Monitors these activities and evaluates findings in terms of relevancy to the probable cause and/or safety recommendations. Studies usually involve the novel and/or innovative application of research results in analyzing survival factors. Develops and prepares documentation in the form of reports, photographs, pertinent records, and other appropriate material. Prepares timely and technically correct factual and analytical reports that accurately reflect the pertinent findings in the survival factors areas to be used in the subsequent analysis and probable cause determination. Maintains currency in survival factors affecting aviation safety including emergent research and operational practices, accident investigation methodology. Requirements Conditions of Employment • U.S. Citizenship.Males born after 12/31/59 must be registered for Selective Service.Resume and supporting documents (see "How to Apply" section.).Suitability for Federal employment.Financial Interest in transportation enterprises will be evaluated on a case-by-case-basis.Bargaining Unit Position: YES - Bargaining unit represented by NTSB-AFGE Local 2211.Direct Deposit is required.A probationary period may be required.Status candidates must meet time-in-grade requirements (52 weeks at the next lower grade level) by the closing date of this announcement. Only experience and education obtained by the closing date of this announcement will be considered.This position is being announced concurrently under Public (U.S Citizens) procedures under Vacancy Number AS-12586916-25-KAT To be considered under both Public (US Citizens) and Government-Wide procedures, you must apply to both announcements.You may be required to complete a Confidential Financial Disclosure Report, OGE-450, upon entering the position and annually.THIS POSITION IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR REMOTE TELEWORK.Applicants must meet all qualifications and eligibility requirements by the closing date of the announcement. Qualifications GS-14: You MUST have one year of specialized experience equivalent to at least the GS-13 grade level in the Federal service (experience may have been gained in the private sector). Specialized experience is defined as: Experience in leading a team investigating civil aviation accident survival factors from initial investigative activities to the identification of cause and preventative safety actions; leading the development and implementation of a plan for conducting a component examination or follow-up investigation; using data to support decision making in determining investigation scope and the development of findings in the areas of survival factors; carrying out investigative research needed to further the study of crashworthiness and survival factors issues in the aviation industry; applying knowledge of civil aviation survival factors safety issues and investigation evidence in the development of recommendations to improve occupant protection and survivability. For more information see link: General Inspection Investigation Enforcement and Compliance Series 1801 (opm.gov) NOTE: IN DESCRIBING YOUR EXPERIENCE, PLEASE BE CLEAR AND SPECIFIC. WE WILL NOT MAKE ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING YOUR EXPERIENCE. Your resume must clearly show the specialized experience and competencies related to this position. Failure to demonstrate how you possess the education, specialized experience and/or competencies will result in an "Ineligible" rating. CALENDAR OF EVENTS • 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 • 59th Annual SMU Air Law Symposium is scheduled March 31 - April 2, 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