Flight Safety Information - January 3, 2025 No. 03 In This Issue : Airbus A321-211, suffered a runway excursion : FAA releases updated AC on collision avoidance systems : Incident: United Nigeria E145 at Abuja on Nov 17th 2021, engine flamed out : Jeju Air Crash: Officials Begin Inspecting Black Boxes : South Korean Police Raid Offices of Airline, Airport Involved in Plane Crash : 2 dead, 18 injured after small plane crashed into California building rooftop, police say : New research shows drones can reduce wildlife strikes at airports : Incident: Delta A339 at Atlanta on Jan 1st 2025, engine problem : Passengers demand to leave when Boeing 737 when it twice fails to take off : Fuel exhaustion leads to forced landing : Automation In Transportation: Lessons For Safe Implementation : USAIG Announces Executive Leadership Succession Plan....(No hyperlink) Calendar of Events Airbus A321-211, suffered a runway excursion Date:Thursday 2 January 2025Time:00:42 UTCType: Airbus A321-211 Owner/operator:S7 Airlines Registration:RA-73437 MSN:2726 Year of manufacture:2006 Engine model:CFMI CFM56-5B3/P Fatalities:Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: Other fatalities:0 Aircraft damage:None Location:Noril'sk Airport (NSK/UOOO), Krasnoyarsk Krai - Russia Phase:LandingNature:Passenger - Scheduled Departure airport:Moskva-Domodedovo Airport (DME/UUDD) Destination airport:Noril'sk Airport (NSK/UOOO) Confidence Rating: Information verified through data from accident investigation authorities Narrative: S7 Airlines flight S72583, an Airbus A321-211, suffered a runway excursion when turning on the taxiway after landing on runway 19 at Noril'sk Airport (NSK). 79 passengers aboard the aircraft were not injured. METAR: UOOO 020000Z 15009MPS 9999 DRSN SCT021 M11/M13 Q1007 R19/39//35 NOSIG RMK QFE739/0986 UOOO 020117Z 17010MPS 5000 -SN BLSN OVC021 M10/M13 Q1007 R19/39//35 NOSIG RMK QFE739/0986 FAA releases updated AC on collision avoidance systems By General Aviation News Staff December 31, 2024 · Leave a Comment An updated advisory circular has been released by the FAA focusing on the operational use of Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems (ACAS), including Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS). The update to Advisory Circular (AC) 90-120 “aims to standardize practices, improve compliance, and enhance safety during in-flight collision risk scenarios,” according to FAA officials. ACAS technology has become a critical component for preventing midair collisions, offering alerts and resolution advisories (RAs) to help pilots maintain safe separation. The circular, released Nov. 20, 2024, provides a detailed explanation of ACAS technology, its variants (ACAS I, ACAS II, ACAS Xa), and how these systems function to prevent mid-air collisions. It also clarifies the differences between Traffic Advisories (TAs) and Resolution Advisories (RAs), and how pilots should respond to each. Why does this matter to pilots? As airspace grows increasingly congested, understanding and utilizing ACAS capabilities effectively can significantly enhance safety. This circular provides the tools to train pilots, manage ACAS events, and comply with evolving regulations, ensuring seamless operation in complex airspace, according to FAA officials. For general aviation, ACAS can reduce near-miss incidents, particularly in busy terminal environments. By adopting the guidance in this circular, pilots can improve situational awareness and respond accurately to collision threats, FAA officials noted. In addition, the AC covers: • Operational Approval and Procedures: The circular outlines the process for obtaining operational approval from the FAA for ACAS use. It covers the necessary amendments to operational manuals, MELs, training programs, and other documentation. • Training Requirements: AC 90-120 emphasizes the importance of comprehensive ACAS training, encompassing both ground and flight instruction, including simulator exercises. It stresses the need for pilots to demonstrate proficiency in interpreting ACAS displays and responding correctly to TAs and RAs. • Reporting Procedures: The AC details the different reporting requirements for various ACAS events. It clarifies the mandatory reporting requirements for RAs under specific conditions and outlines other reporting channels, such as the FAA Hotline and NASA ASRS, for voluntary reporting of significant events. For more information: FAA.gov Incident: United Nigeria E145 at Abuja on Nov 17th 2021, engine flamed out By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Apr 26th 2022 19:52Z, last updated Thursday, Jan 2nd 2025 19:27Z A United Nigeria Airlines Embraer ERJ-145, registration 5N-BWW performing flight NUA-505 from Abuja to Lagos (Nigeria) with 43 passengers and 4 crew, was lining up for departure from runway 22 when the crew received a "“E1 OIL IMP BYP" advisory. The aircraft commenced takeoff and was climbing out of Abuja's runway 22 when a loud bang came from the rear of the aircraft, all engine parameters showed green. At about 4000 feet another loud bang was heard from the back and the engine instruments indicated the left engine had flamed out. The crew requested a direct return to runway 04 at Abuja. The aircraft landed safely on runway 04 about 14 minutes after departure. On Apr 26th 2022 Nigerai's AIB released their preliminary report rating the occurrence a serious incident. There were no injuries, there also was no damage to the aircraft. The flight data recorder did not record this flight, the last recording on the FDR had been on Feb 14th 2021. On Dec 28th 2024 Nigeria's AIB released their final report concluding the probable causes of the serious incident were: Causal factor Failure of the no. 4 bearing of engine no. 1 leading to the engine flameout at 4,000 ft. Contributory factors The inability to probe beyond borescope inspection is the cause of the impending bypass advisory message. The AIB analysed: Engine Health Monitoring/Advisory for 5N-BWW Correspondence regarding the no.1 engine between Rolls Royce and United Nigeria Airlines showed that an impending bypass advisory message was registered on the Centralized Maintenance Computer (CMC) on 24 August 2021. This prompted United Nigeria Airline Limited to contact, the Engine manufacturer (Rolls Royce), for advice. The investigation found that Rolls Royce advised the United Nigeria Maintenance team to inspect all the diagnostic chip collector plugs for metal chips as per the Fault Isolation Manual (FIM) 79-37-00-810-801, which was carried out. No debris was found. On 15 September 2021, the Oil Debris message reappeared. The investigation also discovered that maintenance action was carried in accordance with FIM 79-37-00-810-801. The diagnostic plugs were re-inspected, and no debris was found for the second time. Hence, this allowed United Nigeria Airlines to continue operating the aircraft as the manufacturer advised. However, on 4 October 2021, the United Nigeria maintenance team informed Rolls Royce that chips were found at the collector plugs during the inspection. Rolls Royce advised United Nigeria to inspect the gearbox, use an X10 magnifier glass to inspect the harness, inspect the oil pump screen with a borescope, inspect the midspan bearing, Permanent Magnet Alternator (PMA), and gear shaft for movement. On 21 October 2021, United Nigeria informed Rolls Royce that their maintenance team carried out a borescope inspection of the Engine as advised, and nothing was found. According to the investigation, borescope inspection alone was insufficient to determine the cause of the impending bypass advisory light. Hence, further investigation was needed to detect the root cause of the engine problem. The Engine should have been removed and taken for a shop visit, where the root cause would have been detected. This could have prevented the Engine from flaming out. The Engine continued service until the incident occurred on 17 November 2021. Filter bypass system of 5N-BWW An Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System (EICAS) advisory message, "E1 OIL IMP BYP," came ON while the aircraft lined up for takeoff. The crew consulted the Quick Reference Handbook (QHR) for the Embraer 145, Emergency/Abnormal procedure, which says it was a crew awareness message. Therefore, the crew continued with the takeoff roll. The oil filter on engine No. 1 of 5N-BWW was clogged by metal particles (debris) in the oil, sending a message to the EICAS. The impending bypass functions as a safety measure to prevent the Engine moving part from lubricating oil starvation when the oil filter becomes clogged, allowing unfiltered oil to go into the Engine for lubrication. The impending bypass indication will be illuminated when the differential pressure switch in the engine oil filter is actuated. Numerous drilled or core passages usually lead to various lubrication points on the Engine. These passages are usually small and easily clogged by impurities when unfiltered oil is allowed to pass through them. The EICAS message “E1 OIL IMP BYP” will be illuminated when the pressure differential across the oil filter exceeds 22 psi and the oil is about to bypass the filtering element when the filter is contaminated. Also, the visual and electrical impending bypass indicators will be activated when the pressure differential across the oil filter reaches 19 to 25 psi. In the case of 5N-BWW, the persistent advisory messages of oil impending bypass show evidence of impurities of metal particles on the affected Engine, the cause of which was not determined by the operator. This led to the mechanical failure, which resulted in engine flameout. Compressor surge during climb If a compressor surge occurs during high power at takeoff, the flight crew will hear a loud bang accompanied by yaw and vibration. A surge from a turbofan engine results from instability in the Engine's operating cycle. Compressor surges may also be caused by engine deterioration. The flight crew stated, "During the climb, there was a loud bang from the rear, and all engine parameters were checked and all in green.” According to the FDR data, there was an Inter Turbine Temperature (ITT) spike at the start of the flight, and the control loop went into surge avoidance for a second. This phenomenon is known as a single self-recoverable surge. The fluctuation in engine parameters might not be noticed unless someone looked at the gauges at the time of the surge. This might have been a surge that caused the loud bang from the rear, as reported by the flight crew. Although the crew couldn't notice the fluctuation, they said all parameters were checked, and all were in green. At about 4,000 ft, the flight crew further stated they heard another bang followed by a flameout. Data from the FDR shows that engine no.1 failed at 4000ft, followed by N2 RPM, which indicated zero. The no. 1 engine failure necessitated an air return by the flight crew. The preliminary finding of the affected Engine, which was taken to a maintenance facility in Standard Aero, USA, revealed that the #4 bearing seized, leading to a bearing failure. The bearing might have seized because metal debris entered its clearances Jeju Air Crash: Officials Begin Inspecting Black Boxes Jeju Air Flight 7C2216 By Luke BodellPublished 3 days ago Note: See photos in the original article. Photo: viper-zero | Shutterstock Officials are inspecting the black boxes recovered from the wreckage of Jeju Air flight 7C2216 and have promised to release updates as soon as possible. The Boeing 737-800 is believed to have suffered a bird strike, but the exact circumstances surrounding its belly landing and subsequent destruction are unclear. Investigators inspect Jeju Air black boxes Officials investigating the crash of Jeju Air flight 7C2216 are now checking the plane's two "black boxes" to determine what went wrong. Authorities located the aircraft's cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) among the wreckage, both of which contain key data that will hopefully shed some light on the tragic accident. Related NTSB To Assist South Korean Aviation Authority With Investigation Into Jeju Air Flight 2216The crash comes at a time of extraordinary political instability in South Korea. The joint investigation team consists of officials from the Korea Office of Civil Aviation (KOCA), supported by experts from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and Boeing, the plane's manufacturer. Among the critical questions yet to be answered include why the 737's landing gear had not been extended, despite the aircraft featuring both hydraulic and manual mechanisms to lower it. Photo: Thanhliemnguyen | Shutterstock According to South Korea's transport ministry, the FDR is missing a component that connects the data storage unit to the power storage unit, potentially complicating data recovery. Korea's Deputy Minister for Civil Aviation, Joo Jong-wan, said on Tuesday, "An expert is continuously looking for ways to restore the data inside the recorder." Video footage of the crash shows the aircraft conducting a belly landing at a high speed and without its flaps configured for landing. The landing was also performed within minutes of the pilots declaring an emergency, raising questions over how much control the flight crew had over the plane. Aviation expert Chris Kingswood told the BBC that "you would normally be forced into that kind of situation if you lose both engines," a scenario that is plausible following a severe bird strike affecting both engines. The CVR is said to be in better condition and will give investigators vital clues as to what the pilots were doing in the moments leading up to the landing. An inquiry is also underway regarding the concrete wall built around 250 meters from the end of the runway - such structures are supposed to be "frangible," meaning they will break apart if impacted, with experts stating there would have been many more survivors had that structure not been there. Airline to cut flights, enhance safety measures In a press conference today, Jeju Air CEO Kim Yi-bae said the airline will be cutting its schedule this winter by 10-15% as it aims to focus on improving its safety practices. He stressed that Jeju's schedule cuts do not indicate it was operating more flights than it could safely handle, and is instead about enhancing safety procedures. Photo: Suparat Chairatprasert | Shutterstock In the wake of the crash, Jeju canceled a large number of flights and will continue to scrap flights. Kim could not give an exact number of flight cancelations and said the airline would only begin restoring its schedule when it regains public trust. He also stressed that its pilots are trained according to regulatory standards, has two flight simulators and has boosted its number of maintenance staff since 2019. Related Jeju Air Denies Maintenance Negligence As All 175 Passengers & 4 Crew Confirmed Dead In Fatal CrashAccording to authorities, only two of the 181 people onboard Jeju Air flight 7C2216 from Bangkok have survived the crash. South Korean authorities have ordered an inspection of the country's entire aircraft fleet, expediting checks on its 737-800 fleet, which consists of over 100 airframes, 39 of which are operated by Jeju Air. The transport ministry has said inspections of all these 737-800s would be completed by January 3rd, but has chosen not to ground the type given its strong safety track-record. South Korean Police Raid Offices of Airline, Airport Involved in Plane Crash Story by Dasl Yoon, Timothy W. Martin Note: See photos in the original article. Investigators carry items from the office of an aviation agency at Muan International Airport, South Korea. SEOUL—South Korean police raided the offices of the airline and airport operator involved in Sunday’s fiery plane crash that killed 179 passengers, with the search warrant issued on charges of professional negligence resulting in death. There were just two survivors of the Jeju Air flight, with the Boeing 737-800 jet skidding off the runway, slamming into a concrete-reinforced embankment and erupting into flames. The crash at Muan International Airport, located in the country’s southwest, represented one of the worst aviation disasters in years. WirelessCarAutomotive Digitalization Roughly 30 investigators on Thursday collected evidence from Jeju Air’s office in Seoul, as well as the Muan airport and its regional aviation administration office. No individual has been charged at this time, police said. Under South Korean law, professional or gross negligence that results in death can carry punishment of up to five years in prison. Shares of Jeju Air have fallen roughly 13% this week, while tens of thousands of travelers have canceled reservations with the budget airline. The company’s CEO, Kim E-bae, is banned from leaving the country. The airline, named after a South Korean resort island, will cooperate with police, a company director said on Thursday. The investigation will focus on the communications between the Muan control tower and the Jeju Air pilots—particularly during the flight’s chaotic final six minutes featuring multiple attempts to land, mayday alerts over a bird strike and an abrupt belly landing made roughly halfway down the airport’s sole runway. Related video: Investigators: Did South Korean airport design contribute to plane crash? (WHAS-TV Louisville) Efforts will also look at whether Jeju Air had followed regulations and proper maintenance of the jet, as well as the design of the airport itself. The location of the roughly seven-feet-high embankment, just over 800 feet from the end of the runaway, has fallen under scrutiny. With the surrounding terrain low, the structure needed to be elevated, so the “localizer” antenna atop the embankment could function by sitting at a similar height as the runway. South Korea’s acting president, Choi Sang-mok, has ordered a thorough examination of the country’s airline operation system—including a special safety inspection for the more than 100 Boeing 737-800 jets operated by domestic airlines. Officials said they were also checking the localizer equipment at the nation’s airports. A team of South Korean and U.S. investigators, including Boeing officials, are exploring the crash’s causes. Data from the cockpit voice recorder has been converted into audio files, South Korea’s transport ministry said, though releasing the communications to the public may be difficult due to the continuing investigation. The jet’s other black box, the aircraft flight-data recorder, was partially damaged and will be taken to the U.S. for analysis in cooperation with the National Transportation Safety Board. 2 dead, 18 injured after small plane crashed into California building rooftop, police say Thao Nguyen Fernando Cervantes Jr. USA TODAY Note: See photos in the original article. SAN DIEGO — Two people are dead and 18 others were injured after a small plane crashed into a building rooftop in Southern California on Thursday, authorities said. Fullerton police and fire personnel responded to reports of an "unknown plane" that crashed into the roof of a commercial building shortly after 2 p.m. local time, Fullerton Police Department spokesperson Kristy Wells told USA TODAY. The incident, which remains under investigation, occurred about half a mile from the Fullerton Municipal Airport. After the crash, ten people were transported to area hospitals for treatment and eight others were treated and released on scene, the Fullerton Police Department said on X. It remains unclear whether the people killed were inside the plane. After arriving at the scene, police and fire personnel immediately began evacuating the surrounding business area due to an active fire. Local television footage and images showed plumes of smoke rising out of the building. The crash resulted in a 4-alarm fire and a massive response from firefighters and police, who were dispatched to the area, officials told ABC 7. U.S. Rep. Lou Correa, who represents parts of Orange County, said in a statement on X that the plane crashed into a furniture manufacturing building. The Federal Aviation Administration told USA TODAY that the aircraft was a single-engine Van’s RV-10. "The FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will investigate," the agency said. "The NTSB will be in charge of the investigation." Fullerton is located about 30 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. New research shows drones can reduce wildlife strikes at airports By General Aviation News Staff November 27, 2024 Note: See photos in the original article. Drone images can offer airport biologists a new perspective on wildlife without having to travel through thick vegetation or disturb the animals in their natural state. (Photo by Raymond Ayers) A team of researchers at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University recently won first place at a national competition for a research project focused on using drones to help mitigate the risk of wildlife hazards at airports. To avoid dangerous and costly collisions between wildlife and aircraft, airport biologists are constantly monitoring nearby animal populations and attempting to reduce features that might attract hazardous species to the airport, according to the researchers. “Drones not only make the process more cost-effective but also significantly enhance the ability to identify different wildlife species simultaneously,” said Anna Golendukhina, an aviation master’s student and one of the authors of the research. “This is especially important because it helps us better understand how these animals interact with their habitats, which can be crucial for ensuring airport safety.” The team’s project won first place in the Airport Cooperative Research Program’s Student Research Design Competition held in the summer of 2024 in Washington, D.C. An Embry Riddle team — comprised of Anna Golendukhina, Dr. Flavio Mendonca, Savanna Box, Nicholas Buckelow and (not pictured) Raymon Ayres and Jose L. Cabrera — recently won first place for a research project focused on using drones to help mitigate the risk of wildlife hazards at airports. (Photo by the Association of Clinical Research Professionals Media Team) Because drones can access hard-to-reach areas, cover ground quickly, and use camera sensors to gather information about local environments, the technology is perfect for collecting information about wildlife and their natural habitats in challenging environments, according to the researchers. “Drones make the entire process of wildlife data collection not only more thorough but also much safer for the experts involved,” Golendukhina added. “We strongly believe the safe application of UAS technologies could be a game-changer — improving safety, saving money, and giving airport operators a clearer picture of how wildlife interacts with airport environments.” Eagle Eye View To evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of using drones, the researchers collected data on a farm near the Daytona Beach International Airport, which is next door to Embry Riddle’s Daytona Beach Campus. During these trips, they followed the FAA’s requirements regarding wildlife hazard assessment — including identifying local wildlife species and their numbers, noting the daily and seasonal occurrences of these species, and identifying nearby features that could attract wildlife. “Due to the unique versatility and maneuverability of Unmanned Aerial Systems, we were able to achieve aerial perspectives, even in areas with challenging terrains, such as wetlands, forests and coastlines,” Golendukhina said. The team was also able to track animals at night using thermal infrared cameras, identify animals that do not travel in groups, and spot birds that fly at higher altitudes — all tasks that prove more difficult using traditional methods, according to the researchers. The team also interviewed veteran industry experts — such as former FAA Administrator Capt. Billy Nolen, who now serves as chief safety officer at Archer Aviation; David Castaneda, airport wildlife supervisor at Charlotte Douglas International Airport; and Cathy Boyles, wildlife program manager at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport — each of whom offered valuable feedback on their work. “These connections to accomplished industry executives are incredibly powerful,” said Dr. Flavio Mendonca, associate professor of Aeronautical Science and the team’s faculty mentor. “Our students quite literally learned from the best, and they expanded their networks in the process.” In addition to Golendukhina, the Embry Riddle team included master’s students Savanna Box, Nicholas Buckalew, Raymon Ayres, and Jose L. Cabrera. For more information: ERAU.edu Incident: Delta A339 at Atlanta on Jan 1st 2025, engine problem By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Jan 2nd 2025 18:14Z, last updated Thursday, Jan 2nd 2025 18:14Z A Delta Airlines Airbus A330-900, registration N408DX performing flight DL-105 from Atlanta,GA (USA) to Sao Paulo Guarulhos,SP (Brazil), was climbing out of Atlanta's runway 27R when the crew declared emergency and decided to stop the climb at 5000 feet reporting they had a stall on their #1 engine (Trent 7000, left hand). The aircraft returned to Atlanta for a safe landing on runway 27R about 50 minutes after departure. The FAA reported: "Delta Air Lines Flight 105 returned safely to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport around 7 p.m. local time on Wednesday, January 1, after the crew reported a possible issue with one of the engines. The Airbus A330 was headed to Sao Paulo, Brazil. The FAA will investigate." The aircraft is still on the ground in Atlanta about 18 hours after landing. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL105/history/20250101/2321Z/KATL/SBGR Passengers demand to leave when Boeing 737 when it twice fails to take off Note: See video in the original article. Passengers panicked when a plane failed to take off twice from an airport in Thailand - a day after the deadly crash in South Korea. Footage from inside Nok Air flight DD176 shows the jet lurching while trying to fly from the Don Mueang International Airport runway in Bangkok on December 30. The Boeing 737-800, the same series of aircraft used by Jeju Air, was bound for Nan Nakhon Airport in Nan province but reportedly encountered technical difficulties. The plane captain was said to have circled the jet back onto the tarmac for a second attempt before finally stopping the flight to return to the parking bay. In a statement, budget airline Nok Air said: 'On December 30, 2024, flight DD176 on the Don Mueang Airport - Nan Nakhon Airport route was scheduled to depart from Don Mueang Airport at 4:45 pm. 'When the plane was about to take off from the runway, the pilot detected some technical problems and decided to cancel the takeoff and return the plane to the parking bay. The decision was made under all international safety regulations and measures. 'Nok Air prioritises safety, so the plane had to be thoroughly inspected before being returned to service. A replacement plane was brought in to operate the flight, causing flight DD176 to be delayed to 7:20 pm. Nok Air apologises to all passengers for the impact of this incident.' Passenger Narongsak Toyabut who filmed the video said that the plane engines stalled on the first takeoff attempt. He added: 'The second attempt began with a proper takeoff, but the engine sounded unusually loud. The plane gained speed but I noticed that it had already passed the usual takeoff point near the first air force hangar. ‘By the time it reached the second hangar, it still hadn't lifted off. Then, the plane suddenly slowed down and turned around. The captain announced an engine malfunction and returned to the airport apron for an inspection. ‘For those who weren't there, it's hard to explain how terrifying the situation was. I'm thankful the captain didn't insist on flying when the plane wasn't ready. I can't imagine what could have happened if we had to stop mid-flight.' The jet was a Boeing 737-8AL registered HS-DBV - the same plane model involved in the tragic Jeju Air crash just a day earlier. Boeings says it is part of the Next Generation (737 NG) series of its 737 aircraft. On December 29, 2024, Jeju Air Flight 2216, crashed at the Muan International Airport in South Korea, killing 179 of 181 people onboard. The incident occurred when the plane skidded down the runway and collided with a concrete structure during an emergency landing attempt. Fuel exhaustion leads to forced landing By General Aviation News Staff · December 9, 2024 · 5 Comments According to the pilot, after flying for about four hours, the Piper PA-38-112’s engine lost total power about two miles from the destination airport. He performed a forced landing to a field near Rockingham, North Carolina, which resulted in substantial damage to the airplane’s fuselage and right wing. The pilot described that the fuel consumption during the accident flight was higher than he had expected based on the fuel consumption that he had calculated on previous flights. An FAA inspector examined the airplane after the accident and confirmed that both of the fuel tanks were empty. In the “Recommendation” section of the NTSB Pilot/Operator Accident Report, the pilot stated that “a more accurate way to determine actual fuel on board and a higher reserve might have prevented this accident.” Based on this information, it’s likely that the loss of engine power was due to fuel exhaustion. Probable Cause: The pilot’s improper fuel management, which resulted in fuel exhaustion and a total loss of engine power. NTSB Identification: 106461 The National Transportation Safety Board will hold an in-person public forum, Automation in Transportation: Lessons for Safe Implementation, on March 11-12, 2025, in Washington, DC. The Forum, led by NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy with participation by all NTSB Board Members, will focus on safety issues related to automation in all transportation modes: aviation, highway, rail, pipeline, and marine. Topics to be addressed: • Current and emerging use of automation in transportation • Lessons learned from early implementations • The role of humans in automated systems • Assessing the safety of highly automated systems • Post-deployment safety assessments • Forum participants will include a diverse group of subject matter experts representing industry, academia, labor, government, safety advocates, and other stakeholders. The Forum will be open to the public and will take place at the NTSB Boardroom and Conference Center. The event will also be livestreamed. Other details about the Forum, including a full agenda, will be announced in the coming weeks. Register Now CALENDAR OF EVENTS • Sponsor the 2025 Fuzion Safety Conference! March 4 & 5, 2025 (Orlando) • • "Automation in Transportation: Lessons for Safe Implementation," on March 11-12, 2025, in Washington, DC. • 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