Flight Safety Information - January 22, 2025 No. 016 In This Issue : Incident: Karun F100 at Tehran on Jan 20th 2025, tyre damage on landing : Incident: American B38M at Saint Vincent on Jan 20th 2025, tyre damage on landing : Incident: Saudia A320 at Jazan on Jan 17th 2025, bird strike : Incident: Southwest B737 at Fort Myers on Jan 17th 2025, foreign objects on landing runway : Incident: United B772 at San Diego on Jan 16th 2025, right main gear did not retract : Jeju Air Crash Latest Analysis : Taiwan Air Force officer dies on being sucked into fighter jet engine : EU regulator backs away from allowing lone pilots to fly airliners : US FAA probes reports of SpaceX rocket debris landing in Turks and Caicos : Earth’s magnetic north pole is on the move, and scientists just updated its position : British Airways sues airport handlers for $1.2 million after almost 20 pounds of gold jewelry went missing : Southwest to Reduce Pilot Head Count at Several Bases : Cirrus Operator Hopscotch Air Joins FAA/ACSF Safety Program : Air New Zealand appoints new commercial and safety chiefs : Calendar of Events Incident: Karun F100 at Tehran on Jan 20th 2025, tyre damage on landing A Karun Airlines Fokker 100, registration EP-AWZ performing flight KRU-2681 from Sirjan to Tehran Mehrabad (Iran) with 101 passengers and 8 crew, landed on Tehran's runway 29L but blew both left hand main tyres and became disabled on the runway. Iran's Civil Aviation Authority reported they have opened an investigation after the aircraft was stopped on the runway due to a landing gear malfunction. The passengers disembarked normally, the runway however needed to be closed with the traffic using the other runway. https://avherald.com/h?article=5231c490&opt=0 Incident: American B38M at Saint Vincent on Jan 20th 2025, tyre damage on landing An American Airlines Boeing 737-8 MAX, registration N328TC performing flight AA-909 from Miami,FL (USA) to Saint Vincent (Saint Vincent and Grenadines), landed on Saint Vincent's runway 04 but blew both left hand main tyres. The aircraft rolled out, smoke became visible from the landing gear, the aircraft came to a stop on the runway and was disabled. Emergency Services responded, the passengers disembarked onto the runway via mobile stairs. The airport needed to be closed for about 5.5 hours as result of the incident. The aircraft is still on the ground in Saint Vincent about 24 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=5231c300&opt=0 Incident: Saudia A320 at Jazan on Jan 17th 2025, bird strike A Saudi Arabian Airlines Airbus A320-200, registration HZ-AS64 performing flight SV-1804 from Jazan to Riyadh (Saudi Arabia), was climbing out of Jazan when the left hand engine (CFM56) ingested a bird and emitted bangs and streaks of flames. The aircraft returned to Jazan for a safe landing. A replacement A320-200 registration HZ-AS57 reached Riyadh with a delay of about 6.5 hours. The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Jazan on Jan 21st 2025. https://avherald.com/h?article=5231bf28&opt=0 Incident: Southwest B737 at Fort Myers on Jan 17th 2025, foreign objects on landing runway A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-700, registration N236WN performing flight WN-3009 from Atlanta,GA to Fort Myers,FL (USA), landed on Fort Myers's runway 06 but collided with debris on the runway. The aircraft taxied to the apron. The crew advised ATC that there had been vultures at about 300 feet to the left of the runway centerline over the clear area. The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT STRUCK DEBRIS ON LANDING AND POST FLIGHT INSPECTION REVEALED DAMAGE TO MAIN LANDING GEAR AND FUSELAGE, FORT MYERS, FL." The aircraft remained on the ground in Fort Myers for about 5.5 hours, then resumed service. https://avherald.com/h?article=5231b813&opt=0 Incident: United B772 at San Diego on Jan 16th 2025, right main gear did not retract A United Boeing 777-200, registration N768UA performing flight UA-1873 from Sn Diego,CA to Washington Dulles,DC (USA), was climbing out of San Diego's runway 27 when the crew stopped the climb at FL230 advising ATC they were currently troubleshooting an issue with the right hand main landing gear, the gear was confirmed down and they were working with maintenance to find an option to get it up. About 30 minutes later the aircraft continued the climb to FL310 but diverted to Denver,CO (USA) where the aircraft landed without further incident about 90 minutes later. A passenger reported the captain announced the landing gear did not uplock, however, there would be a normal landing. The landing was uneventful. A replacement Boeing 777-200 registration N211UA reached Washington with a delay of about 3:20 hours. https://avherald.com/h?article=5231ad63&opt=0 Jeju Air Crash Latest Analysis The crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216, triggered by a devastating bird strike and dual-engine failure, has raised pressing questions around aviation safety, wildlife management, and airport emergency preparedness. Here’s what we know so far and what remains a mystery. Originally cleared for an approach to Runway 01 at Muan Airport, Jeju Air Flight 2216 encountered a bird strike during descent, prompting the flight crew to declare a mayday to air traffic control (ATC) at 08:59 local time and subsequent and go-around. Video shows the landing gear is retracted for the go around. The aircraft subsequently touched down on Runway 19 with the landing gear still retracted at 09:02 local time and crashed head-on into an embankment at the end of the runway. The aircraft touched down 1,200 metres into the 2,800-metre-long Runway 19, leaving insufficient distance to come to a stop. Only two cabin crew members seated in the rear galley survived the crash. Preliminary reports suggest the aircraft suffered a bird strike to both engines( first the left and then the right), resulting in a complete loss of power and hydraulic systems, which control the landing gear. Feathers and blood were found in both engines, confirming the bird strike. The flight data recorder (black box or FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) ceased recording four minutes before the crash, hampering the investigation. It remains unclear whether the flight crew attempted an engine relight (the process of restarting an aircraft's engine after it has shut down or failed during flight) following the dual-engine failure. However, the fact that the aircraft landed on the opposite runway suggests that this was not feasible. The loss of hydraulic power was a critical factor in this accident, as these systems control the aircraft’s essential flight surfaces—movable components on the wings, tail, and other structures that enable the pilot to manage the aircraft's movement and stability by manipulating airflow. Without hydraulic power, the landing gear could not be deployed, leaving the flight crew insufficient time to manually extend it using the gravity drop system. If only one engine had been damaged, there might have been enough time to attempt manual deployment of the landing gear. The exact cause of the CVR and FDR failure remains under investigation, but it is likely due to the loss of power or electrical failure resulting from the engine failure. This absence of critical data has significantly hindered the investigation, leaving key gaps in the timeline of events. While it is unlikely, the possibility of crew interference with the recorders cannot be ruled out at this stage. Given the high-stress nature of the moments leading up to the crash and the complete loss of engine power, it remains unclear whether the crew would have had the time or motivation to disable the devices. Both the CVR and FDR have been sent to the United States for further analysis. Weather reports at the time of the crash indicated favourable weather conditions, with few clouds at 4,500 feet and a very light wind from the south-southwest. Weather has been ruled out as a contributing factor in the crash. However, Muan Airport’s ATC advised the flight crew of bird activity at 08:57 local time. One of the major issues highlighted by this accident is the urgent need for improved wildlife management to reduce the risk of bird strikes, as engine vulnerability to such events remains a significant concern. Several bird roosting and feeding grounds surround Muan International Airport, posing an ongoing risk to its operations. Muan Airport's emergency response also faced criticism for delays in reaching the crash site. The crash occurred outside the airport's perimeter fence, in an area with uneven terrain, making access difficult for heavy emergency vehicles. Although the crash was reported quickly, miscommunication between ATC and emergency teams delayed dispatch to the correct location. Furthermore, traffic congestion on the perimeter road further hindered rescue efforts. Outdated communication systems, inadequate firefighting resources, and a lack of proper access roads hindered the emergency response. The airport's preparedness for first aid and medical emergencies was also criticised, as its facilities were designed for minor incidents, not large-scale accidents. Although too little, too late, in a positive step, South Korea will change the concrete barriers used for navigation at nine airports across the country following the Jeju Air crash. Seven airports will also have their runway safety areas modified following a review of all South Korean airports that has since been carried out. There are notable similarities between this incident and the "Miracle on the Hudson" in January 2009, when a US Airways A320-214 ditched in the Hudson River following a bird strike and dual-engine failure. Had Jeju Air Flight 2216 touched down further up the runway, it is possible the aircraft could have stopped in the grass area, potentially avoiding the embankment collision. This raises questions about Jeju Air’s emergency protocols and the flight crew’s decision-making during the incident. The "Miracle on the Hudson" refers to the emergency landing of US Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson River in January 2009, after both engines failed due to a bird strike, with all 155 people on board surviving the incident. This tragic accident highlights critical gaps in aviation safety, wildlife management, and airport emergency preparedness. While Jeju Air and Muan International Airport operate in a region with unique challenges, the incident underscores the need for robust protocols to mitigate bird strike risks, ensure effective communication during crises, and enhance emergency response capabilities. Lessons learned from this disaster should drive improvements across the aviation industry to prevent similar tragedies in the future, and it is encouraging to see that such changes are already being implemented across airports in South Korea. https://www.airlineratings.com/articles/jeju-air-crash-latest-analysis Taiwan Air Force officer dies on being sucked into fighter jet engine A Taiwan Air Force officer has died upon being sucked in the engine of a F-CK-1 fighter jet at Ching Chuan Kang Air Force Base in Taichung, Taiwan. Taiwan’s Air Force Command Headquarters said in a press release that the tragic accident occurred on the morning of January 21, 2025. According to local reports, a Ching-kuo Indigenous Defence Fighter (IDF – AIDC F-CK-1 Ching-kuo) had landed in the airbase, and a 41-year old female master sergeant, identified as Hu, conducted a final routine inspection of the aircraft just before the jet’s engines were switched off. For “unknown reasons,” Hu was sucked in by the right side engine of the fighter jet, reports said. Colleagues managed to rush Hu to a hospital, but she was later pronounced dead, at about 11:40 local time. PTS Taiwan News has reported that Ching Chuan Kang Air Force Base suspended take offs for Indigenous Defence Fighter jets and is investigating the accident. The AIDC F-CK-1 Ching-Kuo is commonly known as the Indigenous Defense Fighter (IDF). It is a multirole combat aircraft named after Chiang Ching-kuo, the late President of the Republic of China. The aircraft made its first flight in 1989, before entering service with the Republic of China Air Force (Taiwan) in 1992. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/taiwan-air-force-officer-dies-on-being-sucked-into-fighter-jet-engine EU regulator backs away from allowing lone pilots to fly airliners Airlines want to cut the number of pilots to save money, while unions are opposed. The EU Aviation Safety Agency is in the middle. BRUSSELS — The need to have two pilots at all times in passenger airplane cockpits is being challenged by new technologies — to the dismay of pilots and their unions. That resistance is starting to pay off. On Tuesday, the EU Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) published its annual update of the European Plan for Aviation Safety, which sets out safety priorities while identifying risks and mitigation measures. In the document, the agency waters down its previous openness to single pilot operations — adding an extra regulatory hurdle. “EASA has adjusted its rulemaking program to make clear that we will focus first on evaluating the development and deployment of such advanced cockpit technologies,” said EASA spokesperson Janet Northcote. Single pilot flying does not entail having only one pilot at the controls of an airliner for the duration of a flight. Instead, it would allow one pilot to be alone in the cockpit when the airplane is cruising, allowing the second pilot to step away from the controls. For that to happen, aircraft manufacturers must ensure that the technology is up to snuff so safety isn’t compromised. EASA would have to approve single-pilot operations, called extended minimum crew operations (eMCOs). An eMCO-equipped plane would tempt many airlines, which currently have to keep two pilots in the cockpit for the entire flight. Four pilots are needed if the flight lasts longer than the length of one pilot shift. In Tuesday’s update, EASA said it will set up a study to assess the impact of “new advanced flight deck technologies” and “propose a regulatory framework that ensures the safe integration of smart cockpits in commercial air transport operations.” That adds a new regulatory step before considering single-pilot operations. While the previous rulemaking study, launched by EASA in 2023, was aimed at developing rules that would allow for the “safe implementation of eMCO,” the latest action announced by the regulator only looks at the smart cockpit concept. EASA explained Tuesday’s shift as part of an effort to remove any doubt that safety is paramount. “EASA in November last year clarified its approach to the concept of eMCO to make absolutely clear to all parties that safety comes first and must be enhanced by any changes to the cockpit or to operations,” Northcote said. EASA’s more conservative approach to single-pilot operations comes after Florian Guillermet took over as executive director of the EU agency in April. He succeeded Luc Tytgat, who had been acting executive director for the previous seven months, and Patrick Ky, who led the agency for 10 years and was an open supporter of single-pilot operations. Worried pilots But pilots aren’t reassured by EASA’s new course. “Under its previous leadership, the agency leaned worryingly toward ‘enabling’ single pilot flying, aligning too closely with industry players,” said Tanja Harter, president of the European Cockpit Association pilots union. “But the operational concept of flying with only one pilot during cruise is still alive and [was] explicitly mentioned,” in Tuesday's document, she added. “Manufacturers and certain airlines will keep pushing, but regulators must stay laser-focused on safety.” The main impetus for the development of single-pilot capability comes from Europe — where the world leader in the sector, Airbus, is working on autonomous flight along with other manufacturers such as Dassault. Unions have fought back, warning that cutting the number of pilots poses safety risks. “Can you handle two emergencies at the same time?” asks a recent union ad, which shows a toilet in the middle of a flight deck and no pilot in the cockpit. The sudden death of a Turkish Airlines pilot during a flight from Seattle to Istanbul in October prompted pilots to underline that the additional crew was crucial in helping the plane land safely. https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-regulator-backs-away-from-allowing-single-pilots-to-fly-airliners/ US FAA probes reports of SpaceX rocket debris landing in Turks and Caicos WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and officials from the Turks and Caicos Islands have launched probes into SpaceX's explosive Starship rocket test that sent debris streaking over the northern Caribbean and forced airlines to divert dozens of flights. "There are no reports of public injury, and the FAA is working with SpaceX and appropriate authorities to confirm reports of public property damage on Turks and Caicos," said the FAA, which oversees private rocket launch activity. An upgraded version of SpaceX's Starship exploded in space over the Bahamas roughly eight minutes into the company's seventh flight test from Texas on Thursday. It sent fields of blazing debris for miles across the sky over the Turks and Caicos, a British Overseas Territory. Residents in the South and North Caicos islands described to Reuters intense rumbling that shook the ground and said they received messages from friends in North Caicos who found charred pieces of what they believed to be Starship debris. "My mirror and the walls were shaking," said Veuleiri Artiles, a woman who was working in South Caicos when the debris fell. "It was like when you're on an airplane... my ears were rattling." "It felt like an earthquake," said Ibalor Calucin, who lives on the territory's Providenciales island. "It was scary... all of the people here in our apartment ran to the parking lot." There is a "multi-agency investigation that is ongoing" into the Starship explosion, the commissioner of the Royal Turks and Caicos Islands Police Force, Fitz Bailey, told Reuters. He declined to comment on reports of public property damage from the debris. The rumbling was from the many orange-glowing shards of debris from Starship's explosion that were breaking the sound barrier as they plunged through the atmosphere, sending loud booms thundering across the islands, according to seismic ground sensor data analyzed by Benjamin Fernando, a seismology researcher at Johns Hopkins University. The rumbling in the ground "was about 10 millimeters per second, which is actually quite a lot," Fernando said. "That's a relatively substantial ground motion. It's comparable to a small earthquake." The Starship rocket that exploded had multiple new onboard features flying for the first time and carried its first batch of mock satellites that were meant to be deployed in space. SpaceX's Starship system launched from Boca Chica, Texas at 5:37 p.m. ET (2237 GMT) Thursday, flying east over the Gulf of Mexico. Starship separated from its Super Heavy booster as planned at 64 km (40 miles) in altitude, igniting its six engines to blast deeper into space. The rocket was bound for a suborbital trajectory around Earth to re-enter the atmosphere over the Indian Ocean and attempt a propulsive landing on the water's surface. But SpaceX lost communication with the rocket soon after its separation from Super Heavy and later confirmed its demise. "Initial data indicates a fire developed in the aft section of the ship, leading to a rapid unscheduled disassembly," SpaceX said in a statement on its website. https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-faa-opens-probe-spacexs-183030727.html Earth’s magnetic north pole is on the move, and scientists just updated its position If you are using your smartphone to navigate, your system just got a crucial update. Scientists have released a new model tracking the position of the magnetic north pole, revealing that the pole is now closer to Siberia than it was five years ago and is continuing to drift toward Russia. Unlike the geographic North Pole, which marks a fixed location, the magnetic north pole’s position is determined by Earth’s magnetic field, which is in constant motion. Over the past few decades, magnetic north’s movement has been unprecedented — it dramatically sped up, then in a more recent twist rapidly slowed — though scientists can’t explain the underlying cause behind the magnetic field’s unusual behavior. Global positioning systems, including those used by planes and ships, find magnetic north using the World Magnetic Model, as it was named in 1990. Developed by the British Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, this model notes the established position of magnetic north and predicts future drift based on the trajectory of the past few years. To preserve the accuracy of GPS measurements, every five years researchers revise the WMM, resetting the official position of magnetic north and introducing new predictions for the next five years of drifting. “The more you wait to update the model, the larger the error becomes,” said Dr. Arnaud Chulliat, a senior research scientist at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. “The way the model is built, our forecast is mostly an extrapolation given our current knowledge of the Earth’s magnetic field.” The scientists released two models on December 17: the standard WMM, with a spatial resolution of approximately 2,051 miles (3,300 kilometers) at the equator, and the first high-resolution model, with spatial resolution of about 186 miles (300 kilometers) at the equator. While anyone can use the more powerful high-resolution model, most GPS hardware used by the general public incorporates the standard WMM and isn’t equipped to handle the other — and many users won’t benefit from the upgrade, said Dr. William Brown, a geophysicist and geomagnetism researcher with the British Geological Survey, in an email. “Major airlines will upgrade the navigation software across their entire fleets of aircraft to load in the new model, and militaries in NATO will need to upgrade software in a huge number of complex navigation systems across all kinds of equipment,” Brown told CNN. But for most people, the switch isn’t necessary. “Think of it like upgrading your smartphone — you don’t necessarily want to buy a new phone just to upgrade an app to a new version that is more powerful,” he said. Changing to the new model should be a seamless transition for GPS users; with the update, scientists verified the accuracy of the previous model’s predictions about where magnetic north would end up by 2025, Chulliat said. “The forecast was very good,” he said. “And so the new model confirmed that we were not very far off.” But why are all these updates necessary, and why doesn’t magnetic north stay in one place? Magnetic north versus ‘true north’ At the top of the world in the middle of the Arctic Ocean lies the geographic North Pole, the point where all the lines of longitude that curve around Earth from top to bottom converge in the north. Marking the North Pole is challenging, as it’s covered by moving sea ice, but its geographic location, also known as the true North Pole, is fixed. By comparison, the magnetic north pole is the northernmost convergence point in Earth’s magnetic field, also known as the magnetosphere. Generated by the churning molten metals in Earth’s core, the magnetosphere shields the planet from harmful solar radiation and keeps solar winds from stripping away Earth’s atmosphere. Because the convective sloshing at Earth’s core never stops, the magnetosphere is never static. As a result, its northernmost point is always on the move. British explorer Sir James Clark Ross discovered the magnetic north pole in 1831 in northern Canada, approximately 1,000 miles (1,609 kilometers) south of the true North Pole. We now know that every day, magnetic north traces an elliptical path of about 75 miles (120 kilometers). Since its discovery, magnetic north has drifted away from Canada and toward Russia. By the 1940s, magnetic north had moved northwest from its 1831 position by about 250 miles (400 kilometers). In 1948, it reached Prince Wales Island, and by 2000 it had departed Canadian shores. “It has typically moved about 10 km (6.2 miles) per year or less over the last 400 years,” Brown said. However, the latest WMM update follows a period of highly unusual activity for the magnetic north pole. In 1990, its northern drift accelerated, increasing from 9.3 miles (15 kilometers) per year to 34.2 miles (55 kilometers) per year, Chulliat said. The shift “was unprecedented as far as the records we have,” he added. Around 2015, the drift slowed to about 21.7 miles (35 kilometers) per year. The rapid deceleration was also unprecedented, Chulliat said. By 2019, the fluctuations had deviated so far from the prior model that scientists updated the WMM a year early. Future drift Scientists expect that the drift toward Russia will continue to slow, though there is some uncertainty about how long the slowdown will persist and if it will continue at its current pace, according to Brown. “It could change (its) rate, or even speed up again,” Brown said. “We will continue to monitor the field and to assess the performance of the WMM, but we do not anticipate needing to release a new model before the planned update in 2030.” Earth’s magnetic field has behaved even more dramatically in the past, with the magnetosphere weakening so much that its polarity reversed. This flips the magnetic north and south poles, and the change can last for tens of thousands of years. Scientists have estimated that this polar flip, which can take thousands of years to complete, happens about once every million years, though the time between flips has varied greatly — from 5,000 years to as much as 50 million years. The signs that precede such flips are also not well understood, making them difficult to predict, Brown said. The last big flip was about 750,000 to 780,000 years ago. During a polar flip, animals that migrate using the magnetic field to find their way, such as whales, butterflies, sea turtles and many species of migratory birds, could be affected. A flip would disrupt radio communication and scramble navigation systems. Orbiting satellites would be at risk, as a weakened magnetic field would offer less protection against space weather. While life on Earth has weathered multiple magnetic reversals over more than 100 million years, “we’ve never experienced a reversal when modern technology was present,” Brown said. “It would certainly be an interesting time for engineers to adapt our technology to, but hopefully one they’d have a slow, centuries-long build up to, rather than any sudden change.” https://www.yahoo.com/news/earth-magnetic-north-pole-move-153212026.html British Airways sues airport handlers for $1.2 million after almost 20 pounds of gold jewelry went missing Almost 20 pounds of gold jewelry went missing from a British Airways plane in Chicago. Two employees from a ground-handling firm were prosecuted on suspicion of theft over the incident. BA is asking for compensation after a Bahraini court ordered the airline to pay back the jeweler. British Airways has filed a $1.2 million lawsuit after almost 20 pounds of gold jewelry went missing from one of its planes. The airline says it was contracted by Al-Arefi Jewelry to transport the valuable cargo from Bahrain to Chicago in July 2023. But after the flight from London to Chicago O'Hare International Airport landed, the jewelry was reported missing. British Airways is suing Ground Services International, which is owned by the Emirati firm Dnata and provides ground-handling services at several US airports. The suit, filed in a Chicago court last October, says two GSI employees have been prosecuted on suspicion of theft. As a result of the incident, Al-Arefi brought legal action against the airline. Last February, a Bahraini court ordered BA to pay the jeweler 153,000 dinars, or about $406,000 at the current exchange rate. BA says it wrote to GSI to request compensation over this, but the latter has refused, resulting in BA taking legal action. The airline says GSI is in breach of the Standard Ground Handling Agreement because it didn't safeguard valuable cargo and hasn't compensated it. BA is asking for more than $1.2 million, which consists of repaying the Bahraini court's judgment, attorneys' fees over $100,000, and more than $700,000 in consequential losses. A settlement conference has been scheduled for February 11, according to a court document seen by Business Insider. A Dnata spokesperson told BI: "dnata is committed to ethical business practices and operates in compliance with all laws, regulations and industry standards. Our strict governance guidelines make the rules clear to every employee. We cannot comment further on ongoing legal proceedings." https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/british-airways-sues-airport-handlers-112441226.html Southwest to Reduce Pilot Head Count at Several Bases Hundreds of pilots will face displacements. Southwest is set to substantially reduce the number of pilots at several of its bases this spring. On Monday, the carrier’s vice president of crew planning announced the projected shake-up in a memo shared by aviation watchdog JonNYC. Last year, the Dallas-based airline shared plans to cut 140 pilot jobs in Atlanta as it scales back capacity in the market. That number will now move to 115. Among the hardest-hit bases will be Denver, which will see a reduction of around 155 pilots between April and May. The displacements will impact both captains and first officers. Other bases are planned to also see double-digit cuts. These include Dallas, Los Angeles, Orlando, Florida, and Oakland, California. The memo added that Southwest expects “significant growth” in Baltimore and Nashville, Tennessee, by May. The carrier is opening multiple captain and first officer positions in those two bases along with Chicago. A Southwest spokesperson noted that these changes come as the airline shifts the number of aircraft remaining overnight at some airports. Southwest plans to begin red-eye flights next month. “The modest reductions to our Crew bases in Atlanta and Denver are part of our previously announced strategy to efficiently maximize the revenue-generating potential of our fleet and accommodate Customer demand. Employees will transfer to other bases and no reductions in force have occurred,” the spokesperson said in a statement. These moves come just days after the carrier paused corporate hiring and events in its latest cost-cutting effort. Southwest will also suspend some internships this summer. “You’ll begin to see and feel efforts related to our cost initiative in the coming weeks, including some hard decisions I’ve had to make,” Southwest CEO Bob Jordan shared in a memo last week. https://airlinegeeks.com/2025/01/21/southwest-to-reduce-pilot-head-count-at-several-bases/# Cirrus Operator Hopscotch Air Joins FAA/ACSF Safety Program Northeast-based charter fleet now part of safety reporting program. In service since 2009, Northeast-based Hopscotch Air has joined the Air Charter Safety Foundation’s (ACSF) Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP). Created in partnership with the FAA, ASAP is a voluntary safety reporting system. The focus is to encourage air charter certificate holders and employees to voluntarily report safety issues and events, “even though they may involve an alleged violation of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, enforcement-related incentives have been designed into the program,” according to the FAA. Hopscotch Air flies a fleet of single-engine Cirrus aircraft based in White Plains and Farmingdale, New York, as well as Boston. It provides on-demand service to destinations throughout the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and eastern Canada. What sets Hopscotch Air apart as a general aviation charter program is that passengers experience flight in a small aircraft in an up close and personal way, with passengers able to occupy the right front seat if so desired. ACSF president Bryan Burns said, “Every [ASAP] participant contributes to the overall safety of the industry, and we’re thrilled to welcome Hopscotch Air to this initiative. Their involvement exemplifies how even smaller operators can make a big impact on aviation safety.” Hopscotch Air CEO Andrew Schmertz said, “Safety is our highest priority, and having a platform to openly report and address safety concerns and learn from others strengthens our commitment to continuous improvement.” https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/hopscotch-air-signs-on-for-asap-safety-initiative/ Air New Zealand appoints new commercial and safety chiefs Air New Zealand is to boost its senior leadership team with the appointment of a chief safety and risk officer, as well as a chief commercial officer. The moves, announced 21 January, follow a series of high-profile departures from the airline’s management team, as it manages ongoing supply chain and travel demand challenges. To lead its commercial business, Air New Zealand has picked former Qantas executive Scott Wilkinson. Wilkinson, who joins the airline in the second half of the year, spent 10 years at Qantas and is currently its executive manager of digital and direct customer experience. During his time at the Australian carrier, he has “led a number of a major commercial initiatives focused on growing revenue, enhancing distribution capabilities, and strengthening Qantas’ loyalty programme”, says Air New Zealand. Meanwhile, the airline will promote veteran Nathan McGraw to the role of chief safety and risk officer. McGraw, who has been with Air New Zealand for nearly 20 years, will assume the role on 31 March. A trained ATR pilot, McGraw is currently the airline’s general manager for integrated planning. He has also held leadership positions in flight operations and safety roles in the carrier. McGraw will replace outgoing safety chief David Morgan, who returns to the flightdeck after stepping down in early 2025. https://www.flightglobal.com/airlines/air-new-zealand-appoints-new-commercial-and-safety-chiefs/161445.article 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