Flight Safety Information - March 21, 2025 No. 058 In This Issue : Major disruptions in international travel due to London Heathrow closure : Incident: Baltic BCS3 at Zurich on Mar 20th 2025, nose gear trouble on departure : Incident: Iberia A359 over Atlantic on Mar 19th 2025, suspected fuel leak : Incident: Malaysia B738 near Kuala Lumpur on Mar 18th 2025, cargo smoke indication : Incident: Delta B739 at Atlanta on Mar 19th 2025, cabin pressure problems : Investigators say a Delta jet descended too quickly before Toronto crash last month : Boeing misled Southwest pilots on safety of 737 Max, union lawyer tells Texas Supreme Court : Take-off clearance cancelled as Southwest 737 pilots mistake taxiway for runway : Trump’s FAA Pick Has History of Lowering Air Safety Standards : FAA Introduces New Runway Incursion Device : U.S. drone operators continue to wait for FAA guidance on flying beyond line of sight : Boeing 777 Wing Crack Issue, FAA Mandates Inspection : FedEx places new order for 10 ATR 72-600F regional aircraft : Air India and IndiGo Will Require 16,800 Pilots in 10 Years : Calendar of Events Major disruptions in international travel due to London Heathrow closure An external power substation near Heathrow Airportsupplying power to the airport, located about 2.3nm northnortheast of the airport, suffered a major fire at about 03:30L (03:30Z), the power supply to Heathrow Airport as well as thousands of homes failed as result. The airport needed to close as result, all flights for Mar 21st 2025 needed to be cancelled. The airport's announcement reads: Due to a fire at an electrical substation supplying the airport, Heathrow is experiencing a significant power outage. To maintain the safety of our passengers and colleagues, Heathrow will be closed until 23h59 on 21 March. Passengers are advised not to travel to the airport and should contact their airline for further information. We apologise for the inconvenience. International flights already in the air bound for Heathrow were diverted to other UK airports like London Gatwick,EN (UK) and as far as Manchester,EN (UK). Residents reported there had been an explosion like sound waking them up, their houses shook. 150 homes needed to be evacuated as result of the fire. By about 10:00L (10:00Z) fire services stated they now brought the fire at the power substation under control. https://avherald.com/h?article=5257e5bc&opt=0 Incident: Baltic BCS3 at Zurich on Mar 20th 2025, nose gear trouble on departure An Air Baltic Bombardier C-Series CS-300 on behalf of Swiss, registration YL-AAV performing flight LX-2250 from Zurich (Switzerland) to Budapest (Hungary) with 117 people on board, was climbing out of Zurich's runway 28 when the crew stopped the climb at FL160 due to problems with the landing gear. The aircraft returned to Zurich for a safe landing on runway 14 about 30 minutes later and stopped on the runway due to a nose gear problem. The airline reported the landing was uneventful, however, the aircraft could not taxi to the apron due to a nose gear malfunction. The airport reported due to the aircraft on runway 14 landings are currently done on runway 16. According to information The Aviation Herald received, a landing gear system malfunction occurred triggering a master caution once airborne. After landing smoke was observed from the right hand main gear. Preliminary post flight examination indicates that a loss of hydraulic fluid from the shock absorber had occurred causing a malfunction, a number of detached parts were recovered from the departure runway. https://avherald.com/h?article=525745e8&opt=0 Incident: Iberia A359 over Atlantic on Mar 19th 2025, suspected fuel leak An Iberia Airbus A350-900, registration EC-NVR performing flight IB-311 from Madrid,SP (Spain) to Mexico City (Mexico), was enroute at FL370 over the Atlantic about 580 nm westnorthwest of Santa Maria, Azores Islands (Portugal) when the crew decided to return to Madrid due to a suspected fuel leak. The aircraft landed safely back on Madrid's runway 18R about 3 hours later. A passenger reported the captain announced a technical problem. Another passenger reported, that following the flight it became known the crew suspected a fuel leak. The aircraft returned to service about 13 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=52576a26&opt=0 Incident: Malaysia B738 near Kuala Lumpur on Mar 18th 2025, cargo smoke indication A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 737-800, registration 9M-MXN performing flight MH-720 from Jakarta (Indonesia) to Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) with 115 passengers and 7 crew, was descending through about FL200 towards Kuala Lumpur when the crew declared emergency reporting a cargo smoke indication. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on runway 32R about 15 minutes later. The airline reported the aircraft taxied to a remote stand, where passengers disembarked safely while emergency services positioned around the aircraft, subsequently the forward cargo doors were opened. The occurrence aircraft returned to service about 43 hours after landing. https://avherald.com/h?article=525766d0&opt=0 Incident: Delta B739 at Atlanta on Mar 19th 2025, cabin pressure problems A Delta Airlines Boeing 737-900, registration N948DZ performing flight DL-1660 from Atlanta,GA to Kansas City,MO (USA) with 177 passengers and 6 crew, was climbing out of Atlanta's runway 26L when the crew stopped the climb at about 15000 feet due to problems with the cabin pressure. The aircraft returned to Atlanta for a safe landing on runway 27R about 45 minutes after departure. A replacement Boeing 737-900 registration N956DZ reached Kansas City with a delay of about 3 hours. https://avherald.com/h?article=52576458&opt=0 Investigators say a Delta jet descended too quickly before Toronto crash last month Canadian investigators say a Delta Air Lines regional jet that crashed while attempting to land at the Toronto Pearson International Airport last month was descending too quickly. The plane flipped over after the hard landing. None of the 80 people on board died but two passengers were seriously injured. Canadian investigators say a Delta Air Lines regional jet that crashed while attempting to land at the Toronto Pearson International Airport last month was descending too quickly. The plane flipped over after the hard landing. None of the 80 people on board died but two passengers were seriously injured. A Delta Air Lines plane sits on its roof after crashing upon landing at Toronto Pearson Airport in Toronto on Feb. 17. The Endeavor Air flight 4819 with 76 passengers and four crew was landing at around 3:30 p.m. in Canada's biggest metropolis, having flown from Minneapolis, the airline said. A Delta Air Lines jet flips upside down on a Toronto runway and all 80 aboard survive In releasing its preliminary report on the February 17th crash Thursday, Canada's Transportation Safety Board noted that in the seconds before touching down, the CRJ 900 was descending at a rate of more than 1,100 feet per minute, which is nearly twice as fast as it should've been descending. All 80 people on board the plane survived the crash, even though it flipped over and caught fire as it slid down the snowy runway. Twenty-one people were injured, two of them seriously. The flight, operated by Endeavor Air under the Delta Connection brand name, had taken off from the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport at 11:47 a.m. CT with 76 passengers and four flight crew members on board. "The flight proceeded uneventfully" towards Toronto, according to the TSB. In the final seconds before touching down at Toronto's Pearson Airport at 2:12 p.m. ET in strong, gusty winds, the TSB report shows that the plane was descending at a rate of more than 1,100 feet per minute. The report notes the aircraft's operating manual states that a hard landing is defined as "[a] landing at a vertical descent rate greater than 600 ft/min." In addition, the plane was banking at an angle of 7.1° to the right, and the pitch attitude was 1° nose up. The TSB report says that as the plane touched down, the right landing gear fractured and retracted. The right wing then scraped the ground and broke off at the fuselage, releasing a cloud of jet fuel that caught fire as the airplane overturned and moved down the runway. The preliminary investigation does not explain why the plane was descending faster than it should have, nor what role the strong winds may have had in the crash. Much of the information in the preliminary report comes from the aircraft's flight data recorder. No information from the cockpit voice recorder was released. "Accidents and incidents rarely stem from a single cause," TSB chair Yoan Marier said in a video statement. "They're often the result of multiple complex, interconnected factors, many extending beyond the aircraft and its operation to wider systemic issues." Delta says it remains "fully engaged as participants in the investigation led by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada," The airline said in a statement to NPR. "Out of respect for the integrity of this work that will continue through their final report, Endeavor Air and Delta will refrain from comment." The final investigative report is expected in about a year. https://www.npr.org/2025/03/20/nx-s1-5334692/delta-plane-crash-investigation-toronto Boeing misled Southwest pilots on safety of 737 Max, union lawyer tells Texas Supreme Court Southwest Airlines pilots were misled by Boeing's assurances the 737 MAX aircraft was safe to fly before a pair of deadly crashes over a five month period caused the model to be grounded, a lawyer for the pilots union told Texas Supreme Court justices Wednesday. The case could decide whether the pilots can sue over lost wages from the downed aircraft. Arguing for the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, or SWAPA, attorney David Coale said those misrepresentations amounted to buying a "bum steer" when signing a collective bargaining agreement in which the pilots agreed to fly the aircraft before its eventual grounding. "You told me a lie that messed up my thinking process," Coale said, laying out for justices one of the union's basic arguments. "I wasn't able to make an intelligent decision. That decision had consequences." Coale's argument is key to rebutting a central claim from Boeing — that the pilots knew what they were getting, because they signed off on two collective bargaining agreements with Dallas-based Southwest in 2006 and 2016 requiring them to fly the 737. In that case, the union can not sue in state court because those claims would be preempted by the Railway Labor Act, which governs airline and railroad labor relations, Boeing says. Coale rejected that line of reasoning during Wednesday's oral argument, telling justices CBAs are negotiated between the union and the airline — not a third party. He also argued the 2006 CBA had no bearing on whether or not misleading statements caused them damages 10 years later. "Their counterfactual thing about, 'well, we would have fallen back to [the 2006 agreement] — why?" Coale said. "If they're saying at that time, 'we made a lousy plane, it falls out of the sky,' we wouldn't have fallen back to that agreement. There would have been something else that would have come along." Neither Boeing nor SWAPA responded to requests for comment. In October 2018, Lion Air Flight 610 crashed into the Java Sea 13 minutes after takeoff, killing 189 people. Five months later, on March 10, 2019, 157 people died when Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crashed six minutes after takeoff. The Federal Aviation Administration found both were likely caused by a mechanism that could make the nose of the 737 MAX dip due to low speeds like during takeoff. The U.S. Department of Justice found Boeing knowingly hid that information from the FAA so it wouldn't have to spend more money on pilot training. Boeing and the DOJ are still negotiating a plea deal over the incidents. Last week, a federal judge in Fort Worth gave the two sides four more weeks to come to an agreement after a previous deal was rejected in December. The suit at the center of Wednesday's hearing is not the same as a 2019 lawsuit in which SWAPA sued on behalf of union pilots and the organization itself. The union argued it lost member dues and money spent on legal fees in connection with the DOJ’s investigation into Boeing. SWAPA obtained the assigned right to sue on behalf of 8,794 of its members in the middle of that lawsuit, but the Fifth Court of Appeals ruled the union lacked standing to bring claims on behalf of its members and could possibly file another suit — resulting in the 2021 suit. Arguing for Boeing, attorney Anne M. Johnson said Boeing's status as a third-party, non-signatory to the collective bargaining agreement was irrelevant — any case that would involve interpreting the CBA is preempted by federal labor law. She added that the law is meant to allow participation by the employer — in this case, Southwest — who is not a party in this lawsuit. "It should not be decided in a Dallas state court, in which Southwest is not a party, what their collective bargaining agreement means," she said. "And make no mistake, that is exactly what SWAPA intends to do." https://www.keranews.org/business-economy/2025-03-20/boeing-misled-southwest-pilots-on-safety-of-737-max-union-lawyer-tells-texas-supreme-court Take-off clearance cancelled as Southwest 737 pilots mistake taxiway for runway Air traffic control at Orlando International airport cancelled the take-off clearance for a Southwest Airlines-operated Boeing 737 that began its take-off roll on a taxiway running parallel to the runway. The Federal Aviation Administration says it is investigating the incident, which occurred at 09:30 local time on 20 March. It specifies that no other aircraft were involved. Southwest says that flight 3278 “stopped safely” on the taxiway “after the crew mistook the surface for the nearby runway”. Nobody was injured during the incident, which prompted Southwest to transfer passengers onto another aircraft for transportation to Albany International airport in New York. Southwest is “engaged” with the FAA and the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) “to understand the circumstances of the event”. This week, the NTSB released an preliminary report on a separate incident at Chicago Midway International airport in which the pilots of a Flexjet business jet did not recognise the runway as distinct from the taxiway before crossing the path of a Southwest 737 on final approach. The 737 pilots in that case executed a go-around and landed without further incident. https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/take-off-clearance-cancelled-as-southwest-737-pilots-mistake-taxiway-for-runway/162297.article Trump’s FAA Pick Has History of Lowering Air Safety Standards Bryan Bedford has been nominated to be FAA administrator. President Donald Trump announced Monday that he has nominated airline CEO Bryan Bedford to lead the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). If confirmed, Bedford, who is currently the CEO of regional airline Republic Airways, would lead an agency facing intense public scrutiny in the aftermath of a mid-air collision near Washington, D.C., that killed 67 people. Early attention to the crash has highlighted air traffic controller staffing issues in Washington and at Air Traffic Control (ATC) facilities across the country, which are operated by the FAA. FAA Administrators are nominated by the president, confirmed by the Senate, and report to the secretary of transportation. FAA administrators typically have extensive experience in civil aviation or public administration; a significant number have been commercial airline pilots. Bedford joined Republic Airways—which operates regional flights on behalf of American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and United Airlines—as President and CEO in 1999. “We have concerns about the nominee’s past efforts to lower pilot training and safety standards.” In 2002, the airline under Bedford asked the FAA for an exception from federal regulations on the required number of flight hours for new pilots for graduates of its own flight school. The FAA requires 1,500 flight hours for pilots to become licensed as first officers at commercial airlines, including regional carriers. Republic requested that graduates of its own flight training academy be licensed at the 750-hour threshold required for U.S. military pilots to receive the same license. The FAA disagreed with various points in Republic’s petition, primarily its assertion that its internal training programs were conducted with the same rigor as the military’s training programs. The FAA also noted that the minimum flight hours were introduced by an act of Congress, suggesting a request for an exception would be less preferable than requesting an overall review of the standards as applied to all airlines by the law. Comments in favor of maintaining the requirements, including those from legislators, pilot unions, and flight schools, outnumbered comments in favor of granting an exemption. The law in question, the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 directed the FAA to improve the qualification thresholds for commercial pilots, largely in response to investigation findings in the deadly 2009 crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407, which investigators later linked to deficiencies in pilot training. In 2013, the FAA began requiring first officers to hold a higher rating certificate, effectively raising the experience requirement for new pilots from 250 flight hours to 1,500 flight hours. Republic asserted that the increased experience requirement exacerbated a shortage of qualified airline pilots, increasing costs and limiting expansion opportunities across the industry. Regional airlines tend to lose veteran pilots through attrition whenever the major airlines—which offer better pay and benefits—have pilot jobs open. “I think it’s pretty clear that the FAA never really thought that it’s their duty to make sure there’s enough pilots in the industry to support service to small-town America—that’s just not their mandate,” Bedford told Politico in 2022. Texas Senator Ted Cruz, ranking member of the Senate Transportation Subcommittee on Aviation Safety, Operations, and Innovation, told Politico he wasn’t familiar with Bedford, but would consider his nomination on its merits. Airlines for America (A4A), the trade association for U.S. airlines, applauded the nomination. “President Trump made a superb choice in nominating Bryan Bedford to be FAA administrator. Mr. Bedford has decades of experience in aviation operations, and he leads with a commitment to safety above all else,” said A4A president and CEO Nicholas E. Calio. “He intimately understands the importance of a strong working relationship between the FAA and air space operators of all sizes. His leadership at Republic Airways has transformed the company into the flourishing operation it is today, supporting several of A4A’s member carriers.” The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), a labor union representing pilots at 42 U.S. and Canadian airlines, was less rosy. “We have concerns about the nominee’s past efforts to lower pilot training and safety standards and we look forward to hearing his assurances that he will maintain the current requirements,” said Captain Jason Ambrosi, ALPA President, in a statement. The FAA oversees safe operations of civil aviation in the United States, overseeing airlines, airports, aircraft manufacturers, air traffic control, aviation safety, and security and hazardous materials safety. The agency employs around 35,000 workers. https://www.fodors.com/news/news/faa-nominee-bryan-bedford-sparks-controversy-over-pilot-experience-requirements FAA Introduces New Runway Incursion Device The FAA is rolling out the Runway Incursion Device (RID) at 74 air traffic control towers to enhance runway safety. The Federal Aviation Administration is deploying runway safety technology upgrades at 74 air traffic control towers in the U.S., the agency announced Wednesday. The Runway Incursion Device (RID) is designed to assist air traffic controllers by providing real-time alerts when a runway is occupied or closed. With the ability to monitor up to eight runways simultaneously, the RID will replace various outdated systems currently in use at control towers, streamlining safety operations across the country. The RID is part of the FAA's fast-tracked surface safety portfolio, which also includes the Surface Awareness Initiative (SAI) and the Approach Runway Verification (ARV) system. All are designed to improve overall safety on the ground. “The Runway Incursion Device is another vital tool to keep the flying public safe,” said Acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau. “These initiatives will continue to address the needs of our controllers by cutting through the red tape and bringing the most up-to-date technologies to their fingertips.” The RID is already operational at four airports: Centennial Airport in Colorado, Austin-Bergstrom International Airport in Texas, Charles B. Wheeler Downtown Airport in Missouri and Portland International Airport in Oregon. By the end of 2026, the FAA plans to expand the technology to 69 additional airports, further strengthening runway safety nationwide. https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/faa-introduces-new-runway-incursion-device/ U.S. drone operators continue to wait for FAA guidance on flying beyond line of sight The long-awaited draft regulation was due in September The U.S. drone industry is growing anxious that a draft FAA regulation that would permit them to routinely fly their aircraft beyond line of sight has yet to be released, even though congressional language mandated FAA do so by September. Since at least 2022, companies and organizations including the nonprofit Commercial Drone Alliance have called for FAA to release this proposed set of rules, which would be known as Part 108 of the federal code that deals with aeronautics and space. That same year, an FAA advisory committee released a report recommending the creation of such a regulation. I reached out to FAA’s press office for an update on the draft regulation and received this reply on March 14: “We don’t have anything new to share on this.” Once the draft is published in the Federal Register as a formal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, federal law requires a comment period of at least 60 days for the industry and public to weigh in. Per the advisory committee’s recommendation, Part 108 would apply to small drones operating below 400 feet that impart “no more than 800,000 ft-lbs. of kinetic energy, which is analogous to a lower performance light sport aircraft based on weight and max level flight speed,” the report reads. Examples of such aircraft include the CubCrafters Carbon Cub SS made in the U.S. and the Tecnam P92 Echo made in Italy. The intent is to help standardize beyond visual line of sight, or BVLOS, operations, which FAA today authorizes on a case-by-case basis via waivers. Under Part 108, FAA would shift away from approving individual flights, instead authorizing operators and specific drones by issuing a type certificate or a special airworthiness certificate for any design that meets the requirements. This would permit more complex and far-reaching drone flights — for example, a single remote operator overseeing the simultaneous delivery of consumer goods or medications by multiple drones. The advisory committee recommended Part 108 also require detect-and-avoid cameras or similar sensors, along with certification and training requirements for pilots and modifications to right-of-way rules. In October, shortly after the original deadline for the release of the draft regulation, the Commercial Drone Alliance issued a statement warning that additional delays “risk stalling an industry that is poised to bring immense safety, economic and societal benefits to the United States.” In February, Lisa Ellman, the alliance director, testified before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Aviation that deadlines for Part 108 and other regulations “have been ignored at the expense of the drone industry and the American public.” Ellman and the alliance say that Part 108 could address privacy concerns expressed by the general public by requiring and enabling better tracking of drones and the routes they plan to take. “We expect the BVLOS rule will improve electronic conspicuity for everyone in the airspace, and provide a framework for third parties to provide services that help the government more effectively link drones in flight to responsible parties on the ground,” she told the committee in her submitted testimony. Ongoing delays “could harm the domestic drone industry and U.S. global leadership in advanced aviation,” Ellman told me by email in December. It’s important that Part 108 clarify what is needed to safely operate fleets of drones over populated areas, where the bulk of deliveries would occur, says Andreas Raptopoulos, founder and CEO of Matternet. The California drone manufacturer has an FAA type certificate for its M2 drone, mostly for delivery and inspection work, and customer flights are authorized under a Part 135 certificate for operations. However, depending on the location, Matternet often must still obtain a waiver to fly BVLOS, Raptopoulos told me, because routine operations are not yet permitted except for a few experimental corridors FAA has authorized. “We need a BVLOS rule that’s very clear and applies nationally, because that’s really when you can give the predictability to our commercial partners and investors,” he said. “The drone delivery industry is like a compressed spring right now because there’s investment capital waiting in the wings. Once we get the clarity, this space is going to boom.” Standardizing BVLOS flights could benefit more than commercial operations. For instance, Dan Macchiarella, a professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University’s Daytona Beach campus, wants to use drones to conduct environmental surveys. Part 108 would allow him to fly drones with greater ease and more regularly over populated areas. Macchiarella runs the COASTech survey, which flies senseFly eBee X drones equipped with visible light cameras and spectrometers to monitor sea turtle populations and toxic algae along Central Florida’s Atlantic coast. Currently, he must apply for waivers to fly the drones over coastal waters and lagoons. “Our waivers require visual observers to spot aircraft that may be flying low, such as military craft or Coast Guard, which might not otherwise show up on our monitors,” Macchiarella told me. “These [BVLOS] regulations have been a long time coming. They would broaden my options and eliminate some paperwork,” he said. Some experts I spoke to said that although Part 108 will not apply to larger aircraft like the coming passenger air taxis, the regulation could set a precedent for future ones that would govern the ability to fly passenger aircraft autonomously beyond the sight of a remote operator or monitor. Others, like Jon Lovegren, head of autonomy at California-based Wisk, believe they’ll be fine without Part 108. Lovegren said Wisk is confident that it can obtain its certificate for airline passenger operations under FAA’s existing Part 135, even though plans call for having no pilot on board its electric aircraft. “We will meet much more rigorous design and development requirements, much like commercial aircraft today,” he told me. “So our path, I think, is less reliant upon a Part 108 rule set. But, even though Part 108 is not a direct part of our strategy, I personally would like to see it progress.” https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/u-s-drone-operators-continue-to-wait-for-faa-guidance-on-flying-beyond-line-of-sight/ Boeing 777 Wing Crack Issue, FAA Mandates Inspection This regulatory action follows the discovery of a 5-inch crack on the right wing's upper skin at a specific wing station. WASHINGTON– The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a new Airworthiness Directive (AD), effective from April 23, 2025. This applies to all Boeing 777-200, -200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F aircraft models. This regulatory action follows the discovery of a 5-inch crack on the right wing’s upper skin at a specific wing station. Under the directive, operators must conduct recurring inspections. These inspections are to check for cracks in the upper wing skin around certain fasteners. Then, perform required remedial actions when issues are found. The FAA has implemented this AD to mitigate safety risks associated with this condition across the affected fleet. Boeing 777 Wing Crack The FAA is implementing an AD, effective from April 23, 2025, for all Boeing 777-200, -200LR, -300, –300ER, and 777F aircraft. The regulatory process began with a November 2023 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The initial action was prompted by the discovery of a 5-inch crack on the right wing’s upper skin at wing station 460. The directive evolved with a September 2024 supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM). This was based on Boeing’s reports of two additional cracking incidents at fastener locations 6 and 7, where cracks spread in the spanwise direction. These cracks were only discovered during repairs of adjacent fasteners. Significantly, the FAA changed the required inspection method from the originally proposed ultrasonic (UT) inspections to open-hole high-frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections. HFEC proved more effective at detecting these particular cracks. The directive mandates recurring inspections of the upper wing skin around certain fasteners and appropriate remedial actions to address this safety concern. Discussion of Final AD The FAA received comments from five commenters: Boeing, All Nippon Airways (NH), Air France (AF), FedEx (FX), American Airlines (AA), and United Airlines (UA). Request for Time Extension American Airlines (AA) requested a compliance time extension for previously inspected aeroplanes. This can allow them to fly up to 4,700 flight cycles or 10,300 flight hours from the time of the inspection. United (UA) requested an additional grace period to conduct the fastener 6 and 7 open-hole HFEC inspection on aeroplanes. UT inspection was already conducted before the issuance of the final rule. The FAA disagreed with the request. It stated that a grace period extension or allowing credit for accomplishing the UT inspection may not adequately maintain an acceptable level of safety due to factors such as aeroplane age, utilization, and inspection history. Operators may request a compliance time extension through alternative methods of compliance (AMOC) if necessary. Air France (AF) has requested clarification from the FAA on the fastener inspection compliance time. This is for aeroplanes that have already completed inspection instructions by Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-57A0125 RB, dated July 25, 2023. The FAA agreed to clarify the inspection compliance time. It also includes a grace period of 12 months or 4,300 flight hours after the effective date of the proposed AD. For aeroplanes inspected without the open-hole HFEC inspection, the FAA may consider compliance time extensions through AMOCs. However, sufficient supporting data should be submitted to show an acceptable level of safety. This comes after Air France had already inspected some Group 4 aeroplanes without finding any issues after the UT inspection. Request to allow Open Hole HFEC Inspections All Nippon Airways (NH) has requested the FAA to accept the procedure of performing open-hole HFEC inspections instead of UT inspections for affected fasteners. Boeing Information Notice instructs operators to perform this. The FAA disagrees, as it has already identified the open-hole HFEC procedure and additional approval would not be required. Request To Limit Inspection FedEx (FX) has requested to revise paragraphs of the proposed AD to only cover Model 777F (Group 6) aeroplanes with over 40,000 total flight hours or 6,500 total flight cycles. The company argues that the inspection intervals in the Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-57A0125 RB and the added requirements are not in the public interest. FedEx also notes that no cracks were found on aeroplanes with less than 48,000 total flight hours and for those with over 40,000 hours. There are low rates of crack findings. The FAA acknowledges that removal of interference fit fasteners may require oversizing the fastener hole. However, no delays in inspections are allowed. The FAA will consider alternate inspection intervals for compliance time extensions. Substantial data must be submitted to show an acceptable level of safety is maintained with alternate inspection intervals. Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-57A0125 RB, issued July 25, 2023, was examined by the FAA. This document outlines methods for routine checks for upper wing skin cracking, which is typical of several fasteners, as well as relevant on-condition measures. On-condition actions include repair. Bottom Line The FAA concluded that adopting this AD as suggested is necessary for air safety. FAA is issuing this AD to remedy the dangerous outcomes of these products. This AD is accepted as suggested in the SNPRM, except for a few minor editorial adjustments. No operator’s financial burden will be increased by any of the modifications. https://aviationa2z.com/index.php/2025/03/21/boeing-777-wing-crack-inspection-ad/#google_vignette FedEx places new order for 10 ATR 72-600F regional aircraft The worldwide express delivery firm FedEx has placed an order for 10 ATR 72-600F regional aircraft adding to a previous agreement signed between the two companies in 2017. ATR confirmed on March 21, 2025, that the 10 ordered aircraft were part of its 2024 undisclosed orders that it released last month and expects delivery of the ATR 72-600Fs to begin in 2027 through to 2029. “FedEx’s decision to order additional ATR 72-600F underscores their trust in our aircraft’s performance and versatility. Our freighter variant is an essential component of the ATR family, offering significant advantages over traditional passenger-to-freighter conversions, including enhanced reliability and availability, and longer-term planning,” said Alexis Vidal, Senior Vice-President Commercial of ATR. In November 2017, ATR and FedEx signed a major contract for the US-firm to purchase 30 ATR 72-600s plus 20 options. At the time, the new twin-engine turboprops were the first ATR 72-600s that would operate in a cargo configuration. ATR said that with a “large cargo door, cargo loading system and wide cross section, the ATR 72-600F can accommodate industry-standard Unit Load Devices (ULDs) and interline with larger freighters”. “This purpose-built design, with its 9.2t payload, makes the ATR 72-600F a key asset in FedEx’s fleet, replacing its legacy ATRs, and helping optimise its network capabilities worldwide. Its high versatility allows for seamless operations across multiple countries, logistical frameworks and environments, from the warm climates of Miami, Florida, to the cold temperatures of Anchorage, Alaska,” an ATR spokesperson said. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/fedex-order-atr-turboprop Air India and IndiGo Will Require 16,800 Pilots in 10 Years Current pilot staffing shows IndiGo employing 5,463 pilots, Tata Air India with 3,280, Air India Express with 2,169, Akasa Air with 787, and SpiceJet operating with 369 pilots. DELHI- IndiGo Airlines (6E) will require more than 11,000 pilots over the next decade, while Air India (AI) will need approximately 5,870 pilots during the same period, Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol announced Thursday in a parliamentary response to lawmakers Kuldeep Indora and Gaurav Gogoi. According to Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) data, SpiceJet (SG) will need 1,630 pilots, and Air India Express (IX) will require 2,196 pilots by fiscal year 2028, while Akasa Air (QP) reports no immediate pilot demands. IndiGo Airlines (6E) will require more than 11,000 pilots over the next decade, while Air India (AI) will need approximately 5,870 pilots during the same period. Air India and IndiGo Pilots Need Current pilot staffing shows IndiGo employing 5,463 pilots, Tata Air India with 3,280, Air India Express with 2,169, Akasa Air with 787, and SpiceJet operating with 369 pilots. Despite growing demand, Mohol affirmed there is no current shortage of trained pilots across Indian airlines. The government has received representation from the Airlines Pilots’ Association of India (ALPA) regarding the regulation of training costs charged to aspiring trainee pilots, with particular concern about high-type rating expenses imposed by airlines. Addressing pilot training program costs, Mohol explained these specialized programs require significant investment due to expensive aviation fuel (AvGas 100LL), costly aircraft spare parts, imported flight simulators, and the types and number of aircraft used for training. Most training aircraft in India are manufactured abroad, contributing to higher expenses. Indian aviation has experienced substantial growth over the past two to three years following industry consolidation. Rising passenger numbers have prompted fleet expansion across Indian carriers, intensifying demand for qualified crew members, reported HT. In 2024, Indian airlines added 134 aircraft to their fleets, surpassing the previous year’s addition of 119 planes. Full-service carrier Air India inducted 24 aircraft, including five A350s, while its low-cost subsidiary Air India Express introduced 18 new aircraft. Air India Pilots Salary Air India’s compensation structure demonstrates substantial salary differences between various pilot ranks, reflecting experience levels, aircraft types, and responsibilities. Trainee pilots, representing the entry-level position typically filled by recent cadet program graduates or independently certified flying school alumni, earn approximately INR 50,000 monthly, totaling INR 6,00,000 (US$7,000) annually. While receiving no flying hour allowances, they qualify for minimal layover payments. First Officers serve as the captain’s primary support, handling communications and decision-making when required. Their annual compensation ranges between INR 36,00,000 and INR 72,00,000 (US$40,000-US$80,000), with monthly salaries from INR 2,35,000 to INR 3,45,000. Experience and aircraft type determine their base salary. Flying hour fees vary from INR 1,500 to INR 4,000 (US$15-US$45) based on seniority. They receive INR 1,700 (US$20) for domestic layovers, while international allowances fluctuate by destination. Captains manage critical flight phases and make essential navigation and emergency procedure decisions. Their yearly earnings range from INR 60,00,000 to INR 90,00,000 (US$70,000-US$105,000), influenced by aircraft type and experience. Narrow-body aircraft captains receive a monthly INR 25,000 (US$300) allowance, while wide-body captains earn INR 75,000 (US$900). Flying hour compensation spans from INR 4,500 to INR 10,000 (US$50-US$120), with domestic layover payments of INR 2,200 (US$25). The airline’s pilot hierarchy includes multiple advancement levels. Captain/SFO (First Officer with ATPL) earns INR 4.75 lakh monthly, Commander (internally promoted Captain with P1 rating) receives INR 7.50 lakh monthly, and Senior Commander (Commander with over 4 years P1 experience) earns INR 8.50 lakh monthly. Senior Commanders represent Air India’s most experienced pilots, responsible for both flight operations and training junior colleagues. Their annual base salaries range from INR 1,00,00,000 to INR 1,25,00,000 (US$115,000-US$145,000). While receiving the same fleet allowances and layover fees as captains, their flying hour compensation ranges from INR 9,000 to INR 12,000 (US$105-US$140), significantly exceeding captain-level counterparts. IndiGo Pilots Salary First officers at IndiGo earn monthly salaries ranging from ₹1.5 lakhs to ₹2.5 lakhs, translating to annual compensation between ₹18 lakh and ₹30 lakh (US$21,000 to US$35,000). Individual experience levels and negotiation outcomes determine the exact compensation within this range. Captains at IndiGo shoulder greater responsibilities, including aircraft operation, passenger and crew safety, and critical navigation decisions. These pilots typically possess substantially more experience than their first officer colleagues. Senior captains represent the airline’s highest pilot rank, requiring over a decade of flying experience. Their expanded duties may include fleet management and training first officers for commander positions. The captain position commands significantly higher compensation, with monthly salaries between ₹5 lakhs and ₹10 lakhs. This translates to annual earnings ranging from ₹60 lakhs to ₹1.20 crores (US$70,000 to US$140,000), with exact figures determined by experience and seniority. https://aviationa2z.com/index.php/2025/03/20/air-india-indigo-will-require-16800-pilots-in-10-years/ CALENDAR OF EVENTS · 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 . 70th annual Business Aviation Safey Summit (BASS), May 6-7, 2025, Charlotte, N.C., organized by Flight Safety Foundation in partnership with NBAA and NATA. · Sixth Edition of International Accident Investigation Forum, 21 to 23 May 2025, Singapore · Flight Safety Foundation - Aviation Safety Forum June 5-6, 2025 - Brussels . 2025 EASA-FAA International Aviation Safety Conference, 10 Jun 2025 to 12 Jun 2025, Cologne, Germany · The 9th Shanghai International Aerospace Technology and Equipment Exposition 2025; June 11 to 13, 2025 . 3rd annual Asia Pacific Summit for Aviation Safety (AP-SAS), July 15-17, 2025, Singapore, organized by Flight Safety Foundation and CAAS. . Asia Pacific Aviation Safety Seminar 2025; 10-11 September 2025; Manila, Philippines · ISASI ANNUAL SEMINAR 2025'September 29, 2025 – October 3, 2025, DENVER, COLORADO . 29th annual Bombardier Safety Standdown, November 11-13, 2025; Wichita, Kansas · CHC Safety & Quality Summit, 11th – 13th November 2025, Vancouver, BC Canada Curt Lewis