UK Wants References To ’Polished Frost’ Removed
The UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is recommending that the FAA change its regulations to make it illegal for aircraft to take off with so-called “polished frost.” The AAIB also said all aviation authorities that follow the FAA’s practice should delete all references to polished frost within their regulations and expunge the term from approved operations manuals. Under FAR 91.527(a)(3), pilots can take off in an airplane with frost on the wings or other control surfaces if the frost has been “polished to make it smooth.” The AAIB’s recommendations follow its investigation into the fatal crash of a Challenger 604 at Birmingham International Airport on Jan. 4, 2002. Investigators concluded the pilots elected not to have the airplane de-iced and that frost on the wings caused the jet to go out of control and crash on takeoff. “It is considered that the concept of ’polished frost’ is particularly inappropriate and potentially dangerous to modern aircraft types and detracts from the importance of strictly observing the clean-wing principle,” the final report said. The AAIB issued the report and recommendations in August, but it wasn’t until the November 28 fatal crash of a Challenger 601 in Montrose, Colo., that the FAA acknowledged that it was reviewing the AAIB’s recommendations. According to the NTSB, the pilots of the Challenger 601 declined to have the aircraft de-iced; however, investigators have not yet determined if de-icing was a factor.

Gulfstream Crew: Reversers, Spoilers Would Not Deploy
The pilots of the UK-registered Gulfstream IV that slid off Runway 24 after landing at Teterboro Airport last Wednesday told the NTSB that the aircraft touched down within the first one-third of the runway and they could not get the thrust reversers or spoilers to deploy. About halfway down the runway the captain applied the emergency brake and the first officer deployed the speed brake. From about 3,000 feet to about 5,000 feet the aircraft skidded down the runway before it went off the right side and came to rest on its belly in the trees. The accident severed the left main and nose landing gear assemblies. The right gear remained attached but collapsed. In addition, the outboard one-third of the left wing was severed and the nose of the airplane was crushed inward about five to seven feet. There were no injuries to the two pilots (who hold ATP ratings from the U.S. and UK), the flight attendant or the six passengers. All nine occupants deplaned out the aft left emergency exit window. The Safety Board found both aft right emergency windows detached, but is investigating why they couldn’t be removed. The aircraft (G-GMAC), registered to GAMA Aviation of Farnborough, England, was on a charter flight from London Luton Airport. The pilots told the NTSB that the approach was less turbulent than expected, considering the strong gusty crosswinds prevailing at the time. They were holding a Vref of 128 plus 17 knots (a total of 145 knots), according to the NTSB.

Chicago Makes Case for Using AIP Funds To Bulldoze Meigs
Last Friday the city of Chicago filed a 43-page legal brief with the FAA claiming the city was justified in using $2.8 million in Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funding to tear up Meigs Field in March 2003. The brief came in response to an October FAA investigation into whether or not funds intended for O’Hare and Midway were illegally used to destroy Meigs. The city claims there is precedent for using such funds to dismantle “abandoned” airports, citing the cases of Denver Stapleton and Austin (Texas) Robert Mueller Airports. Both sites were shut down concurrently with the opening of new airports meant to take their places—Denver International Airport and Austin-Bergstrom International Airport, respectively. Critics of the city’s actions dispute the connection. AOPA president Phil Boyer said the funds were meant for airport construction, not destruction. An NBAA spokesman said the application of AIP funding in this case was a “gross misuse” of the money, since—unlike the two cases cited as precedent—the action served to “reduce capacity rather than increase it.” The FAA must decide if the use of the funds was appropriate. According to AOPA, the city could face fines of up to three times the $2.8 million diverted, or $8.4 million.

Embraer 195

Embraer 195 Flew for the First Time Today
The largest member of Embraer’s 170/190 family of single-aisle commercial jet—the 108-seat Embraer 195—took to the air for the first time today from São José dos Campos, Brazil. The first prototype, a two-row stretch of the 100-seat Embraer 190 (also undergoing flight testing), flew for about two hours this afternoon. Basic system and functional tests were carried out and, according to a spokesman, “were very successful.” Flight testing will continue toward the aim of reaching type certification in the second quarter of 2006. The flight today comes just three weeks before the expected certification of the Embraer 175, scheduled to win approval from Brazilian authorities by the end of the year. After significant order cancellations, Embraer now holds firm orders for just fifteen 195s from struggling Swiss flag carrier Swiss International Airlines.

Raytheon Aircraft Offers One-Year Maintenance Plan
Customers buying new Beechcraft and Hawkers can now subscribe to Raytheon Aircraft’s Support Plus maintenance program for a one-year trial period. At the end of this period, owners will have the option of continuing the agreement for the full five-year term or ending the agreement with no further commitment. In addition, Support Plus now provides owners of aircraft up to 10 years old to sign up for selectable options covering all maintenance issues. The program, which was introduced in 2002, previously covered aircraft up to five years old. For a monthly service fee, Raytheon Aircraft becomes responsible for the cost of parts and labor for scheduled and unscheduled inspections, maintenance and component removals, as well as Service Bulletin coverage. “Support Plus is based on a price scale of one- to two-year-old aircraft, three to five, five to10 and 10 to 15,” said a spokesman. “You can’t enroll if your aircraft is 11 or more years old. However, if it’s, say, nine years old, you can enroll at the five-to-10 scale and stay in the program through 14 years old.” Each non-new aircraft is inspected before enrollment, and customers are responsible for fixing any squawks. Also, time-sensitive items—those that have to be replaced at certain intervals, such as tires, brakes and so on—are inspected and given a rating as to when they will need to be replaced, which is factored into the enrollment cost.

AIN Alerts is a publication of The Convention News Co., Inc., 214 Franklin Avenue, Midland Park, NJ, 07432. Copyright 2004. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission from The Convention News Co., Inc., is strictly prohibited. The Convention News Co., Inc., also publishes Aviation International News, Business Jet Traveler, NBAA Convention News, HAI Convention News, EBACE Convention News, Paris 2005, Dubai 2005, Asian Aerospace 2006 and Farnborough 2006.