Europe Outlines Action Plan For UAV Policymaking

by  IAN SHEPPARD

European regulators have expressed concern about a potential disruption to airline traffic posed by small UAVs such as this Elevated Horizons Agri6 "multicopter."

September 12, 2014, 9:34 AM

European regulators are increasingly concerned about the safety risks associated with integrating unmanned aerial systems (UAS) into civil airspace, and they are especially worried about the risks posed by smaller unmanned aircraft operating alongside airliners. This was the key message from the UAS 2014 conference held in London last week.

“It’s similar to the mobile phone or the Internet coming in [to aircraft cabins],” said Matthew Baldwin, who is director of aviation and international transport affairs with the European Commission (EC). “The question for me is how you promote these activities but with a regulatory framework that addresses the safety and privacy concerns.”

“At present,” Baldwin said, “we have a patchwork of national regulations, with eight [EU] member states having taken the first steps to allow commercial [UAS] activities. It is a global business and we risk missing out if we don’t promote it in Europe, but it is a very fragmented framework at the moment. A global market needs global rules, so we will take part in ICAO activities and Jarus, which the U.S. and Israel are involved in as well.” Jarus, based in the Netherlands, stands for Joint Authorities on Rulemaking for Unmanned Systems.

Giving an example of the fragmented, inconsistent regulatory framework, Baldwin said that the current European cut-off point where a vehicle is deemed to be a UAS (not a light UAS) is 150 kg (330 pounds), and the boundary below which they are deemed “small UAS” is 20 kg (44 pounds) in the UK but only 2 kg (4.4 pounds) in France, and various numbers in between in other member states. In Baldwin’s view, these weight thresholds are “absurd and arbitrary.”

In the safety arena Baldwin said, “We believe that EASA [the European Aviation Safety Agency] is best placed to develop rules, and we envisage an EC proposal early next year to cover safety, liability and insurance, security privacy and so on.” He added that “Sesar JU [the Single European Sky’s joint undertaking organization] has the experience of how to integrate RPAS [remotely piloted aerial systems] in to the ATMMaster Plan…they will develop a working program and work packages to develop and validate new policies.”

The EC issued a policy document this year (available on its website) that laid down the foundation for the envisioned EC Regulation that is expected to be in place by early next year.

Russian Sanctions Avoid Direct Hit on Civil Aerospace

AINONLINE

by  CHARLES ALCOCK

The Superjet 100 airliner built by Russia's Sukhoi is not subject to new European Union sanctions against parent company United Aircraft Corp., but restrictions on access to capital markets have squeezed the wider Russian aerospace sector. (Photo: Superjet International)

September 19, 2014 - 11:58am

The latest round of economic sanctions imposed against Russia by the U.S. and European Union (EU) did not directly target the civil aerospace and air transport sectors, but they might yet inflict collateral damage on those industries. TheU.S. sanctions, announced on September 12, included the Rostec defense group, which harbors ambitions in the civil sector, such as its planned joint venture with Canada’s Bombardier to build Q400 regional airliners in Russia.

On the same day, the latest wave of EU sanctions specifically named United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), the state-backed conglomerate that encompasses most of Russia’s military and civil aviation ventures. However, in both cases, the small print in the complex sanctions documentation indicates that the bans on exporting technology to those ventures do not relate to non-defense-related programs, such as the SSJ-100 airliner marketed by the Superjet International joint venture between UAC subsidiary Sukhoi and Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi group.

“We don’t see any effects on the civil aviation sector,” said a Superjet spokesperson. “As a consequence, this will not affect Superjet International’s activities. For the time being, we have not suffered any particular restrictions.”

A Bombardier spokeswoman pointed out that Rostec does not appear on the list of Russian companies covered by existing Canadian government sanctions. However, she acknowledged that the company recognizes the implications of the increasingly strained political atmosphere between Russia and Western countries over the military crisis in Ukraine, even as it continues discussions aimed at agreeing plans for a Q400 assembly line in Russia. “We are meeting with [Rostec] on an ongoing basis, and we remain optimistic that we’ll be able to conclude [negotiations] in 2014,” she told AIN. “However, considering all of the developments of late, we’re now being realistic in that the timeline could shift.” So despite the immediate absence of Canadian sanctions targeting Rostec, Bombardier must contend with what the spokeswoman referred to as “other barriers in the way” and “ongoing sensitivities we need to be mindful of.”

What seems clearer is that sanctions are significantly affecting the ability of leading Russian banks to raise new capital in U.S. and EU markets, raising great concern within Russian industry, including aerospace. UAC president Mikhail Pogosyan told Russian news agencies this week that the squeeze on credit is constraining the group. “It is not easy,” he commented. “On one side, there are not any catastrophic consequences that may stop everything tomorrow. On the other, the cost of borrowed money is rising and lending mechanisms have become notably more complicated.” UAC often acts as the guarantor of loans to fund developments by subsidiaries such as Sukhoi and Irkut.

At the same time, Russia’s rouble has collapsed in value on currency markets, last week dropping to a low point against the dollar not seen since the country’s banking crisis in 1998. If the situation continues, it will weaken the buying power of Russia’s aerospace industry for importing Western equipment. Meanwhile, the domestic economy is clearly suffering, potentially manifesting itself with weakened demand for air transport.

It remains unclear whether or not U.S. and EU authorities purposely avoided the direct targeting of civil aerospace with their sanctions, mindful of their potentially negative effects on leading airframe makers Boeing and Airbus and their many suppliers. By contrast, the sanctions directly targeted the oil and gas industries. So far, Russia has not followed through on its threat to ban European airlines from using its airspace for flights to and from the Asia-Pacific region in retaliation. 

F135 Engine Failure Investigation Makes Progress

AIN DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE » SEPTEMBER 19, 2014

by  CHRIS POCOCK

A Pratt & Whitney F135, the engine that powers the F-35 stealth fighter. (Photo: P&W) The inset shows the location of the plate seal, between the second and third fan stages, that rubbed excessively to cause an engine failure.

September 19, 2014, 8:20 AM

Root-cause analysis of the F135 engine failurethat grounded the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter fleet in July will be completed by the end of the month. Meanwhile, the problem is already sufficiently understood for Pratt &Whitney to have devised an interim fix. F-35s are flying again, but with borescope inspections mandated every three flying hours. The flight envelope restrictions that were previously imposed now vary, with four key development aircraft cleared for greater maneuverability.

“Pratt & Whitney has put its ‘A-team’ on this problem and has taken accountability,” Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer, told the Air Force Association conference this week. The company has agreed to pay for modifications to the fan section of the 150 engines already delivered, he added.

Bennett Croswell, P&W president for military engines, said that “there’s more movement of the engine” within the F-35 airframe “than we thought when we designed it.” Both Bogdan and Croswell emphasized that some movement is normal. The problem had not been identified earlier in the development program, because at the time the aircraft had not been cleared for “more aggressive maneuvers,” Croswell said. The problem could not possibly have been detected during engine ground testing, he added.

The problem is excessive rubbing of a polyamid plate seal between the second and third stages of the F135’s fan. The rub strip is flat when a new engine is built, Croswell explained, but during acceptance tests it is designed to be abraded into a groove, or trench. This method ensures that air does not leak forward, a migration that wouldreduce engine efficiency. But in the engine incident that happened while an F-35 was taxiing at Eglin AFB on June 23, the plate seal heated to 1,900 degrees C, causing microcracks to form and propagate in the arm, which eventually failed and penetrated a fuel tank, causing a fire. During inspections, three more engines (out of 165 delivered) were found to have “hard rubbing” that could potentially lead to a similar failure.

“We are validating the root cause on a ‘rub rig’ at our West Palm Beach facility,” Croswell continued. “We’ll test different densities of polyamid, and the orientations that occur in its formation.” P&W and subcontracting supplier Cobham are “pre-trenching” some stators before engine assembly, to determine whether efficiency is significantly affected. Another approach could be to specify a uniform set of flight maneuvers to “burn in” the trench, Croswell said.

Airliner Makers Collect $7.45 Billion in New Orders

Lufthansa plans to assign 10 A320s on order to its Eurowings low-fare subsidiary. (Photo: Airbus)

September 17, 2014, 6:01 PM

A series of new order announcements involving no fewer than three major civil airframe makers signaled the end of a late-summer sales lull on Wednesday, as airlines went on a new buying spree reminiscent of July’s Farnborough airshow. The value of the day’s orders totaled some $7.45 billion at list prices and involved 86 airplanes ranging in size from the Embraer E175 regional jet to the Boeing 787-9 widebody. 

A pair of contracts between Airbus and Lufthansa covering a total of 25 A320-family jets led the day’s order windfall in terms of dollar value. Worth $3.25 billion, those contracts call for delivery of 15 A320neos to Lufthansa Group member Swiss and another 10 current-generation A320s to low-fare subsidiary Eurowings. Lufthansa plans to send another 13 A320s from its current backlog to Eurowings starting next year, as it seeks to expand its budget offering in Europe in much the same manner Air France plans to challenge discount incumbents on the continent with its Transavia subsidiary.

For its part, Boeing finalized an order for six 787-9 Dreamliners and five 737 Max 9s with Irish leasing company Avalon. Worth $2.1 billion at list prices, the deal closes on a commitment announced at the Farnborough show and introduces the first 787s into Avalon’s portfolio. It also raises the number of 737 Max narrowbodies on its books to 20.

As a result of yet another $2.1 billion deal, Brazil’s Embraer padded its backlog of E-Jets by 30 airplanes after Republic Airways of the U.S. offset a 20-airplane order cancellation by the UK’s Flybe with a firm order for 50 E175s. Republic, which has agreed to fly the airplanes in United Airlines colors, expects deliveries of its latest batch of E-Jets to start during next year’s third quarter and extend into 2017. Having already taken delivery of 34 of a firm order for 47 E-175s it placed in January last year, Republic also retains options on another 32 of the 76-seat jets.

Under the terms of an amended capacity purchase agreement with United, Republic will begin to remove its 31 Bombardier Q400 turboprops in January; it then plans to sublease 24 to Flybe. The UK airline's fleet restructuring plan calls for a recommitment to the Canadian turboprops and de-emphasis on the Brazilian jets, delivery of 24 of which it had deferred before ultimately canceling 20. Now flying 45 Q400s and 11 E175s, it plans to take the 24 additional turboprops over a two-year period starting in March next year and the four remaining E-Jets in 2018.  

High-altitude Airport OK Will Put Falcon 7X in Rare Air

assault recently wrapped up flight-testing that would see its Falcon 7X become the first certified business jet to operate at the world’s highest commercial airport–14,470-foot-high Daocheng Yading Airport in China’s Sichuan province. The certification effort is intended to meet demand in Western China for business jets capable of operating at small high-altitude airports in the region.

Testing at Daocheng began on August 25 and concluded on September 7, with support from both the EASA and China’s CAAC. Daocheng flight-tests started after preliminary flights at Jiuzhai Huang Long Airport (elevation 11,311 feet) near Chengdu with a CAAC pilot at the controls. After an initial landing at Daocheng, the 7X performed engines/APU run-up followed by a series of takeoffs and landings, including some with simulated engine failure.

Once finalized by the CAAC, the approval will permit the Falcon 7X to operate at altitudes up to 15,000 feet. In addition to setting an airport altitude world record for a business jet, the test campaign established several benchmarks for aviation in China: it was the first flight-test campaign undertaken over Chinese territory by a foreign-registered aircraft and it will be the first approval to be issued jointly by the EASA andCAAC.

Pure splendor and brilliancy in this capture of Terminal 1A

Pure splendor and brilliancy in this capture of Terminal 1A by Mwaura Kirubi.

Flights currently operating from Terminal 1A ‪#‎JKIA‬ are:
KQ 202/204 to Mumbai, KQ 304/310 to Dubai, KQ498 to Zanzibar, KQ886 to Bangkok/Canton, KQ860 to Bangkok/Hong Kong and KQ420 to Kilimanjaro.
All KQ flights to Johannesburg, Entebbe, Dar es salaam, Delhi, Luanda, Amsterdam, London, Paris, Seychelles, Kigali, Bujumbura, Juba, Khartoum, Djibouti and Addis.

Uhuru’s dilemma over ICC summons

President Uhuru Kenyatta (left) when he appeared before the International Criminal Court on April 8, 2011. PHOTO | FILE

ADVERTISEMENT

President Uhuru Kenyatta faces his biggest dilemma yet after the International Criminal Court (ICC) ordered him to appear at The Hague-based court in person for a status conference.

On Friday, while postponing indefinitely the October 7 trial date, the court directed that the President appears before it on October 8 in relation to charges linked to the 2007/2008 post-election violence.

“Given the critical juncture of the proceedings and the matters to be considered, the accused is required to be present at the status conference on October 8, 2014,” the order by Judges Kuniko Ozaki (presiding judge), Robert Fremr and Geoffrey Henderson said.

The order leaves President Kenyatta with two difficult options: he can choose to obey it and appear before the judges on October 8 as directed — an option the Sunday Nation understands his lawyers seem to favour as they believe the case is on its last legs — or ignore the summons.

If he chooses to appear, he will have to momentarily forget the trappings of power and face the humiliation of being in the dock as an accused person.

Attending the session would also mean the President would be disregarding the October 12, 2013 resolutions of the extraordinary session of the African Union (AU), which advised him or any serving head of state not to honour the summons to appear before the court.

The extraordinary AU summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, had declared: “To safeguard the constitutional order, stability and, integrity of member states, no charges shall be commenced or continued before any International Court or Tribunal against any serving AU head of state or government or anybody acting or entitled to act in such capacity during their term of office”.

The summit had also advised President Kenyatta not appear before the ICC until such a time that the United Nations Security Council and the ICC adequately address the concerns raised by its African member states.

Incidentally, the extraordinary summit had been held at the request of Kenya which was seeking the continent’s backing to disregard the ICC over claims that it was only targeting African leaders. The Jubilee administration has been lobbying for a tough diplomatic stance.

If the President chooses not to honour the summons, the ICC will lift his conditional excusal from attending court and issue an arrest warrant.

“At this time, the Rome Statute has not been reviewed to exempt heads of state. The fact that the AU has spoken through a resolution does not oust the Rome Statute,” Nairobi lawyer Anthony Oluoch told the Sunday Nation on Saturday.

HIERARCHY OF LAWS

He added that the “hierarchy of laws” meant that where there was a conflict between an AU resolution and the UN-sanctioned international law, the AU argument would be subordinate. Mr Oluoch added that President Kenyatta risked facing international censure if he defied the court without a valid reason.

“He will become a pariah head of state like President Omar al Bashir (of Sudan) whose international travels are limited for fear of arrest and being rendered to the ICC detention for jumping bail,” Mr Oluoch explained.

Lawyer Kibe Mungai who is representing Walter Baraza — a journalist fighting extradition to ICC to face charges of witness tampering — said the entire scheme is political.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The President’s case has collapsed but the ICC is looking for a fight. Ordinarily, I would be reluctant to advise him to go but given the prosecution has said it lacks evidence against him, he should go and confront the court and ask why they are holding him to something that is not there,” said Mr Mungai.

“This is pure international politics and he should seize the opportunity to show the world that he too can play international politics,” he added.

The Hague court had issued summons instead of arrest warrants for the Kenyan post-election violence suspects — President Kenyatta, his deputy William Ruto, and Mr Joshua Sang. Other Kenyans, whose charges were eventually dropped, are Mr Henry Kosgey, Mr Francis Muthaura, and former commissioner of police Hussein Ali.

The conditional excusal from being detained was on the basis that they adhered to certain conditions, including cooperating with the court and honouring summons. They were also threatened with arrest warrants if they were found to have interfered with witnesses and victims of the post-election violence.

Following the 2013 General Election, the court also excused President Kenyatta’s and Mr Ruto’s cases from running concurrently. This was to allow either of them to be in the country to carry out their state functions.

SHOULD HONOUR SUMMONS

According to Mr Oluoch, the President is sued in his personal capacity and should not drag the country to the case.

“I would advise him to honour the summons and appear before the court in person because the interests of the country far outweigh his absence for a day or two. It also outweighs the humiliation that some may see when the President of a country takes his place in the dock as an accused,” he said.
The other option President Kenyatta’s lawyers could be exploring is to apply that he attends through video link.

The option was introduced with the insistence of the AU at the 2013 Assembly of State Parties in The Hague. The ICC has been reluctant to allow it, particularly for the accused. The use of video link from an undisclosed location in Nairobi was recently used by witnesses 604 and 516 in the case against Mr Ruto and Mr Sang.

On Saturday, Gatundu South MP Moses Kuria said the ICC was turning into scripted drama. “It’s farcical that the prosecution says that it has no evidence but the court still wants the President to leave his state duties to go to The Hague,” he said.

Mr Kuria, however, said the final decision on whether or not to honour the summons is President Kenyatta’s. “The President is competent enough to make his own decision.”

NEO-COLONIALISM

Meanwhile, the summons could further strain the relations between the AU and the ICC. AU leaders have a number of times condemned the court for discrimination and taking advantage of Africa’s weak global position to frustrate the continent’s leaders.

The continent’s leaders have been toying with the idea of establishing an African court to handle international crimes within the continent and “break itself from the yoke of neo-colonialism” of the West.

In case he honours the summons, it will be the third occasion he has been in the ICC courtroom while facing crimes against humanity charges. In the earlier instances, he was summoned during the initial appearance hearing on April 8, 2011, and later for the confirmation of charges hearing from September 21 to October 5, 2011.