U.S. citations against airlines soar

Sometimes airfares are just too good to be true.

Southwest Airlines sent an online offer to about 10 million people in January 2013 for flights from Dallas to Branson, Mo., for a bargain price of $66. But fliers who tried to book the fares couldn’t find seats for the sale period — an error the airline blamed on a technical glitch.

Unfair and deceptive practices, such as promoting fares that don’t exist, are by far the most common violation of passenger rights by the nation’s airlines, according to three years of U.S. Department of Transportation citation records.

The Southwest violation was among more than 500 total citations — resulting in $20.9 million in fines — issued from 2010 to 2013 to all airlines and travel agencies at a time when passengers were howling mad over new airline fees, cramped seating and mergers that cut service to smaller cities.

A Los Angeles Times analysis of federal citations during that time period also found:

The most common citation for unfair and deceptive practices was a failure to disclose the full fare for a flight, including taxes.

The steepest penalties were imposed against airlines that mistreated disabled passengers.

Only about half the fines imposed by the Department of Transportation were collected, with the balance either suspended or directed to be used to improve airline services.

In response to an outcry from passengers, the Department of Transportation cracked down on violators and adopted new passenger rights rules that took effect starting in 2010.

In addition to requirements to advertise full fares, the new rules impose hefty fines on airlines that strand passengers on the tarmac for hours. Airlines must also refund checked-bag fees for lost luggage and give customers bumped from overbooked flights compensation of as much as $1,300, up from the previous maximum of $800.

These new rules focus primarily on the treatment of passengers — not on safety or mechanical issues, which are regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration.

With renewed attention on passengers, the number of citations issued by the Department of Transportation nearly doubled. From 2010 to 2013, the number of citations imposed on airlines averaged 54 a year, compared with the average of 28 for the previous four years, according to federal citation records.

Although passenger rights groups have welcomed the changes, some airline critics believe the new rules don’t go far enough and are calling for steeper fines to change the behavior of repeat violators.

“I don’t think these fines do anything to mitigate or stop the bad behavior,” said Albert Rizzi, a blind traveler who was kicked off a US Airways plane in November 2013 when a flight attendant complained that his service dog had wandered into the aisle. “There are no consequences involved.”

Of the 521 violations in 2010-13, the department cited airlines 181 times for violating rules of unfair and deceptive practices, such as Southwest’s nonexistent discount airfares to Branson, according to agency records.

In each violation, the airlines and travel agencies signed consent orders to settle the allegations of wrongdoing raised by the Department of Transportation to avoid civil litigation.

Ten months after Southwest was cited for promoting those fares, the department fined the airline $200,000 for running television ads touting another super-low fare from Atlanta that did not exist — another error, according to the airline.

A rule requiring airlines to advertise the full cost of a flight took effect in January 2012. Since then, violations of the rule have led the federal agency to fine the nation’s airlines and travel agencies 57 times.

For example, American Airlines advertised in February 2013 that children fly “free” as part of a ski resort package. But the fine print said only the airfare charges were free — travelers still had to pay taxes and fees.

American Airlines agreed to a $20,000 fine but disputed that it had broken any rules.

Congress is now considering a bill, supported by most airlines, that would eliminate the full-fare rule, allowing airlines and travel agencies to advertise the fares and fees separately.

The heftiest fines — nearly four times higher than the average penalty — were issued to airlines that neglected or mistreated disabled passengers, according to federal records.

Delta Air Lines has been assessed the largest fine — $2 million — for 22 violations from 2007 to 2011.

In one incident at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, a disabled 79-year-old woman said she was left unattended in a terminal for more than two hours because she declined to pay a Delta worker $10 to push her wheelchair.

Delta paid $750,000 of the total fine. The balance was credited to the airline for money it spent to improve services for disabled passengers, such as increasing employee training and investing in technology to ensure wheelchairs are provided to fliers who request them.

Eight years earlier, Delta was fined $1.35 million for similar violations but was required to pay only $100,000 of the fine, with the balance either forgiven or credited to the airline for making improvements to services for disabled passengers.

Critics say Delta’s repeated violations show that federal fines don’t fix bad behavior and inflict little pain on an industry that generated $12.7 billion in net profits in 2013.

“In the case of multiple violations, the fines should be greater and they shouldn’t be waived,” said Paul Hudson, president of FlyersRights.org, a nonprofit passenger rights group. “They should increase exponentially.”

From 2010 to 2013, only $11.5 million of the $20.9 million in fines was paid to the U.S. Treasury, according to records.

Rizzi, the disabled passenger who was forced off a US Airways flight, noted that his incident occurred only a week after the airline agreed to pay $1.2 million for allegedly discriminating against passengers with disabilities.

“My sense is that these fines are meaningless to the airlines,” he said.

American Airlines, the parent company of US Airways, said it takes seriously its responsibility “to provide safe, reliable and convenient travel for passengers with disabilities,” and has committed to spend $2 million a year to improve service to disabled passengers.

The Department of Transportation believes the fines are having an effect.

“We’ve made incredible progress through the use of fines and other methods,” said agency spokeswoman Casey Hernandez, adding that the penalties — and threat of penalties — have reduced violations.

With disgruntled passengers turning to social media and blogs to vent their frustrations, airline experts say the companies are eager to avoid the bad publicity.

“I think in the grand scheme of things, these fines are not a lot of money,” said Nelson Granados, an associate professor of information systems at Pepperdine University, who worked in the airline industry for eight years. “But the impact to reputation is what concerns airlines.”

Read More

FAA wants to speed up installation of new air-traffic control system at Newark

The FAA says it concurs with an unflattering federal report's recommendations for speeding implementation of a new satellite-based air traffic control system intended to improve safety and reduce delays.

The FAA has been gradually implementing elements of the new, so-called NextGen system to replace a radar-based system used since the end of World War II. NextGen incorporates global positioning technology similar to systems on smart phones and car dashboards, allowing air traffic controllers to track aircraft more precisely. The system's enhanced precision, say proponents, reduces the space and time between planes taking off or landing.

But a June 17 report by the U.S. Department of Transportation's inspector general's office concluded that adopting the new routes and procedures were lagging, most notably at Newark Liberty, John F. Kennedy International, and LaGuardia airports, which together make up the nation's busiest air space. The report surfaced publicly on Tuesday.

"Use of high-value procedures remains low, particularly at busy airports such as those in the New York City area," the report states.

For example, the report found that a "curved" approach pattern possible under NextGen was being employed for 1 percent of flights at Kennedy and LaGuardia, and for none at Newark Liberty.

In a response that the FAA made public today, the aviation agency said it was already taking steps consistent with the report's recommendation that it complete "an action plan" for overcoming obstacles to NextGen; develop a timeframe for streamlining new procedures under the system; and establish a process to gauge the success of the new procedures.

But, the FAA noted in its response, these things take time.

"There are challenges that must be understood and managed in order to realize the full benefits of PBN," the FAA said, referring to new routes and procedures collectively known as Performance-Based Navigation.

"In 2011, the FAA kicked off an effort to understand the challenges to implementing PBN and identify the methods the Agency could utilize to mitigate or eliminate the barriers altogether," the FAA added.

The agency may face yet another barrier to NextGen's implementation: residents subject to new or increased aircraft noise thanks to changes in approach patterns made possible by NextGen.

"While I understand the need to reduce delays in the congested airspace here, the FAA does not operate in a vacuum," said Susan Carroll, who lives in Flushing, N.Y., near LaGuardia, and is a member of Queens Quiet Skies. "These more 'efficient' flight paths have come at a great cost to those of us on the ground."

Read More

FAA seeks $12M fine against Southwest

The Federal Aviation Administration on Monday proposed a $12 million fine against Southwest Airlines for repairs to Boeing 737 planes in 2009 that did not comply with the agency's safety regulations.

The FAA gave the airline 30 days to respond to the proposed civil penalty. Carriers typically try to negotiate with the agency to pay a smaller fine.

Beginning in 2006, Southwest made "extreme makeover" alterations to eliminate potential cracking of the aluminum skin on 44 jetliners, the FAA said. An agency investigation found that Southwest and its contractor, Aviation Technical Services Inc., of Everett, Wash., failed to follow proper procedures for replacing the fuselage skins.

The FAA said the contractor did not put the planes on jacks to stabilize them. The work was done under the supervision of Southwest, which was responsible for ensuring that the procedures were followed, the FAA said.

After it put the airline on notice that the planes were not in compliance, the agency said, Southwest returned the jetliners to service and operated them on "numerous flights" in 2009.

The FAA later approved the repairs, after Southwest provided documentation that the work met safety standards.

This is the FAA's second proposed civil fine against Southwest for maintenance issues.

In 2008, the agency proposed a $10.2 million fine against the Dallas-based airline for operating 46 Boeing 737s on 59,791 flights in 2006 and 2007 without full inspections for fuselage cracks. Southwest, the second-busiest carrier at Philadelphia International Airport, disputed that fine, and after negotiations, it agreed to pay $7.5 million.

In a statement Monday, Southwest responded: "Safety is paramount and we always strive for full compliance with established and approved processes and procedures."

The repairs "were fully resolved some time ago," the airline said. "None of the items raised in the FAA letter affect aircraft currently being operated by Southwest."

The carrier added: "Southwest is committed to continuously making enhancements to our internal procedures, as well as improvements related to oversight of our repair vendors."

The FAA found that the contractor had applied sealant between the new skin panels, but did not install fasteners in all the rivet holes quickly enough for the sealant to be effective. "This could have resulted in gaps between the skin and the surface," allowing moisture and leading to corrosion, it said.

The FAA also said Southwest had failed to properly install a ground wire on water drain masts, a feature designed to prevent lightning strikes, on two of its Boeing 737s. The planes operated on more than 20 passenger flights after Southwest became aware of the discrepancies, but before the airline corrected the problem, the FAA said.

"Safety is our top priority, and that means holding airlines responsible for the repairs their contractors undertake," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx.

Read More

FAA grants Serbia category one status

The United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has upgraded Serbia from a category two to a category one status, allowing carriers from the country to operate flights to the United States and codeshare with US-based airlines and vice versa. Yesterday, the FAA announced that Serbia complies with International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) safety standards. The category one status granted to the country is based on a March 2014 FAA assessment of the safety oversight provided by the Civil Aviation Directorate of Serbia, and an FAA verification of necessary corrective actions during a follow up visit this month. A category one rating means the country's civil aviation authority complies with ICAO standards.

With Serbia obtaining a category one status, its national carrier has jumped over a major hurdle in establishing services to the United States. In an interview to EX-YU Aviation News last week, Etihad Airways CEO, James Hogan, said he is “very keen” for his equity partner, Air Serbia, to establish direct services to the United States. “We discussed this with the [Serbian] Prime Minister. We are doing a business plan. If the numbers stack up flights will maybe launch at the end of 2015”. Commenting on the FAA’s decision yesterday, the Serbian Prime Minister, Aleksandar Vučić, said, “I would like to thank [the US Ambassador to Serbia] Mr. Kirby, as we have obtained rights to fly to the US after several decades. In the second half of 2015 there will be flights to Chicago and we are pushing for New York as well”.

Serbia has held a category two rating since 2006. A category two rating means a country either lacks laws or regulations necessary to oversee air carriers in accordance with minimum international standards, or that its civil aviation authority is deficient in one or more areas, such as technical expertise, trained personnel, record keeping or inspection procedures, as was the case in Serbia. In order to maintain a category one rating, Serbia must adhere to the safety standards of ICAO, the United Nations' technical agency for aviation that establishes international standards and recommended practices for aircraft operations and maintenance.

Read More

FAA wants to lower building height limit near airports

The government wants to dramatically reduce the allowable height of buildings near hundreds of airports — a proposal that is drawing fire from real estate developers and members of Congress who say it will reduce property values.

The Federal Aviation Administration proposal, supported by airports and airlines, is driven by encroaching development that limits safe flight paths for planes that might lose power in an engine during takeoff. Planes can fly with only one engine, but they have less power to climb quickly over obstacles.

Airlines have to plan for the possibility that a plane could lose the use of an engine during takeoff even though that doesn’t happen very often. As more buildings, cellphone towers, wind turbines and other tall structures go up near airports, there are fewer safe flight paths available. Current regulations effectively limit building heights based on the amount of clearance needed by planes with two operating engines.

Airlines already must sometimes cut down on the number of passengers and the amount of cargo carried by planes taking off from airports in Burbank and San Jose in California, and in Honolulu, Los Angeles, Miami, Phoenix, and near Washington, D.C., among others, so they will be light enough to clear obstructions if only one engine is available, said Chris Oswald, vice president of the Airports Council International-North America.

The problem is exacerbated in hot weather when air is denser and planes require more power during takeoff. Bigger planes that carry lots of passengers and cargo on lucrative international flights are especially affected.

Airports worry that the problem could cost airlines enough money that they’ll find some routes unprofitable and eliminate service, Oswald said.

The FAA’s proposal would change the way the agency assesses proposals to build new structures or modify existing structures near 388 airports to take into account the hazard that would be created to one-engine takeoffs. For example, under the proposal a building located 10,000 feet from the end of a runway would have a maximum allowable height of 160 feet instead of the current limit of 250 feet, according to an analysis by the Weitzman Group, a New York real estate consulting firm. As the distance from an airport increases, the allowable building height increases as well. The proposal could affect buildings as far as 10 miles from an airport.

Planes taking off usually follow one of about a half-dozen possible flight paths. To limit the number of buildings and other structures affected by the proposal, the FAA is recommending airports and local zoning boards work together to select a single flight path for each runway that planes can use in the event that an engine quits, said John Speckin, the FAA deputy regional administrator in charge of the proposal. The new height limits would only apply to structures in that path, he said.

“We’re trying to create a balance of the aviation needs and the development needs in the local community,” he said in an online briefing Wednesday.

But even with that limitation, thousands of existing and planned structures would be affected, said Peter Bazeli, who wrote the Weitzman analysis. Existing buildings along the path would not have to be altered, but a property owner who wanted to increase the height of a building or replace it with a taller building might be out of luck.

“Just one flight path could cover hundreds and hundreds of acres in densely developed areas,” Bazeli said. “You are going to be bumping up against some very valuable property rights.”

The FAA doesn’t have the authority to tell owners how high a building can be. But property owners near airports are supposed to apply to the FAA before construction for a determination on whether a proposed building or renovation presents a hazard to navigation. Erecting a building that the FAA says is a hazard is akin to building in a flood plain — insurance rates go up, mortgages are harder to get and property values decrease. Local zoning laws often don’t permit construction of buildings determined to be an aviation hazard.

The FAA’s proposal has created “a real estate and developer firestorm,” said Ken Quinn, a former FAA chief counsel who is representing several developers. “A single building can be worth $100 million and more. If you are talking about lopping off whole floors, you can ruin the economic proposition and you can destroy the viability of the building, so you are talking about easily a $1 billion in economic impact.”

Cellphone tower owners and operators are also concerned.

“A change in the maximum allowable height of infrastructure surrounding airports … could degrade wireless service coverage and capacity,” PCIA, a trade association for the wireless industry, said Wednesday in a letter to House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee members.

The real estate and wireless industries want the FAA proposal to be put through a formal rulemaking process, which can take years to complete. When an agency proposes a new rule, it also has to show that the benefits outweigh the cost to society. That makes it easier for industries to challenge the rule. FAA officials have chosen instead to treat the proposal as a policy change, eliminating the need to meet rulemaking requirements.

A bill recently introduced by Democratic Rep. Jim Moran, whose Northern Virginia district includes densely populated areas around Reagan National Airport near downtown Washington, would require the FAA to conduct a formal rulemaking. In a letter earlier this year to Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx, Moran and three other lawmakers expressed concern that the proposal would have a “detrimental effect on the development and marketability of airports as well as hinder job creation and shrink the tax base of local governments.”

Read More

FAA orders Boeing to protect 737s from computer hackers

The Federal Aviation Administration is ordering Boeing to modify the technology aboard late-model 737 aircraft to prevent computer hackers from damaging the planes. The order published Friday in the Federal Register is effective immediately, although the agency allowed a comment period until July 21. The special conditions are urgent because the FAA is trying to avoid slowing down design and delivery of new planes, according to the agency. Doug Alder, a Boeing spokesman, said the special conditions will institutionalize actions that the manufacturer was already taken or planned, in line with similar protections for the 747-8, 777 and 787.

"They are a normal part of the process for introducing new technology or design features not previously addressed by regulation," Alder said. "Special conditions are one way regulators and manufacturers work together to ensure that commercial airplanes are safe and secure."

The latest FAA order applies to 737-700, -700C, -800, -900ER, -7, -8 and -9 aircraft, one of the most popular types of planes for the last 20 years. The special conditions apply to these aircraft because their technology is connected more thoroughly than other planes with computer networks outside the aircraft, making the 737 more vulnerable, according to FAA. The plane's technology "may allow the exploitation of network security vulnerabilities resulting in intentional or unintentional destruction, disruption, degradation, or exploitation of data, systems and networks critical to the safety and maintenance of the airplane," the FAA said.

The order from Jeffrey Duven, manager of FAA's certification services, calls for Boeing to "ensure that the airplanes' electronic systems are protected from access by unauthorized sources external to the plane, including those possibly caused by maintenance activity."

Read More

The Boeing 787 is granted extended 330 minutes ETOPS

Boeing (Chicago and Seattle) has released this statement about extended ETOPS for the 787:

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved additional extended operations (ETOPS) for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. The move will allow 787s to be operated up to 330 minutes from a landing field and signals continued confidence in the airplane’s technical capabilities.

Dreamliners have been allowed to operate up to 180 minutes away from a landing field since they were introduced into service in 2011. Granting of the expanded operational permission will allow airlines to introduce additional routes after they meet the proof of capabilities requirements and receive approval from their own regulatory agencies for such operations.

ETOPS operations will make the 787 even more efficient in operations as they enable more direct flight paths, which can save thousands of pounds of fuel and reduce carbon emissions.

More than 1,030 787s have been ordered by 60 customers to date. Boeing has delivered 146 Dreamliners to 19 customers.

Read More

Boeing 787 Flights Extended

Boeing 787 operators have received FAA approval to fly Extended Operations (ETOPS), a development that the company says will enable aircraft to fly on a wider range of routes and to more destinations. 

The ETOPS approval allows 787s to be operated for up to 330 minutes (5.5 hours) away from an airport, up from the previous 180 minutes. The FAA's approval is a sign of confidence in the aircraft that received negative publicity throughout 2013 after incidents involving its lithium-ion battery system grounded the global 787 fleet for more than three months. 

"Our customers are eager to expand their 787 operations," said Larry Loftis, vice president and general manager, 787 program, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "We're delighted that this capability, which was designed into the airplane from the very beginning, has been certified." 

Boeing announced the ETOPS approval less than one week after the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued recommendations to the FAA for an improved certification process for lithium ion batteries installed on aircraft. Last year the 787's lithium ion battery system was redesigned following the global fleet grounding in order to prevent overheating. 

To date, Boeing has delivered 146 Dreamliners to 19 different customers, and has received 1,030 orders for the aircraft from 60 different customers. The company plans on an entry into service for two new versions of the aircraft with the 787-9 toward the end of this year, and the 787-10 in 2016.

Read More

FAA, NTSB investigating close call between 2 planes

The Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating an incident nearly three weeks ago when two jets came within miles of each other. 

On April 25, United Airlines Flight 1205 from Kona to Los Angeles responded to a warning from the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System about 200 miles northeast of Kona.  The warning told the crew to avoid a U.S. Airways Boeing 757 heading westbound.

The FAA says the required separation between aircraft in the airspace where the incident occurred is either 5 miles laterally or 1,000 feet vertically.

Preliminary data shows that the aircraft were 8 miles apart when the alert came.  The United plane was told to descend.  On the next radar hit 12 seconds later, the aircraft were 5.3 miles apart laterally and 800 feet apart vertically.

The FAA says it not drawing conclusions about whether the aircraft were on a collision course.  The agency began investigating the incident immediately and says it has taken steps to prevent a recurrence.  FAA officials say the TCAS performed as it was designed.

A joint FAA and NTSB investigation team was scheduled to arrive on Oahu on Thursday.

Since the 1980s, the FAA has required the TCAS on airliners with more than 30 passenger seats to help prevent mid-air collisions.  It alerts pilots to potential conflicts and may issue them instructions to climb or descend to avoid the conflict.

The Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating an incident nearly three weeks ago when two jets came within miles of each other.

United Airlines says it is working with the NTSB in its review of the incident.

Read More

Airplane diverts after windshield cracks

A cracked windshield was not part of traveler Jennifer Squires' flight plan when she boarded a Delta Air Lines flight from Atlanta to Los Angeles on Saturday, May 3. The aircraft was flying at 38,000 feet when the pilot told passengers over the intercom that they would be making an emergency landing in Albuquerque, wrote Squires, via e-mail.

"I immediately thought someone was ill," she wrote. "A few minutes later he (the pilot) told us that because of pressure, the windshield in the cockpit arched, bubbled, and then shattered."

Not the entire windshield, clarified a Federal Aviation Administration spokesman. "Our initial information was that the outside part of the windshield shattered but the interior part remained intact," wrote FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford, via email.

"All windows and windshields are at least double paned," said Delta spokesman Morgan Durrant said via e-mail. "This is a rare occurrence but the established procedure is to divert."

There was no loss of cabin pressure, and the airplane landed in about 15 minutes, Squires said. The aircraft had taken off at 8:58 a.m. Eastern Time and landed in Albuquerque at 9:49 a.m. local time (11: 49 a.m. Eastern Time), according to FlightAware.com.

"As I exited the plane, I asked if I could see the damage," wrote Squires, who took her picture at that time. "The pilot and co-pilot were in the cockpit, and I thanked them for getting us down safely."

Squires, who shared the story with CNN iReport, credited the crew's skill and demeanor. "They were very calm. The whole crew was in fact very professional and quite calm. I really didn't fear for my life, and I don't think anyone else was overly reactive or worried."

The airline told passengers it was flying another aircraft from Los Angeles and also offered to re-book passengers on other flights to Los Angeles, Squires said.

Read More

FAA under pressure as clamor for small commercial drones grows

It seems like a perfect time to get into the drone business. With easy access to technology and patchy regulation, small commercial drones already have been used to film box-office hits and market expensive real estate.

Internet retailer Amazon is testing its sixth generation of an unmanned aircraft system that could one day whisk packages to customers within hours. With big corporations like FedEx and Domino's Pizza flirting with the technology, law firms, trade groups and insurers are lining up to capitalize on an expected economic gold mine.

There's only one catch: Commercial drones are illegal. In a 2007 policy statement, the Federal Aviation Administration essentially declared a ban on operating drones for commercial purposes. The agency doubled down on that position in early April, appealing an administrative order that tossed out the legal foundation for its policy. The ruling came after a commercial drone user challenged an FAA fine levied against him.

The ongoing case and mounting pressure to tap into the potentially lucrative industry puts the FAA in a tough spot. The regulatory body, responsible for keeping U.S. airspace safe, plans to propose a formal rule for commercial drones by the end of the year. But regulations aren't likely to be finalized until 2015 at the earliest, leaving some wondering whether the FAA can catch up to an industry already half past go.

"I don't think there's any question that market pressure is intense and the FAA is struggling on the regulatory side to keep up," said James H. Burnley, a former Transportation secretary and a Washington attorney.

Much of the commercial interest is focused on small drones — those that weigh less than 55 pounds, fly less than 400 feet high and often remain within the operator's line of sight. Many look no different than toy helicopters. But from a regulatory standpoint, integrating these drones into the national airspace is a complicated challenge that must reconcile evolving technology with safety concerns, including how to keep the drones from crashing into manned aircraft or causing damage or injury as they land.

"We really want to get it right the first time," said FAA spokesman Les Dorr.

The FAA has certified more than 600 public-sector entities to fly drones, mostly law enforcement agencies and universities. It announced last month that the first of six national sites for commercial drone testing was ready in North Dakota. But to date, the agency says it has made only one exception to its commercial ban, allowing oil company ConocoPhillips to survey marine mammals and ice in the Arctic.

Commercial drone advocates say the agency is taking too long. Thirty-three industry groups, including the National Ski Areas Assn. and National Sunflower Assn., are urging FAA Administrator Michael Huerta to expedite the approval process, citing a nearly four-year delay on its small-drone rule.

"The current regulatory void has left American entrepreneurs and others either sitting on the sidelines or operating in the absence of appropriate safety guidelines," they wrote in an April 8 letter.

Some businesses aren't waiting for the FAA rules to be completed. A Minnesota-based beer company made an online commercial that featured a drone transporting its "frosty winter lager" to some expectant ice fishermen. Weeks later, a Detroit flower company announced plans to drone-deliver roses on Valentine's Day. In March, the Washington Nationals sent up a drone to catch the baseball team's spring training on tape.

Several large law firms have launched drone practices, and there's even a fledgling insurance market. Nationwide Insurance's agricultural subsidiary is offering liability coverage to a handful of customers who currently use small drones in their farm operations, an underwriting director confirmed. Amazon told shareholders in April that it's continuing to test the "octocopter" that it unveiled in December, saying it will be ready to roll out drone delivery service as soon as the FAA gives its OK.

Although even unauthorized testing of commercial drones is prohibited under the FAA policy and the agency regularly notifies operators when it discovers a violation, weak enforcement has often left businesses flying in an air of uncertainty. For many, the crime outweighs the punishment.

"If you wait until the FAA passes its rule, you will be too far behind," said Jerry LeMieux, a retired Air Force colonel who serves as president of the Unmanned Vehicle University, an Arizona-based academy for unmanned systems engineering. "The time to get in is now."

To date, the FAA has issued only one fine for an unauthorized commercial drone flight. It wrote a letter ordering the Minnesota beer company and the Detroit florist to cease their activities. But the agency learns about most violations only from reports in the media, tips from rival businesses or when companies film their drone flights and post them on YouTube.

"There is a perception, largely correct, that [operators] are unlikely to get caught, and if they do get caught, there aren't going to be significant consequences," said Timothy Reuter, a drone enthusiast in Washington, D.C., who created a network of local groups to highlight the benefits of civilian use.

Delays, many argue, have stymied an industry that could generate more than 70,000 jobs and $13.6 billion for the economy in its first three years, according to a forecast released last year by the Assn. for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International.

Hollywood has an especially rich history of using unmanned aircraft. In 1995, the company Flying-Cam took home an Oscar for developing an unmanned helicopter system equipped with a camera. Prior to the FAA ban, Flying-Cam shot more than 80 films in the U.S., according to its director of operations, Haik Gazarian.

Now it shoots advertisements and films (recent titles include "Skyfall" and "The Hangover") on sets overseas, where commercial drone flight is often permitted. Likewise, Domino's tested its drone in Britain.

Stoking hopes for faster action, an administrative law judge with the National Transportation Safety Board in March overruled the FAA's only fine issued over a commercial drone flight. The $10,000 penalty was levied against Raphael Pirker, who was hired by a marketing company to capture aerial footage of the University of Virginia. The FAA said he flew the device "in a careless and reckless manner."

The judge in the case, Patrick Geraghty, ruled that small commercial drones should, for legal purposes, be treated as model aircraft, which are governed by a set of self-enforced 1981 guidelines used by hobbyists without the need for FAA approval. Geraghty stayed the decision while the agency appeals to the full NTSB panel.

As the FAA defends its authority, it can expect to face additional legal obstacles. Pirker's lawyer has filed a lawsuit challenging whether the agency ban can extend to a Texas nonprofit search-and-rescue firm. If higher courts also rule against the FAA, the decision could force the agency to explore other options for regulating the technology, said Rebecca MacPherson, a transportation lawyer and former FAA assistant chief counsel.

"If they lose this decision, they are really going to have to figure something out, because the current approach is not working," she said

Read More

Fury as air traffic controller in 2009 crash back on the job

An air-traffic controller who was joking on his cellphone about grilling a cat when he could have been preventing a deadly, midair collision off Manhattan is back on the job — and now he’s routing planes around coastal Virginia, an area teeming with military jets.

Carlyle Turner, 42, is in a control tower again despite a federal investigation that faulted him in a 2009 accident in which a private single-engine plane crashed into a helicopter full of tourists over the Hudson River. All nine people aboard both aircraft were killed. After a paid suspension, Turner was transferred to the Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport, WPIX-11 reported. The victims’ families were seething.

“It’s awful. It’s reprehensible,” said Pamela Altman, 65, of Upper Dublin, Pa., whose husband, Steven, was piloting the plane.

“He should have been fired, he should have been prosecuted and he should have gone to jail.”

The New Zealand family of the helicopter’s pilot, Jeremy Clarke, were “outraged,” said their lawyer, Justin Green. An investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board found Turner was on the phone with a co-worker on Aug. 8, 2009, when he was supposed to be monitoring traffic from the tower at New Jersey’s Teterboro Airport. During the call, he joked about barbecuing a dead cat that had been found at the airport

“Fire up the cat,” he said, according to the NTSB probe.

Adding a racial slur, he said, “Chinese people do it, so why can’t we?” transcripts revealed.

While gabbing, Turner missed hearing Steven Altman read back the wrong frequency for contacting Newark Airport, where a controller wanted to warn the pilot about the helicopter in his path. Turner and his union successfully appealed a recommendation that he be fired, Green said. Steven Altman’s brother and nephew died with him. Sister-in-law Jaclyn Altman won an $18.7 million negligence settlement from the federal government, the National Law Journal reported.

The feds also paid $14.5 million to relatives of the Italian tourists in the helicopter, while Clarke’s parents and sister got $1.5 million. Pamela Altman said she settled with the feds and the Liberty Helicopter tour company. She wouldn’t reveal the amounts. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) said he was shocked to learn Turner was working again, because “even if this gentleman was totally rehabilitated, it sends such a bad signal to others that he’s back on the job in such an important air safety position.”

The Newport News airport is about 10 miles from Joint Base Langley-Eustis, called “the home of East Coast tactical air power.”

A Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman said only, “Controllers have the same due-process rights as other federal employees and are also covered by the provisions of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association contract.”

Turner, who lives in Chesapeake, Va., wasn’t home Sunday. Neighbors said he and his wife moved in about three years ago. WPIX reported last week that Turner is one of 12 controllers nationwide who have been reinstated despite being faulted in deadly crashes since 1998.

Read More

Southwest Airlines CEO calls on FAA to speed up 'next-gen' navigation

The Federal Aviation Administration needs to accelerate the use of modern, satellite-based air traffic control systems that could make aircraft travel more efficient and safe, and which Southwest Airlines now uses at Denver International Airport, said Gary Kelly, CEO of Southwest, the No. 2 carrier at DIA.

"Today, the majority of U.S. traffic is managed through 1950s technology, resulting in longer flights, less efficient use

Read More

FAA tells Boeing to fix 747-8 software to avoid crash

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration on Tuesday ordered an immediate fix to the latest version of Boeing Co's  747-8 plane, saying a software glitch could cause it to lose thrust when close to landing and fly into the ground.

The FAA's so-called airworthiness directive covers Boeing's 747-8 and 747-8F planes with certain General Electric Co engines. It calls for replacing defective software with a new, improved version.

Read More

FAA Review Says Boeing 787 Dreamliner Safe

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, grounded for months last year after battery overheating problems, is soundly designed and safe to fly, a joint review by the plane maker and the Federal Aviation Administration said on Wednesday.

The review, which was initiated by the FAA after a battery fire aboard a 787 in Boston in January 2013, encompassed the

Read More

American Airlines ends bereavement fares

As several airlines blamed a pilot shortage for cutting service this month, the Government Accountability Office reported mixed findings Friday about whether there would be enough pilots over the next decade.

Read More