Brazil Crash Survivors Found

Amazonian Indians found nine survivors of a Brazilian Air Force transport that crashed in the jungle yesterday. One person was reported missing and one dead from the flight.

Here's the BBC account.

###

The FAA's Blistering Letter to Flight 188 Pilots

The FAA revocation of the pilot's certificate for both captain and first officer on the infamous Northwest/Delta Flight 188 (NW188) last week contains some blistering language.

Here are some excerpts from the letters that each pilot received from the FAA on the flight, which overshot the Minneapolis airport by 150 miles on Oct. 21, while the pilots failed to make any radio contact with air traffic control for about 90 minutes

--"You operated NW188 in a reckless manner that endangered the lives and property of others."

--[As a result of the incident] "you lack the qualifications necessary to hold an Airline Transport Pilot certificate."

--"Your lack of awareness that NW188 had overflown the airport to which it had been dispatched and cleared until that aircraft had reached Eau Claire, Wisconsin, (approximately 150 miles beyond MSP [Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport] is completely unacceptable."

--"You engaged in conduct that put your passengers and your crew in serious jeopardy ... while you were on a frolic of your own."

Here is the full FAA letter, identical to both pilots except for their names and titles.

Thanks to correspondent Jeremy for sending it.

###

Major Airlines Crank Up Another Fare Hike

Major airlines have installed the third significant fare increase in as many weeks, according to Rick Seaney, the CEO of Farecompare.com

Yesterday morning, Seaney reports, AirTran "increased airfares by $6 and $10 roundtrip (based on distance) across the bulk of their route system. Shortly thereafter ... American and Delta/Northwest matched on overlapping routes, while Continental took a further step matching on the bulk of their route system."

Last night, "United and US Airways matched across the bulk of their respective route systems. This increase marks what appears to be well on its way to the 6th successful hike of 2009, all since June."

He added, "Holiday travelers did get a bit of a break however today, as mixed in with the airfare increases several legacy carriers filed targeted off-peak “Holiday Airfares” (Turkey Fares), on the off-peak days around Thanksgiving and for Christmas and New Years Day. The widely matched deep discount 3-day off-peak winter sale started this past Tuesday by Southwest Airlines expires tonight, removing a big chunk of winter deals from the marketplace (for the moment).

"The volatility of airfare filings today simply underscores the continual tinkering that domestic airlines are doing as they hone in on price points reflect an uptick in demand but doesn’t scare off skittish travelers, and sounds another wakeup call for procrastinating holiday air travelers."

###

Search Continues for Aircraft Missing in Amazon

As of this morning, there has been no trace reported of a Brazilian single-engine transport with 11 aboard that went missing yesterday in the western Amazon.

The passengers were medical staff working in a campaign to provide vaccinations to in Indian settlements in the rain forest. Here's a Bloomberg update this morning.

###

Brazilian Aircraft With 11 On Board Missing in Amazon

[Photo: A C-98 Caravan similar to missing plane.]

The Brazilian Air Force said today that one of its transports, a Cessna C-98 Caravan aircraft, is missing in the Amazon.

The aircraft, with 11 on board, took off this morning from Cruzeiro do Sul in Acre state in the western Amazon, bound northeast for Tabatigna in Amazonas state.

A search is under way.

###

Denver Flights Delayed in Snowstorm

Delays are mounting today at Denver International Airport as a slow-moving snowstorm stalled over the eastern front range of the Rockies.

According to Flightstats.com, as of 10:30 a.m. Mountain time today, 244 of the day's scheduled 1,685 departures and arrivals had already been canceled.

Anyone bound for Denver or making a connection through Denver needs to check well ahead today, and probably for the next few days as the schedules sort themselves out.

Conditions are improving, though. Here's a 10.30 a.m. update from Frontier Airlines, which was reporting delays of 3-4 hours at Denver but now says that's lessening. However, Frontier says with engaging honesty, "departure times are rather fluid" today.

Here's United's far less-informative announcement. Come on, United -- how hard is it to get some useful current information up about your Denver ops? Frontier did it.

The storm did not, by the way, dump a lot of snow (yet) on the central Rockies. I'm always amazed at how many people in the media fail to understand the difference between the high plains, the foothills and the Rockies, and the meaning of the continental divide.

And by the way, what if the Rockies had made it to the World Series?

###

Fares Declined Sharply in 2nd Quarter. This Is News?

A standard quarterly government report showing steep air-fare declines in the second quarter is getting a lot of attention today, but really: What's the point? The second quarter ended in June, and that news is ... well, it's useless, frankly, to anyone interested in current fare trends.

As anyone interested in current fares knows, they've been going up steadily since the summer. Major airlines recently succeeded in installing their fifth successive nearly across-the-board fare hike since June (they're a little less eager to hike fares on routes where there are discount competitors.)

I use Farecompare.com and the regular updates from its CEO Rick Seaney to stay on top of current fare trends. In the airline business, April, May and June were a long time ago.

###

Where We Won't Be Going for 2020 Olympics

Sometimes, media piety would choke a goat -- like this beauty from the Birmingham, Ala. newspaper wringing its dainty hands and denouncing a funny wisecrack as "vile, pointless and inappropriate."

Why?

Well, the mayor, a major crook, was convicted on a whole bunch of crimes, and at the usual media scrum following the verdict, a local TV reporter asked him, "What does this mean for Birmingham's chances for the 2020 Olympics?"

Oh. My. God. INAPPROPRIATE!

The usual kept media types are collectively in a near faint.


###

Flight 188: Morning Update

Morning update. Northwest/Delta pilots' licenses yanked by F.A.A. And the Christian Science Monitor is asking the right questions.

David Lettermen did a Top 10 Reasons why the pilots overshot MSP. Among them:

... We get paid by the hour ... Tired of that show-off Sullenberger getting all the attention ... You try steering one of those airplanes after eight or nine cocktails ... For a change, we decided to send luggage to the right city and lose the passengers.
... Thought we saw balloon boy.

###

Flight 188: Say What?

There being a distinct difference between the attributions "investigators say" and "investigators say they were told," it's probably useful to have the text of the latest update by the National Transportation Safety Board on the bizarre incident involving a Northwest/Delta flight that overshot the Minneapolis airport by 150 miles last Wednesday night while the pilots claim they were "distracted."

Here's the NTSB report. The NTSB is next interviewing the three flight attendants.

The Wall Street Journal today (sorry if the link doesn't work because of the pay wall) has some interesting information. According to the Journal report, which cites "people familiar with the details," the "missteps began" when "a female flight attendant brought meals into the cockpit and the captain ducked out for a bathroom break."

No approximate time is given for this meal service, but it certainly would have been well in advance of the time the pilots would have been expected to be preparing for arrival at Minneapolis.

The flight attendant and first officer then chatted in the cockpit "just as controllers were instructing the crew to switch to another radio frequency," according to the Journal report, which added:

"The co-pilot, engaged in conversation with her, missed the instruction, and the captain didn't return until later, according to consultant Greg Feith, a former [NTSB] investigator."

Now just a darn minute here, as Deputy Barney Fife would say. Not only has the story changed, but now it appears as if the pilots were tuned to the wrong radio frequency, which accounts for them being out of contact with air-traffic control -- on approach to a major international airport?

Bring on the flight attendants! We're in for a bumpy ride as this story unfolds.

###

The Pilots' Top 10 List: Why We Missed Minneapolis

[Updated with statement from Delta Air Lines at bottom]

The two Northwest/Delta pilots who overshot Minneapolis by 150 miles last week claim they were busy working out crew schedule procedures on their laptops and 1. Didn't notice that they they had failed to descend to the destination airport for over an hour and 2. Failed to hear increasingly anxious calls from air-traffic control centers.

Since the old cockpit voice recorder in the Northwest A320 only records the most recent 30 minutes of a cockpit conversation, we may never know. As I said the other day, a good cop asking questions and matching up stories would have cracked this case by the end of the baseball game on Wednesday night.

Other pilots are having a good guffaw over it all, and I don't think the laptop explanation is flying.

Here's a link to the always informative and amusing JetWhine blog edited by Rob Mark, a pilot and aviation consultant. Rob has posted his Top 10 reasons the pilots overflew Minneapolis by 150 miles, while noting that "the only reason we can even poke a little fun at these two buffoons is no one was hurt."

In comments, Rob's readers added a few of their own "reasons," including: Pilots were planning a reality-show audition ... Pilots wanted to boost passengers' frequent flier miles ... Pilots took the term "nonstop flight" too seriously.

Me: The foliage in Wisconsin is lovely this time of year ... MSP means Must-Skip Place ...

***

Delta evidently isn't buying the laptop excuse either. Here is a statement Delta issued late this afternoon:

"ATLANTA, Oct. 26 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Delta Air Lines today issued a statement regarding the company's cooperation with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the investigation of Northwest Flight 188. Delta and its Northwest operating subsidiary continue to openly and fully cooperate with the NTSB and FAA to complete the investigation. The pilots in command of Northwest Flight 188 remain suspended until the conclusion of the investigations into this incident.

"Using laptops or engaging in activity unrelated to the pilots' command of the aircraft during flight is strictly against the airline's flight-deck policies and violations of that policy will result in termination.

"Delta CEO Richard Anderson said: 'Nothing is more important to Delta than safety. We are going to continue to cooperate fully with the NTSB and the FAA in their investigations.'

"The NTSB earlier today issued a public release highlighting the initial findings of its investigation into the incident, including evidence that the pilots involved said they were distracted at cruise altitude between San Diego and Minneapolis-St. Paul. The NTSB's press release stated that the pilots said in interviews that "there was a concentrated period of discussion where they did not monitor the airplane or calls from ATC even though both stated they heard conversation on the radio ... neither pilot noticed messages that were sent by company dispatchers ... both said they lost track of time ... (and) each pilot accessed and used his personal laptop computer while they discussed the airline crew flight scheduling procedure."

###



###

What Happened on Flight 188? It's Not a Mystery. Right Now, It Looks More Like a Cover-Up

All right, all right: Now what the heck happened here? Who saw what happened? Let's cut out the guessing.

Of course, it's wrong to expect immediate answers in an aviation accident, when investigators are working partly through mechanical and technological forensics, as well as with people who might be involved.

But the disturbing incident on Northwest/Delta Flight 188, which flew 150 miles northeast beyond its destination in Minneapolis Wednesday night, with the pilots not responding to increasingly anxious calls from various air-traffic-control centers, does not appear to have been the result of an accident -- or at least an accident whose causes can't be immediately determined.

Instead, it appears as if some person or persons may have done something wrong and/or negligent, and potentially put in danger the lives of everyone on board.

So what the heck happened here?

A cop would ask: Who knows the facts?

Well, the two pilots certainly know, but so far they've been able to get away without giving public answers beyond what the co-pilot, Richard I. Cole, blabbered yesterday to KGW-TV in Portland, Ore.:

"Nobody was asleep in the cockpit. No arguments took place. But other than that, I cannot tell you anything that went on because we're having hearings this weekend, we're having hearings on Tuesday. All that information will come out then." The TV report said that Cole declared that there is "a lot of misinformation that's going on. Things are being said that didn't happen, but I can't go into any details."

Oh, well, thanks for clearing that up, cap'n. You are aware, I suppose, that the statement that "there were no arguments at all in the cockpit" appears to contradict the statement the pilots gave to the FBI upon landing, in which they claimed, according to the National Transportation Safety Board, that they had been involved in a "heated discussion over airline policy and they lost situational awareness."

(By the way, the KGW reporter, who is not identified in this raw footage of the interview on the station's Web site, went to the co-pilot's home in Salem, Ore., and knocked on the door, which used to be Journalism 101, standard practice. To his credit, he also pressed the co-pilot on the few answers he did give, such as the denial that anything untoward had occurred in the cockpit. "Then what distracted you for 150 miles?" the reporter persisted before the co-pilot politely closed the door.)


Incidentally, airline pilots are understandably a little cranky these days, not only over crappy working conditions but over issues like seniority when two airlines merge, as Delta and Northwest have. This is not to say that's what they were arguing (or not arguing) about for a whole 78 minutes, though.

So who else knows what happened?

Well, the three flight attendants certainly know something. The flight continued on for over an hour beyond the airport, with the cockpit unresponsive to calls from the ground, while emergency officials considered scrambling military jets. (And remember: An airline cockpit door is locked and supposedly impenetrable. So a flight attendant can't barge in and shake somebody awake if something goes really wrong.)

Unless the whole crew had been rendered temporarily unconscious by some kind of magical knockout drops that had no effect on the passengers, flight attendants (who generally don't miss a trick) certainly had at least some of the "situational awareness" that the pilots claim they misplaced during those strange 78 minutes in the cockpit. Yet we have not heard word one, as far as I know, from the flight attendants.

And some of the passengers knew something -- despite risible media reports that stated that passengers did not have "a clue" that anything was amiss.

The few passengers who reporters could find to interview didn't have a clue because they appear to be clueless. I guarantee you that a good number of people on that airplane had more "situational awareness" than the pilots, if less than the flight attendants. I guarantee you many were aware that something was amiss, especially as the plane droned on for 150 miles past its destination. People have watches and can look out a window, and they certainly can read body language and a situation in which no announcement is forthcoming from the cockpit (or from the front galley, evidently) explaining why the plane was over an hour late, and appeared to have sailed beyond a major metropolitan area like Minneapolis-St. Paul.

This is a matter of public safety. And I don't think there is a "mystery." I think it's a cover-up, which I hope comes to an end soon, because the flying public deserves to know what is going on. We've allowed commercial aviation in this country to become uniquely unaccountable in many instances -- something we would not put up with in any other form of public transportation.

I have no doubt the National Transportation Safety Board will dig this out -- and get it out.

But let's us in the media stop being coy about the issue of accountability. This is a case for a cop with the power of arrest (as would be the case if, say, a city bus barreled down the wrong route for over an hour, and the driver declined to discuss the "mystery" of why). Or even a reporter refusing to accept "no comment" as a satisfactory response. (Again, credit to that unnamed KGW-TV reporter).

What the heck happened here, and who's lying and who's laying low, and why?

When will we get the straight story?

We shouldn't have to depend on a cockpit voice recorder (and one that was evidently so old that it only records about 30 minutes at a time) to get that story. A good cop would have straightened it out by the time the ballgame was over Wednesday night.


***

By the way, someone who sounds like a pilot takes issue with my saying yesterday that the flight was in "crowded airspace" as it approached (and blithely departed) the Minneapolis-St. Paul area at 37,000 feet. The airspace at 37,000 feet is not "crowded," I am informed -- as if I don't have some uniquely personal "situational awareness" of what constitutes "crowded" at 37,000 feet, having survived a mid-air collision at precisely that altitude. It's sort of a matter of definition, I think. Airspace around a major international airport is more crowded than airspace not around a major international airport. But I do take the point.

In fact, given my correspondent's most recent comment, I stand corrected.

###

`This Is Your Captain Snoring...'

[Updated with CNN report: Controllers feared hijacking AFTER talking to an "nonresponsive" pilot]

Oops, a Northwest/Delta A320 with 147 passengers on board overflew the Minneapolis airport by 150 miles, with the pilots failing to respond to radio calls Wednesday night.

Upon landing after the ... uh, sojourn, the pilots told the FBI and airport police that "they were in a heated discussion over airline policy and they lost situational awareness," according to the National Transportation Safety Board in an initial advisory on the incident.

Thank God this alleged heated discussion didn't escalate into a knock-down drag-out fist-fighting, hair-pulling, shrieking brawl, like that recent incident on an Air India flight where the pilots left the cockpit in flight over Pakistan to get into a donnybrook with flight attendants in the front of the plane.

Obviously, two pilots in a cockpit on approach to a major airport who overshoot it and fly on blissfully for 78 minutes, failing to acknowledge radio calls, sounds an awful lot like two pilots who were asleep, assuming they weren't involved in some "heated discussion" that caused them to forget where the hell they were. Which happens to have been in the crowded airspace of a major international airport.

More to come on this fiasco, you can bet.

[Update}: Like this report on CNN (quoting an unnamed federal source) saying that controllers feared the plane had been hijacked AFTER they finally made contact with the cockpit and found a pilot so "nonresponsive" that they ordered the crew to execute certain "maneuvers" to provide evidence that the pilots in fact were in control of the plane.]

###

George Clooney, Road Warrior

A new Paramount film, "Up in the Air," is generating good advance word in screenings. It stars George Clooney as a road warrior. Release is set for mid-December.

Here's the trailer.

###

Halloween in Los Angeles: A Cool Suggestion

If you happen to be in Los Angeles on Halloween night, here's a suggestion. Go to see the screening of the 1922 silent-film vampire classic Nosferatu at the magnificent Walt Disney Concert Hall downtown.

It will be accompanied by Clark Wilson playing the hall's great pipe organ, and presented in the way the film was designed to be seen.

The Disney hall is one of the great concert halls in the country. There's not a bad seat in the joint, and the acoustics are wonderful. My wife and I heard Mahler's Sixth there with Michael Tilson Thomas conducting the Los Angeles Philharmonic and it was a transformational musical experience (except for the lout whose cell-phone rang just as that last sublime chord faded out -- ouch!)

Anyway, here's the phone number for tickets: 323-850-2000. If I were going to be in Los Angeles that night, I wouldn't miss it.

###

Brazil Team Training Hard for New Olympic Event: Synchronized Mayhem

I know it's a little early to consider making any travel plans for the 2016 Olympics in Rio, but travel planners really do need to be aware of just how dangerous Rio and other cities in Brazil are -- and not only to reporters like me who nearly got killed in a horrific mid-air collision that did kill 154 over the Amazon three years ago -- and then got sued for "dishonoring" Brazil, for complaining about the well-known faults of air-traffic safety there -- among them the fact that, as the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board put it: Air traffic control had two planes at the same altitude at opposite directions on the same airway, resulting in that mid-air collision. Here's the NTSB's report on the crash.

Now take this latest story of atrocious crime in Rio today. Drug gangs SHOT DOWN A HELICOPTER; killed two police officers and injured four others; and set fire to five buses and a school.

While noting in fairness that Brazilian authorities have been trying to address both the reality of the crime crisis as well as the international public perception of Brazil and its tourism industry, I repeat here excerpts from the current advisory on travel to Brazil by the U.S. State Department:

"Crime throughout Brazil has reached very high levels. The Brazilian police and the Brazilian press report that the rate of crime continues to rise, especially in the major urban centers – though it is also spreading in rural areas. Brazil’s murder rate is more than four times higher than that of the U.S. Rates for other crimes are similarly high. The majority of crimes are not solved. There were rapes reported by American citizens in 2008.

"Street crime remains a problem for visitors and local residents alike, especially in the evenings and late at night. Foreign tourists are often targets of crime, and Americans are not exempt. This targeting occurs in all tourist areas but is especially problematic in Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Salvador and Recife."

In Rio, "tourists are particularly vulnerable to street thefts and robberies in areas adjacent to major tourist attractions and on the main beaches in the city. In 2008 there were attacks along trails leading to the famous Corcovado Mountain, on the road linking the airport and the South Zone and on the beaches of Copacabana. Travelers are advised not to take possessions of value to the beach. Robbers and rapists sometimes slip incapacitating drugs into their drinks at bars, hotel rooms, or street parties. While crime occurs throughout the year, it is more frequent during Carnaval and the weeks prior. In the weeks before Carnaval 2009, robbers ransacked two tourist hostels. Travelers should be aware of their surroundings and victims are advised to relinquish personal belongings rather than resist or fight back. Tourists should choose lodging carefully, considering security and availability of a safe to store valuables, as well as location. Over the past year, attacks against motorists increased. In Rio de Janeiro City, motorists are allowed to treat stoplights as stop signs between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. to protect against holdups at intersections. ..."


###

Business Aviation Trade Groups: Remaking the Case Despite the Detroit 3

The case had firmly been made for business aviation as a viable, defensible alternative to commercial air service until the recession hit last year -- right about the same time three invincibly tone-deaf CEOs from Detroit auto companies swanned into Washington on their heavy-metal private jets to demand taxpayer bailouts.

Lots of factors combined to put the kabosh on years of robust growth in the business-aviation market. The collapsing economy was the main one.

But there was another, lesser factor. The business-aviation industry evidently still does not -- or will not -- recognize how much public-perception damage was done, at precisely the worst possible time, by the haughty decisions of those three Detroit worthies to use their private jets to get from Detroit to Washington to testify before Congress and ask for taxpayer relief.

Currently, there are signs that the important U.S. business aviation industry is picking up a little bit. As reported here yesterday, business-aircraft activity rose in October for the first time in a year, mainly because of an increased use of turbo-prop planes. Business jets, and especially the heavy-metal beauties like those favored by our Detroit dandies, continued to languish.

I have frequently made the case, here and elsewhere, for the judicious use of business aircraft. Smart corporations know that a well-thought-out corporate flight department, with a mix of planes suitable for various purposes, makes clear bottom-line sense. Most business-aircraft use involves sending teams of managers or technicians somewhere on a tight schedule, often to a location with poor commercial air service.

Getting them in and out efficiently is not a matter of luxury. It is a matter of business efficiency.

Commercial airlines have been slashing capacity (there are 21 percent fewer seats in the U.S. airline market than there were in October 2000, says OAG) and yanking service from small and mid-sized airports. More often, getting there by commercial air requires multiple time-wasting stops -- if you can get there at all by air.

Talk to industry experts, as I often do, and you will hear a general consensus that well over 80 percent of business-aircraft use was clearly justified as a productivity tool.

On the other hand, a small percentage was not. Richard Santulli, the founder of and until recently the CEO of the fractional share business-jet leader NetJets, told me, for example, that the heaviest use of NetJets' top-shelf Gulfstream G5 fleet occurred on the New York/Teterboro-Washington D.C. route. Given copious options for the commercial air shuttles and Amtrak on that short route, that was obviously not a sensible way to use a big corporate jet.

The business-aviation trade groups nevertheless lost control of a message they had been very successful in establishing till the Detroit trio swanned into Washington last year.

If the had simply conceded that flying a G5 from, say, Detroit to Washington is an asinine way to use corporate jets, they could have regained the high ground to argue that in most cases, corporate aviation does make economic sense.

Instead, they blamed the messenger, as if the widespread public revulsion against obvious misuses of corporate jets that followed the Detroit scandal was something cooked up by the media.

And they still at it, as witnessed by the tendentious lede paragraph in a joint announcement released today by the General Aviation Manufacturers Association and the National Business Aviation Association, which contains an otherwise useful argument on behalf of corporate aviation.

To wit:

"Washington, DC, October 15, 2009 – The General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) and the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) today published a new survey showing conclusively that some of the recent portrayals of business aviation are inconsistent with the true nature of the industry.

The survey, conducted for GAMA and NBAA by Harris Interactive, depicts an industry in which the typical company is a small or mid-sized business flying a single aircraft that is used by a broad mix of employees to make business trips utilizing community airports, often with little or no airline service.

"These findings stand in stark contrast to recent mischaracterizations of business aviation operators,” said GAMA President and CEO Pete Bunce.

The findings are interesting, and reiterate the case that had ALREADY been made when the boys from Detroit made their ill-conceived flights from Detroit to Washington on their luxury private jets last year.

Those dumb moves were not "mischaracterizations" by the media. The characterizations were accurate. Rather than fingering those three Detroit CEOS for their poor judgment, the industry went into a defensive crouch and pretended that the media was picking on business aviation in general -- and, of course, some elements in the media then did just that.

The smart move by the business-aviation industry would have been to point out that the self-entitled Detroit Three should have used common sense and flown commercially, and then move on after noting (correctly) that frivolous use of corporate jets is relatively uncommon.

As I said, the case for judicious use of business aviation had already been made when Manny, Moe and Jack from Detroit decided to fly the industry into a brick wall.

Making the sensible case again, the GAMA CEO Pete Bruce said this in yesterday's announcement: "The reality is, companies of all sizes rely on many different types of aircraft to be more competitive, productive, efficient and successful.”

NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen added: "Although the manufacture and use of business aircraft contributes significantly to the national economy, the industry is often not well understood. This important study will help people see the real face of business aviation and underscore its importance to citizens, companies and communities across the U.S."

The survey, based on actual interviews conducted with pilots and passengers involved in business aircraft flights, finds:

--Small companies operate the majority of business aircraft. Most companies (59%) operating business aircraft have fewer than 500 employees, and seven in ten have less than 1,000 employees.

--Companies using business aviation typically operate only a single aircraft. The majority (75%) of companies operate only one turbine-powered aircraft.

--Managers and other mid-level employees are the typical passengers on business aircraft. Only 22% of passengers on business aircraft are top management (i.e., a company’s Chairman, Board Member, CEO or CFO); the majority are other managers (50%) and or technical, sales or service staff (20%).

--Employees use their time onboard company aircraft more effectively and productively than when they are on airline flights. Some passengers even estimate that they are more productive on the company aircraft than they are in the office because of fewer distractions.

--A large majority of flights (80%) are made into secondary airports or airports with infrequent or no scheduled airline service.

The survey was conducted online and by mail within the United States by Harris Interactive on behalf of GAMA and NBAA between June 1-October 6, 2009 among 350 pilots, flight department mangers, and directors of aviation of business aircraft, as well as 289 passengers of business aircraft.

Here is a link to the Harris Interactive survey. It's worth reading.

###

Airlines Jacking Up Fares

Now that it has been satisfactorily demonstrated that people will put up with just about anything, domestic airlines are jacking up fares -- over and above the recently announced $20 roundtrip surcharge for travel during the upcoming peak holiday seasons.

Airlines clearly figure that demand might soon exceed supply, with overall capacity down sharply (there are 21 percent fewer domestic seats flying this October than in October 2000, according to the airline schedule data firm OAG). Unclear is whether they're right about the demand, or whether a fair number of former passengers have abandoned or sharply cut back on air travel altogether, fed up as they are with the hassles.

As usual, the intrepid Rick Seaney at Farecompare.com is on the case.

Here's his report this afternoon:

"Airlines Hiking Domestic Airfares by up to $16 Roundtrip

"Yesterday our proprietary airfare processing system detected an unusually large number of domestic U.S. city pairs with an increase of up to $16 roundtrip -- a hike initiated by American Airlines.

"Continental and Southwest started matching late last night, and hours ago Delta/Northwest, United and US Airways began matching -- rounding out the legacy airlines.

"Most airfare-hike attempts occur late in the week, and either “stick” or “fizzle” over the weekend as carriers decide whether or not to match. It is unusual to see an airfare hike early in the week, which is typically reserved for discounting and sales.

"We contacted American Airlines about the airfare hike attempt and they confirmed the mileage based domestic airfare increase at the following levels:

0-450 miles $3ow/$6rt

451-750 miles $5ow/$10rt

751+ miles $8ow/$16r

"A spokesperson for Southwest Airlines further notes they have matched with at a lower level than the legacy airlines (with no increase on their cheapest “fun fares”):

0-450 miles $2ow/$4rt

451-750 miles $3ow/$6rt

751+ miles $5ow/$10rt

"This hike is layered on top a targeted peak holiday surcharge of $10 each way over the past two weeks and appears to be well on its way to “sticking” as the fourth increase of 2009 – all four occurring since June (compared to 15 total in 2008 and 17 in 2007)."

###

Some Business-Aircraft Use Is On the Rise, But Heavy-Metal Jet Flights Languish and Fractionals Remain Down

In September, business aircraft flying in the United States was at the highest level since October 2008, near the start of the recession, according to flight data tracked by ARGUS TRAQPak. Data are based on serial-number specific aircraft arrivals and departures.

Turbo-prop aircraft accounted for much of the increase, including in the troubled fractional-aircraft market where turbo-prop flights were up 24.4 percent while flights for fractional-owned jets were down in all categories.

Overall business aircraft activity increased 2.7% from August 2009. Compared to September 2008, the increase was .4%. In all categories, Turbo-prop aircraft activity showed the strongest recovery at 11.1%, with large-cabin jet aircraft activity showing the greatest decline at -12.7% as compared to September 2008. ARGUS estimates the percent change of flight activity, rolling month over month, for the last twelve months is up an average of .71% per month. Total flight activity for the last twelve months as compared to the previous twelve months is off -20.28% (Oct. 07–Sept. 08 vs. Oct. 08–Sept. 09).

###

Lufthansa to Offer In-Flight Cell-Phone Roaming, Wi-Fi Service: Will Voice Calls Ever Fly in the U.S.?

In the biggest development yet for total in-flight connectivity -- encompassing both Wi-Fi service and voice cell-phone roaming capability -- Lufthansa said it is equipping most of its long-haul fleet with a suite of products largely developed by Panasonic Avionics that will allow passengers to use their cell-phones or access the Internet in-flight almost anywhere in the world.

Lufthansa's confusing announcement (maybe it was more comprehensible in German), and an equally confusing one by Panasonic, made for bewildering reading, especially since it was framed as a re-launch of the ill-fated Connexion by Boeing Wi-Fi service (which Lufthansa branded as FlyNet). In 2001, Lufthansa had agreed to be the launch customer for Connexion by Boeing. The Boeing subsidiary eventually signed up other customers, including ANA, Japan Airlines and SAS, but the company went out of business (after losing about $1 billion) in 2006, two years after Lufthansa first began offering it on flights.

Connexion by Boeing died of its own weight, literally and figuratively. The equipment was too heavy to be used on anything other than big long-haul planes; the company was bloated with 600 employees; the timing turned out to be awful, in the travel depression that followed 2001, and well before it had become clear that enough people would pay for such a service to make it viable. Neither the market nor the technology was ready.

The new Lufthansa service -- still branded as FlyNet -- has nothing to do with the long-gone Connexion by Boeing. Instead, the technology is by Panasonic and the cell-phone component of the system is being provided by AeroMobile, which is one of two foreign companies (the other is OnAir) that are leading the current revolution in in-flight Wi-Fi and/or cell-phone development on many foreign airlines.

Stripped of some of its more-windy verbiage, Lufthansa's statement said: "Easy to use, the system will allow passengers to utilize the Internet in-flight as they would at a public hot-spot, with WLAN access, sending emails with attachments or an SMS from a mobile phone and synchronisation of smartphones, like PDAs, iPhones or Blackberrys.

"FlyNet will be available to all passengers in the cabin ... It will be installed in stages, worldwide, on all Lufthansa long-haul routes. Rates will differ, from time-based to flat rate ...

Facts and Figures

* Bandwidth:
5-50 Mbps (in ther aircraft
1 Mbps (outside the aircraft)
* Services:
WLAN, GSM, GPRS
* Re-launch:
2010
* Lufthansa long-haul fleet:
96 aircraft
* Lufthansa Partner:
Panasonic Avionics Corporation
* Transmission mode:
Satellite-supported broadband system."

***

Here is Panasonic's statement about the development.

***

AeroMobile and OnAir are behind the Wi-Fi and/or cell-phone revolution on airlines outside the U.S. An American start-up, Row44, is also trying to make inroads in the international market, though its major customer so far is Southwest Airlines, which does not fly overseas. Southwest has said it will outfit its fleet of 737s with Row44's satellite Wi-Fi system.

AeroMobile's chief executive officer, Bjorn-Taale Sandberg, said today that the Lufthansa initiative will transform the industry. "Major airlines are recognizing the need to keep their passengers connected with broadband and cellular connectivity," he said.

"AeroMobile is unique in providing airlines with flexibility and a future-proofed connectivity vision. We have customer commitments from airlines operating Inmarsat Classic Aero, Swift64, SwiftBroadband and now Ku band. Lufthansa’s commitment to Panasonic’s multi-megabyte Ku band solution, eXConnect, will allow AeroMobile to deliver a much richer user experience, provide more comprehensive value-added cellular services and a growth path to 3G," he said.

AeroMobile was the first company to offer in-flight mobile phone services in full commercial use when it launched with Emirates in March 2008. The system is currently installed on over 50 wide-bodied aircraft across six aircraft types with Emirates and Malaysian Airlines. This figure will rise into three figures in 2010 as AeroMobile's equipment is installed on other long haul flag carriers.

The Lufthansa announcement, which sees AeroMobile's equipment installed through Panasonic's eXPhone system, means AeroMobile now has commitments spanning all wide-bodied aircraft variants including B747 and A380.

Last month, I spoke with Benoit Debains, the chief executive of AeroMobile competitor OnAir. He said that OnAir is negotiating to provide service on super-jumbo A380s before the end of the year, though he wouldn't identify the airline or airlines.

The big question, as world airlines gear up for full connectivity, including cell-phone capability, is the United States, where in-flight Wi-Fi is being eagerly adopted but there remains huge public and political resistance to allowing voice calls in flight.

"I used to say the people who are against voice calls are the people who didn’t try it," Debains said, adding: "We have 10,000 flights (every month). I have been on some of these flights and I have to tell you, it is not an issue as people fear. The average duration of a phone call is about 2 minutes. And because there is already a certain noise level in the cabin, a call is not as noisy as people believe it would be."

He called the opposition in the U.S. "very emotional." He said, "When you talk to [U.S.] airline CEOs or to fleet managers, they give you a very personal opinion -- 'You know, an airplane cabin is the last place where I cannot be reached,' blah-blah-blah. They not even thinking in terms of all those things you can do [with full connectivity] that you do when you are on the ground."

Nevertheless, he said, OnAir is trying to persuade some U.S. carriers to carry its system on international fleets. "We believe that the U.S. market ultimately will open up to this," he insisted, though he said that high costs for outfitting a plane ("three or four times higher" than the $100,000 per aircraft it costs to wire a plane for the AirCell's Gogo-branded Wi-Fi service that many domestic airlines are already installing) makes it more likely that OnAir would be installed, if at all, mostly on new factory-built long-haul aircraft that might be ordered in the future.

There has been strong resistance in the United States to any proposal to allow cell-phone use – or even so-called voice over Internet protocol on airplanes.

Among the strongest opponents are flight attendants, though their main union the Association of Flight Attendants, which is affiliated with the Communications Workers of America union. In a statement, the union said:

"AFA-CWA is urging members of the Senate to ensure that a ban on in-flight cellular telephone usage is included in any Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization legislation that passes out of the Senate. The U.S. House of Representatives has already included such a ban in H.R.915, the House FAA Reauthorization Bill. Cell-phone usage in the cabin would create a new security risk by compromising your ability to maintain order in the cabin and to safely execute an emergency evacuation if necessary."

It isn't clear exactly how a cell phone would impede an aircraft evacuation (safety is always trotted out to oppose anything the flight attendants don't like) -- but it is very clear that the opposition to in-flight voice calls in the U.S. is fierce and possibly politically insurmountable.

###