The Aviation Herald Last Update: Thursday, Sep 17th 2020 22:42Z

26001 Articles available

Events from Jun 19th 1999 to Sep 17th 2020 www.avherald.com Incidents and News in Aviation List by: Filter: Accident: Emirates A388 over Arabian Sea on Jan 7th 2017, wake turbulence sends business jet in uncontrolled descent

By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Mar 8th 2017 11:40Z, last updated Thursday, Mar 23rd 2017 20:05Z An Emirates Airbus A380-800, registration A6-EUL performing flight EK-412 from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to Sydney,NS (Australia), was enroute at FL350 about 630nm southeast of Muscat (Oman) and about 820nm northwest of Male (Maldives) at about 08:40Z when a business jet passed underneath in opposite direction. The A380 continued the flight to Sydney without any apparent incident and landed safely.



The business jet, a MHS Aviation (Munich) Canadair Challenger 604 registration D-AMSC performing flight MHV-604 from Male (Maldives) to Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates) with 9 people on board, was enroute at FL340 over the Arabian Sea about 630nm southeast of Muscat when an Airbus A380-800 was observed by the crew passing 1000 feet above. After passing underneath the A380 at about 08:40Z the crew lost control of the aircraft as result of wake turbulence from the A380 and was able to regain control of the aircraft only after losing about 10,000 feet. The airframe experienced very high G-Loads during the upset, a number of occupants received injuries during the upset. After the crew managed to stabilize the aircraft the crew decided to divert to Muscat (Oman), entered Omani Airspace at 14:10L (10:10Z) declaring emergency and reporting injuries on board and continued for a landing in Muscat at 15:14L (11:14Z) without further incident. A number of occupants were taken to a hospital, one occupant was reported with serious injuries. The aircraft received damage beyond repair and was written off.



Oman's Civil Aviation Authority had told Omani media on Jan 8th 2017, that a private German registered aircraft had performed an emergency landing in Muscat on Jan 7th 2017 declaring emergency at 14:10L (10:10Z) and landing in Muscat at 15:14L (11:14Z). The crew had declared emergency due to injuries on board and problems with an engine (a number of media subsequently reported the right hand engine had failed, another number of media reported the left hand engine had failed).



According to information The Aviation Herald received on March 4th 2017 the CL-604 passed 1000 feet below an Airbus A380-800 while enroute over the Arabian Sea, when a short time later (1-2 minutes) the aircraft encountered wake turbulence sending the aircraft in uncontrolled roll turning the aircraft around at least 3 times (possibly even 5 times), both engines flamed out, the Ram Air Turbine could not deploy possibly as result of G-forces and structural stress, the aircraft lost about 10,000 feet until the crew was able to recover the aircraft exercising raw muscle force, restart the engines and divert to Muscat.



The Aviation Herald is currently unable to substantiate details of the occurrence, no radar data are available for the business jet, it is therefore unclear when the business jet departed from Male and where the actual "rendezvouz" with the A380 took place. Based on the known time of the occurrence at 08:40Z as well as the time when the CL-604 reached Omani Airspace declaring emergency and landed in Muscat, as well as which A380s were enroute over the Arabian Sea around that time The Aviation Herald believes the most likely A380 was EK-412 and the "rendezvouz" took place 630nm southeast of Muscat, which provides the best match of remaining flying time (2.5 hours) and distance for the CL-604 also considering rather strong northwesterly winds (headwind for the CL-604, tailwind for the A380s) - this analysis was confirmed on Mar 23rd 2017 by BFU information (see below).



On Jan 7th 2017 there were also other A380-800s crossing the Arabian Sea from northwest to southeast: a Qantas A380-800, registration VH-OQJ performing flight QF-2 from Dubai to Sydney, was enroute at FL330 about 1000nm southeast of Muscat and about 400nm northwest of Male at 08:40Z. An Emirates A380-800 registration A6-EDO performing flight EK-406 from Dubai to Melbourne,VI (Australia) was enroute at FL350 about 470nm southeast of Muscat at 08:40Z. Another Emirates A380-800 registration A6-EUH performing flight EK-424 from Dubai to Perth,WA (Australia), was enroute at FL350 about 350nm southeast of Muscat at 08:40z.



The Aviation Herald received information that Air Traffic Control all around the globe have recently been instructed to exercise particular care with A380s crossing above other aircraft. The Aviation Herald had already reported a number of Wake Turbulence Encounters involving A380s before:



Incident: Virgin Australia B738 near Bali on Sep 14th 2012, wake turbulence from A380

Incident: Air France A320 and Emirates A388 near Frankfurt on Oct 14th 2011, wake turbulence

Accident: British Airways A320 and Qantas A388 near Braunschweig on Oct 16th 2011, wake turbulence injures 4

Report: Antonov A124, Singapore A388 and Air France B744 near Frankfurt on Feb 10th 2011, wake turbulence by A388 causes TCAS RA

Report: REX SF34 at Sydney on Nov 3rd 2008, wake turbulence injures one

Incident: Armavia A320 near Tiblisi on Jan 11th 2009, turbulence at cruise level thought to be A380 wake



MHS Aviation told The Aviation Herald, that they can not provide any further details due to the ongoing investigation, Germany's BFU is investigating the occurrence (which confirmed The Aviation Herald's assumption, that the occurrence was over international waters, Germany as state of registration of the accident aircraft thus being responsible for the investigation).



Authorities in Oman have so far not responded to inquiries by The Aviation Herald.



In response to our inquiry summarizing the known information so far as described above (however, mistakenly assuming the date of the occurrence was Jan 8th 2017 based on the information thus far) Germany's BFU confirmed that they are leading the investigation. The occurrence happened already on Jan 7th 2017 at 08:40Z. The BFU is unable to provide further details at this time (in particular to which A380 caused the wake turbulence) because these details are subject to investigation. By Mar 8th 2017 no safety recommendations have yet been issued by the BFU. A preliminary report is estimated to be included in the January 2017 bulletin (which according to "tradition" should be released by mid of March 2017, however, the release of the Jan bulletin can currently not be estimated because so far only the August 2016 bulletin has been released by the BFU, the remaining 2016 bulletins are still being worked on). On Mar 23rd 2017 the BFU mentioned the aircraft passing above the CL-604 was A6-EUL (see below).



On Mar 17th 2017 Bombardier (who took over Canadair) told operators of Challenger 604 aircraft in an advisory wire, that the aircraft was at 34,000 feet when it experienced a temporary loss of control which resulted in signficant loss of altitude, abnormal flight attitudes and accelerations beyond the certified flight envelope. Shortly after the event the crew shut one engine down due to a high ITT indication, the other engine remained operational. The crew later on restarted the engine and diverted from their intended destination. There were serious injuries to some passengers. The flight crew reported that shortly before the event an oncoming large transport category aircraft had passed them 1000 feet above, slightly offset to the left. Germany's BFU representing the state of registry of the CL-604 rated the occurrence an accident, the Canadian TSB have assigned an accredited representative to the investigation, Bombardier have assigned a technical advisor to the investigation. Due to the ongoing investigation Bombardier can not provide further comment, the BFU will communicate investigation progress.



On Mar 18th 2017 The Aviation Herald received a draft of an EASA safety information bulletin, to be released shortly, stating:



With the increase of the overall volume of air traffic and enhanced navigation precision, wake turbulence encounters in the en-route phase of flight above 10 000 feet (ft) mean sea level (MSL) have progressively become more frequent in the last few years.



The aim of this SIB is to enhance the awareness of pilots and air traffic controllers of the risks associated with wake turbulence encounters in the en-route phase of flight and provide recommendations with the purpose of mitigating the associated risks.



The draft reasons:



The basic effects of wake turbulence encounter on a following aeroplane are induced roll, vertical acceleration (can be negative) and loss or gain of altitude. The greatest danger is an induced roll that can lead to a loss of control and possible injuries to cabin crew and passengers. The vortices are also most hazardous to following aircraft during the take-off, initial climb, final approach and landing.



However, en-route, the vortices evolves in altitudes at which the rate of decay leads to a typical persistence of 2-3 minutes, with a sink rate of 2-3 metres per second. Wakes will also be transported by wind.



Considering the high operating air speeds in cruise, wake can be encountered up to 25 nautical miles (NM) behind the generating aeroplane, with the most significant encounters reported within a distance of 15 NM. This is larger than in approach or departure phases of flight.



The encounters are mostly reported by pilots as sudden and unexpected events. The awareness of hazardous traffic configuration and risk factors is therefore of particular importance to anticipate, avoid and manage possible wake encounters.



The draft issues following recommendations:



As precautionary measures, operators and pilots should be aware that:



- As foreseen in Reg. 965/2012 AMC1 to CAT.OP.MPA.170, the announcement to passengers should include an invitation to keep their seat belts fastened, even when the seat belt sign is off, unless moving around the cabin. This minimises the risk of passenger injury in case of a turbulence encounter en-route (wake or atmospheric).



- As indicated in ICAO PANS-ATM, for aeroplanes in the heavy wake turbulence category or for Airbus A380-800, the word HEAVY or SUPER, respectively, shall be included immediately after the aeroplane call sign in the initial radiotelephony contact between such aeroplanes and ATS units.



- When possible, contrails should be used to visualise wakes and estimate if their flight path brings them across or in close proximity.



- When flying below the tropopause altitude, the likelihood of wake encounter increases. The tropopause altitude varies (between days, between locations).



- Upwind lateral offset should be used if the risk of a wake encounter is suspected.



- Timely selecting seat belt signs to ON and instruct cabin crew to secure themselves constitute precautionary measures in case of likely wake encounters.



In case of a wake encounter, pilots should:



- Be aware that it has been demonstrated during flight tests that if the pilot reacts at the first roll motion, when in the core of the vortex, the roll motion could be amplified by this initial piloting action. The result can be a final bank angle greater than if the pilot would not have moved the controls.



- Be aware that in-flight incidents have demonstrated that pilot inputs may exacerbate the unusual attitude condition with rapid roll control reversals carried out in an out of phase manner.



- Be aware that if the autopilot is engaged, intentional disconnection can complicate the scenario, and the autopilot will facilitate the recovery.



- Avoid large rudder deflections that can create important lateral accelerations, which could then generate very large forces on the vertical stabiliser that may exceed the structural resistance. Although some recent aircraft types are protected by fly-by-wire systems, use of the rudder does not reduce the severity of the encounter nor does it improve the ease of recovery.



- Make use of specific guidance available through AOM for their specific type(s)/fleet.



ATS providers and air traffic controllers should:



Enhance their awareness about en-route wake turbulence risk, key factors and possible mitigations, based on the information provided in this document and other relevant material. This could be achieved through flyers, e-learning, and refresher training module.



Possible risk mitigations may consist of:



- Make use of the wake turbulence category (WTC) indication in the surveillance label and/or the flight progress strip (whether electronic or paper), and observe closely separated aeroplanes that are at the opposite extremes of the WTC spectrum;



- As the best practice, provide traffic information, advising CAUTION WAKE TURBULENCE, when you identify that a HEAVY or SUPER HEAVY wake category traffic is climbing or descending within 15 NM of another following traffic;



- Manage en-route traffic crossings such as , when possible while preserving safe tactical management of overall traffic in the sector, avoiding to instruct climb or descend to HEAVY or SUPER HEAVY traffic within 15 NM distance from another following traffic;



- If at all possible, avoid vectoring an aeroplane (particularly if it is LIGHT or MEDIUM category) through the wake of a HEAVY or SUPER HEAVY aeroplane where wake turbulence may exist.



On Mar 23rd 2017 the BFU reported D-AMSC flying from Male to Abu Dhabi temporarily lost control in flight, possibly as result of wake vortices created by Emirates Airlines A380-800 registration A6-EUL.



The effects of wake turbulence shown by Germany's BFU with an Antonov-2 und a Robin DR-400 (Video: BFU):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXlv16ETueU



Photo of the interior of D-AMSC after the upset (Photo: FlightServiceBureau):







By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, May 16th 2017 14:36Z, last updated Friday, Jun 30th 2017 17:18Z



On May 16th 2017 Germany's BFU released their January 2017 Bulletin in German (the



The BFU reported the Challenger had departed Male at 06:52Z, reached cruise flight level 340 at 07:20Z and was enroute along L894 to waypoint KITAL. At 08:18Z the crew reported passing waypoint GOLEM.



An Airbus A380-800, serial number 224, (Editorial note: although the BFU is not permitted by German law to identify aircraft, the narrative is consistent with Emirates A388 A6-EUL) had departed Dubai at 06:55Z for Sydney (Australia). The aircraft was enroute at FL350 in southeasterly direction.



Analysis of flight data of both aircraft showed, that at 08:38:07Z the A380 passed over the Challenger at 1000 feet vertical separation, about one minute later at 08:38:54Z the Challenger, on autopilot, began to rotate to the right around its longitudinal axis despite ailerons deflected to the left and a light vertical acceleration began. Over the next 10 seconds a right bank of 6-8 degrees were recorded, then the right bank increased to 42 degrees within one second despite left aileron deflection of 20 degrees, a vertical acceleration of +1.6G occurred followed by a vertical acceleration of -3.2G one second later. 13 seconds after the begin of the upset the autopilot disconnected and a master warning activated for 7 seconds.



The flight data recorder recorded a loss of altitude of 8700 feet between 08:39:09Z and 08:39:41Z. At 08:39:31Z the airspeed reached 330 KIAS, the left engine's N1 reduced to 40% while the ITT increased to 850 degrees C. The crew shut the left hand engine down.



At 08:56Z the crew declared emergency with India's Air Traffic Control, reported their position and what happened, and advised they were diverting to Muscat via waypoint KITAL.



At 09:15Z the crew restarted the left engine, climbed back to FL250, engaged the autopilot again at 09:56Z and landed at Muscat at 11:05Z.



According to recordings at Omani Air Traffic Control they were informed by India's ATC that the aircraft was at FL230 and was estimated to pass KITAL at 09:37Z. India's ATC reported an engine shut down as cause for the low altitude and advised the crew was diverting to Muscat.



The BFU reported the crew first observed the aircraft above them in opposite direction on their TCAS, the captain subsequently identified an A380 and the airline. The A380 passed them slightly to the left and above. A short time later the aircraft was exposed to wake turbulence, the aircraft rolled to the left uncontrollable (editorial note: this testimony seems to be opposite to the FDR recordings reported above), the autopilot disconnected. Both crew applied right aileron, however the aircraft continued to roll left and made several revolutions, both Inertial Reference Systems, the flight management system and the attitude indicators failed. Both pilots were wearing their lap belts and crotch belts, the first officer was also wearing his shoulder harness. The captain lost his head set, the quick reference manual lifted off in the cockpit and was distributed over the cockpit with single pages around the cockpit. Using external horizont reference the captain identified their attitude and was able to stabilize the aircraft again at FL240, he observed the left hand engine's N1 and N2 separated with the N1 reducing, the ITT reached 1000 degrees C and flashed red, the engine was shut down. Using the memory checklists the crew were able to restore Inertial Reference System (IRS) #1 in ATTITUDE Mode which enabled them to continue the flight towards KITAL, subsequently the crew restarted the left engine using cross bleed from the right hand engine. The crew subsequently restored IRS #2, position and heading were entered into the flight management system, then it was possible to engage the autopilot again.



The flight attendant reported that she was in the middle of the cabin preparing inflight service when the aircraft made three revolutions around the longitudinal axis according to her recollection. At that time 4 passengers were not in their seats, too. During the revolutions the occupants were thrown against ceiling and seats. The flight attendant received minor injuries, the passengers received bleeding wounds.



The BFU reported one passenger received head injuries and a fracture of a rib, another passenger received a vertebral fracture. The flight attendant and the two other injured passengers received bruises respective a nasal fracture.



The BFU reported that following the accident the aircraft flew for more than two hours until landing in Muscat, the cockpit voice recorder therefore was overwritten and the accident sequence no longer available on the CVR.



The BFU reported that Strategic Lateral Offset Procedures had not been permitted on airway L894 used by the Challenger.



The BFU reported that the aircraft sustained no visible damage to fuselage, wings and tailplane including control surfaces. No leakages were observed. The manufacturer however stated, that it was impossible to return the aircraft into airworthy conditions due to accelerations that were beyond the design limits of the aircraft structure. The aircraft was therefore rated substantially damaged.



The BFU reported that ICAO introduced a work group in 2003 to develop safety recommendations to reduce the effects of wake turbulence by A380 aircraft to an acceptable level. The work group focussed on aircraft flying on parallel tracks and advised that wake turbulence could occur as far as 20nm behind and 1000 feet below an A388 or other heavy aircraft (including B744 and A346 specifically being mentioned by the work group). The work group also considered particularly strong wake turbulence behind heavy aircraft climbing or descending. The material quoted by the BFU does not mention aircraft flying in opposite direction.



DONSA waypoint (Coordinates N14.5886 E65.1925) is located 660nm southeast of Muscat Airport.



The cabin of the Challenger seen in direction opposite to flight (Photo: BFU):





Flight path of Challenger according to FDR (Graphics: BFU):





Flight path of A6-EUL according to Emirates DAR (Graphics: BFU):





Flight Data during initial Upset (Graphics: BFU):





Flight Data during loss of altitude (Graphics: BFU):





Flight Data during recovery (Graphics: BFU):



On Jun 22nd 2017 the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) released their Safety Information Bulletin 2017-10 , the draft of which had already been covered in earlier coverage.On May 16th 2017 Germany's BFU released their January 2017 Bulletin in German (the interim report covering this occurrence now also available separately in English) reporting that the Challenger (serial number 5464), carrying 6 passengers and 3 crew, got out of control about one minute after it had been overflown by an Airbus A380. The aircraft lost about 9000 feet before the crew was able to regain control. Two passengers received serious, one member of the crew as well as two other passengers minor injuries. The aircraft diverted to Muscat. As the occurrence happened over international waters the BFU is responsible for the investigation assisted by the investigation bodies of Oman, India, United Arab Emirates, Canada, USA and France.The BFU reported the Challenger had departed Male at 06:52Z, reached cruise flight level 340 at 07:20Z and was enroute along L894 to waypoint KITAL. At 08:18Z the crew reported passing waypoint GOLEM.An Airbus A380-800, serial number 224, (Editorial note: although the BFU is not permitted by German law to identify aircraft, the narrative is consistent with Emirates A388 A6-EUL) had departed Dubai at 06:55Z for Sydney (Australia). The aircraft was enroute at FL350 in southeasterly direction.Analysis of flight data of both aircraft showed, that at 08:38:07Z the A380 passed over the Challenger at 1000 feet vertical separation, about one minute later at 08:38:54Z the Challenger, on autopilot, began to rotate to the right around its longitudinal axis despite ailerons deflected to the left and a light vertical acceleration began. Over the next 10 seconds a right bank of 6-8 degrees were recorded, then the right bank increased to 42 degrees within one second despite left aileron deflection of 20 degrees, a vertical acceleration of +1.6G occurred followed by a vertical acceleration of -3.2G one second later. 13 seconds after the begin of the upset the autopilot disconnected and a master warning activated for 7 seconds.The flight data recorder recorded a loss of altitude of 8700 feet between 08:39:09Z and 08:39:41Z. At 08:39:31Z the airspeed reached 330 KIAS, the left engine's N1 reduced to 40% while the ITT increased to 850 degrees C. The crew shut the left hand engine down.At 08:56Z the crew declared emergency with India's Air Traffic Control, reported their position and what happened, and advised they were diverting to Muscat via waypoint KITAL.At 09:15Z the crew restarted the left engine, climbed back to FL250, engaged the autopilot again at 09:56Z and landed at Muscat at 11:05Z.According to recordings at Omani Air Traffic Control they were informed by India's ATC that the aircraft was at FL230 and was estimated to pass KITAL at 09:37Z. India's ATC reported an engine shut down as cause for the low altitude and advised the crew was diverting to Muscat.The BFU reported the crew first observed the aircraft above them in opposite direction on their TCAS, the captain subsequently identified an A380 and the airline. The A380 passed them slightly to the left and above. A short time later the aircraft was exposed to wake turbulence, the aircraft rolled to the left uncontrollable (editorial note: this testimony seems to be opposite to the FDR recordings reported above), the autopilot disconnected. Both crew applied right aileron, however the aircraft continued to roll left and made several revolutions, both Inertial Reference Systems, the flight management system and the attitude indicators failed. Both pilots were wearing their lap belts and crotch belts, the first officer was also wearing his shoulder harness. The captain lost his head set, the quick reference manual lifted off in the cockpit and was distributed over the cockpit with single pages around the cockpit. Using external horizont reference the captain identified their attitude and was able to stabilize the aircraft again at FL240, he observed the left hand engine's N1 and N2 separated with the N1 reducing, the ITT reached 1000 degrees C and flashed red, the engine was shut down. Using the memory checklists the crew were able to restore Inertial Reference System (IRS) #1 in ATTITUDE Mode which enabled them to continue the flight towards KITAL, subsequently the crew restarted the left engine using cross bleed from the right hand engine. The crew subsequently restored IRS #2, position and heading were entered into the flight management system, then it was possible to engage the autopilot again.The flight attendant reported that she was in the middle of the cabin preparing inflight service when the aircraft made three revolutions around the longitudinal axis according to her recollection. At that time 4 passengers were not in their seats, too. During the revolutions the occupants were thrown against ceiling and seats. The flight attendant received minor injuries, the passengers received bleeding wounds.The BFU reported one passenger received head injuries and a fracture of a rib, another passenger received a vertebral fracture. The flight attendant and the two other injured passengers received bruises respective a nasal fracture.The BFU reported that following the accident the aircraft flew for more than two hours until landing in Muscat, the cockpit voice recorder therefore was overwritten and the accident sequence no longer available on the CVR.The BFU reported that Strategic Lateral Offset Procedures had not been permitted on airway L894 used by the Challenger.The BFU reported that the aircraft sustained no visible damage to fuselage, wings and tailplane including control surfaces. No leakages were observed. The manufacturer however stated, that it was impossible to return the aircraft into airworthy conditions due to accelerations that were beyond the design limits of the aircraft structure. The aircraft was therefore rated substantially damaged.The BFU reported that ICAO introduced a work group in 2003 to develop safety recommendations to reduce the effects of wake turbulence by A380 aircraft to an acceptable level. The work group focussed on aircraft flying on parallel tracks and advised that wake turbulence could occur as far as 20nm behind and 1000 feet below an A388 or other heavy aircraft (including B744 and A346 specifically being mentioned by the work group). The work group also considered particularly strong wake turbulence behind heavy aircraft climbing or descending. The material quoted by the BFU does not mention aircraft flying in opposite direction.DONSA waypoint (Coordinates N14.5886 E65.1925) is located 660nm southeast of Muscat Airport.The cabin of the Challenger seen in direction opposite to flight (Photo: BFU):Flight path of Challenger according to FDR (Graphics: BFU):Flight path of A6-EUL according to Emirates DAR (Graphics: BFU):Flight Data during initial Upset (Graphics: BFU):Flight Data during loss of altitude (Graphics: BFU):Flight Data during recovery (Graphics: BFU):

By Ammar kiwan on Sunday, Feb 3rd 2019 12:02Z





By Klaus on Thursday, Dec 21st 2017 18:53Z





By Jasper on Saturday, Jul 1st 2017 21:08Z





By Sina on Saturday, Jul 1st 2017 20:01Z





By TangoSierra on Saturday, Jul 1st 2017 18:04Z





By Pau on Saturday, Jul 1st 2017 13:20Z





By edward on Friday, Jun 30th 2017 19:49Z





By anon on Friday, Jun 30th 2017 19:22Z





By edward on Friday, Jun 30th 2017 19:12Z





By alanauer on Friday, Jun 30th 2017 19:04Z





By Airbus lover on Friday, Jun 30th 2017 17:40Z





By Laura on Wednesday, Jun 14th 2017 21:14Z





By twelvetrees on Friday, May 19th 2017 23:02Z





By bob on Friday, May 19th 2017 12:34Z





By Mike on Friday, May 19th 2017 11:57Z





By QQ on Thursday, May 18th 2017 18:11Z





By Eddie on Wednesday, May 17th 2017 22:11Z





By MartinR on Wednesday, May 17th 2017 20:47Z





By GICASI on Wednesday, May 17th 2017 14:04Z





By (anonymous) on Wednesday, May 17th 2017 11:40Z





By (anonymous) on Tuesday, May 16th 2017 20:57Z





By (anonymous) on Tuesday, May 16th 2017 19:06Z





By Ecumenico on Monday, May 8th 2017 20:37Z





By Anon on Wednesday, Apr 19th 2017 15:37Z





By Nabil on Wednesday, Apr 5th 2017 06:28Z





By Airways are less safe today. on Friday, Mar 24th 2017 18:11Z





By Gustavo on Friday, Mar 24th 2017 15:21Z





By Alex K on Friday, Mar 24th 2017 12:02Z





By (anonymous) on Friday, Mar 24th 2017 09:20Z





By BOND on Friday, Mar 24th 2017 06:51Z





Add your comment: (max 1024 characters) Your Name: Your Email: Subject: Your comment: The Aviation Herald Apps

Android and iOS

Support The Aviation Herald

one time

Monthly support 1 €/month

Interview: The human factor named "Simon Hradecky" and the team of man and machine Get the news right onto your desktop when they happen © 2008-2020 by The Aviation Herald, all rights reserved, reprint and republishing prohibited. We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our site, learn more