Latest News
-
Boeing settles with Canadian who lost family members in 737 MAX crash
Boeing has reached a settlement agreement with a Canadian whose family was killed in the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX on March 2019, the lawyer for the man said. Terms of the settlement reached with Paul Njoroge, a Toronto resident, were not disclosed. The crash killed the 41-year-old's wife Carolyne, and his three children, Ryan, Kellie, and Rubi, as well as Carolyne. The crash also killed his mother-in law, who was travelling with them. The trial, scheduled to begin on Monday at the U.S. District Court of Chicago, would have been the U.S. aircraft manufacturer's first in response to two fatal 737 MAX accidents in 2018 and 2019, which killed 346 people. Boeing avoided a trial as well in April when it reached a settlement with the families two other victims of the Ethiopian Airlines crash. The aircraft manufacturer declined to comment about the latest settlement. Boeing lost more than $20 billion in the wake of these two accidents. Boeing's best-selling aircraft was grounded for 20 months. Robert Clifford, Njoroge’s attorney, will represent the families of six additional victims in a second trial scheduled to start on November 3. Boeing says it has settled over 90% of civil lawsuits relating to these two accidents. The company paid out billions in compensation via lawsuits, deferred prosecution agreements and other payments. Boeing and the U.S. Justice Department requested a judge approve an agreement earlier this month that would allow the company to avoid prosecution over the objections of relatives of some victims of the two accidents. Boeing would be able to escape being labeled a felon for three years and avoid oversight by an independent monitor. The agreement was part of the plea bargain struck in 2024 for a criminal fraud allegation that Boeing misled U.S. regulatory authorities about a critical flight 737 MAX system which contributed crashes. (Reporting from Seattle by Dan Catchpole; Editing by Tom Hogue.)
-
What were the names of the two pilots that flew the Air India jet which crashed?
In a preliminary report, investigators investigating a fatal Air India crash stated that the aircraft's fuel switches had been briefly flipped into the off position. This caused confusion in the cockpit which focused attention on the Boeing 787 pilots. Here is a short profile of both pilots, based on media reports and the preliminary investigation report: CAPTAIN SUMEET SABHARWAL The 56-year old pilot had a valid airline transport pilot's license until May 14, 2026. He was cleared to fly in the role of pilot-in command on a number of aircraft, including the Boeing 787, 777 and Airbus A310. He has a total of 15,638 flying hours. Of these, 8,596 were spent on a Boeing 7. According to a report in the Times of India, Sabharwal called his family at the airport and assured them that he would call again once he landed in London. He was described as a gentleman by a pilot who briefly spoke with him. FIRST OFFICER CLIVE KUNDER The 32-year old had a commercial license that was issued in 2020, and it was valid until 26 September 2025. He was cleared to fly the Cessna 172, Piper PA-34 Seneca and Airbus A320 as well as Boeing 787 as a co-pilot. His total flying time was 3,403 hrs. One-hundred and twenty eight hours were spent as a copilot on a 787. Indian media, citing his family, reported that Kunder has been a passionate flyer since his school days. In 2012, he began working as a pilot. He joined Air India as a pilot in 2017. Reporting by Abhijith and Adityakalra, editing by Jamie Freed
-
Air India's Boeing Dreamliner crash: Inside the cockpit
The preliminary report on the Air India crash, which killed 260 people in the last month, showed that the fuel cutoff switches for the engines were almost simultaneously switched from run to shutoff. This deprived the engines of fuel. The sequence of events on June 12 is detailed in the preliminary report by Indian investigators, released on Saturday. Air India Dreamliner VTANB landed at Ahmedabad as AI423 at 05:47 GMT. 07:48 GMT - An aircraft was seen departing Bay 34 of the airport. The aircraft asked for taxi clearance which was granted to it by the air traffic control. A minute later, the aircraft taxied backwards and lined up in preparation for takeoff. 08:02 GMT - The aircraft has been transferred from tower to ground control. Take-off clearance has been issued at 08:07 GMT. The aircraft began rolling at 08:07 GMT. Aircraft lifted off at 08:08 GMT. The report stated that "the aircraft air/ground sensor switched to air mode in accordance with liftoff." Aircraft reached maximum airspeed of 180 knots at 08:08 GMT. "Immediately after, the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch and Engine 2 fuel shutoff switch transitioned one by one from RUN to CUTOFF with a gap of 1 sec." The Engine N1 and N2 started to degrade from their takeoff values when the fuel supply was cut off. In the cockpit recording, one pilot is heard asking another why he cut off. The other pilot replied that he didn't do it The airport's CCTV footage shows Ram Air Turbines (RAT) being deployed immediately after take-off. The aircraft began to lose height before crossing the perimeter wall of the airport. The RAT hydraulic pump started supplying power at 08:08 GMT. Both engines "passed the minimum idle speed". The fuel cutoff switch for Engine 1 has been changed from CUTOFF (stop) to RUN (run). The fuel cutoff switch for Engine 2 also changes from CUTOFF (stop) to RUN at 08:08 PM GMT. When fuel control switches from CUTOFF are changed to RUN during flight, the full authority dual engine controls (FADECs) of each engine automatically manage a relighting and thrust recovery sequence. Engine 1's core speed deceleration halted, reversed, and began to recover. Engine 2 could relight, but it was unable to stop core speed deceleration. Fuel was repeatedly added to the engine to increase core acceleration and recovery. The pilot who sent "MAYDAY Mayday Mayday" at 08:09 GMT. 08:09 GMT - Data recording has stopped. (Reporting by Aditya Kalra; Editing by Jamie Freed) 08:14.44 GMT - Crash Fire tender leaves the airport premises to rescue and fight fires. (Reporting and editing by Jamie Freed; Aditya Klra)
-
What is the fuel switch at the heart of the Air India crash investigation?
Investigators' preliminary report on the Air India crash, which killed 260 people, revealed that the Boeing 787 aircraft's fuel control switches had been briefly turned off seconds after takeoff. This deprived the engines of fuel. Here are some facts about switches, their function in the aircraft, and their movement on an Air India flight. What are fuel switches? These switches regulate the fuel flow to a plane's engine. Pilots use them to shut down or start engines manually on the ground, or to shut down or restart an engine if it fails during flight. Experts in aviation say that a pilot could not accidentally move fuel switches feeding the engines. If moved, however, it would immediately cut off the engine's power. According to John Cox, an aviation safety expert from the United States, there are separate power systems and wirings for the fuel shutoff switches and fuel valves that they control. Where are the fuel switches located? The fuel control switches are located under the thrust levers on a 787. In Air India's example, they were equipped with two GE engine. The switches have a spring loaded mechanism that keeps them in place. The pilot must first lift the switch and then change it from cutoff to run. There are two different modes: 'CUTOFF" and "RUN". What happened on the fatal AIR INDIA flight? According to the flight recording, after takeoff switches for both engines were switched from "RUN" to "CUTOFF", one after the other, with a gap of one sec. The engines started to lose power as a result. On the cockpit voice recording, one pilot is heard asking the other pilot why he has cut off the fuel. The report stated that "the other pilot replied that he had not done so." The flight's first officer and captain did not make any specific remarks. The preliminary report states that the switches were flipped back into 'RUN" seconds later. The report said that both fuel control switches had been found in the "RUN" position on the crash site. The report stated that when fuel control switches from 'CUTOFF to RUN' are changed while an aircraft is flying, the control system of each engine automatically manages the relighting and thrust recovery sequences for ignition and fuel injection. John Nance, an aviation safety expert from the United States, said that "no sane person would turn off those switches in flight," particularly as the plane was just beginning to climb. (Reporting from Abhijith Gaapavaram, New Delhi; Dan Catchpole, Seattle; editing by Jamie Freed).
-
Air India's Boeing Dreamliner crash: Inside the cockpit
The preliminary report on the Air India crash, which killed 260 people in the last month, showed that the fuel cutoff switches for the plane's engine were almost simultaneously switched from run to shutoff. This deprived the engines of fuel. The sequence of events on June 12 is detailed in the preliminary report by Indian investigators, released on Saturday. Air India Dreamliner VTANB landed at Ahmedabad as AI423 at 05:47 GMT. 07:48 GMT - An aircraft was seen departing Bay 34 of the airport. 07:55 GMT - Air traffic control granted the taxi clearance to the aircraft. A minute later, the aircraft took Taxiway R4 from the bay and proceeded on the Runway 23. 08:02 GMT - The aircraft has been transferred from tower to ground control. Take-off clearance has been issued at 08:07 GMT. The aircraft began rolling at 08:07 GMT. Aircraft lifted off at 08:08 GMT. The report stated that "the aircraft air/ground sensor switched to air mode in accordance with liftoff." Aircraft reached maximum airspeed of 180 knots at 08:08 GMT. "Immediately thereafter, Engine 1 and Engine 2 Fuel Cutoff Switches transitioned one by one from RUN to the CUTOFF position with a time interval of 1 sec." The Engine N1 and N2 started to degrade from their takeoff values when the fuel supply was cut off. In the cockpit recording, a pilot is heard asking another why he cut off. The other pilot replied that he didn't do it The airport's CCTV footage shows Ram Air Turbines (RAT) being deployed immediately after take-off. The aircraft began to lose height before crossing the perimeter wall of the airport. The RAT hydraulic pump started supplying power at 08:08 GMT. Both engines "passed the minimum idle speed". The fuel cutoff switch for Engine 1 has been changed from CUTOFF (stop) to RUN (run). The fuel cutoff switch for Engine 2 also changes from CUTOFF (stop) to RUN at 08:08 PM GMT. When fuel control switches from CUTOFF are changed to RUN during flight, the full authority dual engine controls (FADECs) of each engine automatically manage a relighting and thrust recovery sequence. Engine 1's core speed deceleration stopped and reversed. It then started to recover. Engine 2 could relight, but it was unable to stop core speed deceleration. Fuel was repeatedly added to the engine to increase core acceleration and recovery. The pilot who sent "MAYDAY Mayday Mayday" at 08:09 GMT. 08:09 GMT - Data recording has stopped. (Reporting by Aditya Kalra; Editing by Jamie Freed) 08:14.44 GMT - Crash Fire tender leaves the airport premises to rescue and fight fires. (Reporting and editing by Jamie Freed; Aditya Klra)
-
Firefly, a space and defense company, filed its US IPO in 2024. Revenue growth is projected to be at least 20%.
Firefly Aerospace, a space and defense technology firm backed by AE Industrial Partners, disclosed on Friday a 10% increase in revenue for 2024 in its filing to go public in the United States. Firefly reported a revenue of $60,8 million in 2024 compared to $55.2 millions the previous year. Investors are returning to the U.S. IPO Market after months of sluggishness earlier this year, triggered by policy changes and tariff uncertainty under Donald Trump. "There's a window of opportunities' in space-related IPOs", said IPOX CEO Josef Schuster. He added that there is a strong appetite from investors for space-related offerings. This is due to the enthusiasm for the growth prospects in the space sector. When Voyager Technologies, a space firm, and Karman Holdings debuted their listings in the first quarter of this year, they received warm welcomes. Firefly, based in Texas, designs and manufactures small- and medium-lift launch vehicles as well as lunar landers and orbital transfer vehicle. First Moon landing In March, the Blue Ghost spacecraft will join a few private companies in the global race to the moon. Firefly Secured a Value of $2 Billion In a funding round in November 2024. It plans to list on Nasdaq with the symbol "FLY". Goldman Sachs is the lead underwriter for this offering. JPMorgan, Jefferies, and Wells Fargo will also be involved. (Reporting and editing by Pooja Deai in Bengaluru, with Prakhar Srivastava from Bengaluru)
-
The key events of the Air India crash investigation
The preliminary report on the Air India crash, which killed 260 people, revealed that the fuel cutoff switches for the engines were switched from run to off almost simultaneously seconds after takeoff. This deprived the engines of fuel. The timeline below shows the key events of the investigation so far: JUNE 12 Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner headed for London crashed shortly after takeoff in Ahmedabad, killing all 242 passengers on board except one. JUNE 13 India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau launches an investigation in the deadliest aircraft crash of the past decade. The team includes a representative from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, a flight traffic controller, and an aviation medicine specialist. Boeing 787 jets are equipped with two GE recorders. One is installed in the front of the jet and the other at the back. Both aircraft have a cockpit data recorder as well as a voice recorder. A black box is recovered on the roof of a nearby building. JUNE 16 The second blackbox unit was recovered from the debris on the crash site. JUNE 24 Indian Air Force aircraft transported the two black boxes separately from Ahmedabad, India to a lab at AAIB in Delhi. The team, led by the AAIB Director General and technical members of AAIB as well as the NTSB, began the data extraction in the evening. JUNE 25 The data from the memory module of the black box unit at the front end of the aircraft was successfully downloaded. In a report from 2014, the NTSB stated that the forward recorder has an independent power supply which provides backup power for the device for approximately 10 minutes in the event of a plane's loss of power. JULY 12 The preliminary report indicated that no action was recommended to Boeing or GE, indicating that a fault with the aircraft or engine is unlikely. The report said that one pilot could be heard asking the other pilot on the cockpit recording why he had cut off the gas. The report stated that "the other pilot replied that he had not done so." The crash report did not specify which flight captain made the remarks and which first officer. Nor did it identify which pilot sent out "Mayday Mayday Mayday" before the crash. The final report should be ready within one year after the accident. Reporting by Abhijith Gaapavaram, New Delhi. Editing by Jamie Freed
-
India discovers engine switch movement during fatal Air India crash; Boeing and GE do not take immediate action
The preliminary report on the Air India crash, which killed 260 people, revealed that three seconds after takeoff, the aircraft's fuel cutoff switches switched from run to off almost simultaneously, depriving the engine of fuel. According to the report published on Saturday by Indian aviation investigators, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner immediately started to lose thrust and sank down. On the cockpit voice recording, one pilot is heard asking the other pilot why he stopped the fuel. The report stated that "the other pilot replied that he had not done so." The crash report did not specify which flight captain made the remarks and which first officer. Nor did it identify which pilot sent out "Mayday Mayday Mayday" before the crash. The preliminary report does not mention how the switch on the flight to London from Ahmedabad, India, could have been flipped. John Cox, an aviation safety expert from the United States, said that a pilot could not accidentally move fuel switches feeding the engines. He said that a pilot would not be able to accidentally move the fuel switches that feed engines. The engines are cut off almost instantly by pressing the switch. Most often, it is used to shut down the engines once an aircraft has reached its gate at the airport or in emergency situations such as a fire. The report did not mention any emergency that would have required an engine cutoff. India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau stated that "at this stage of the investigation, there are currently no recommended actions for Boeing 787-8 engine operators or manufacturers and/or GE GEnx-1B engines" Air India, Boeing, and GE Aviation didn't immediately respond to requests for comments. The investigation is being led by the agency under the Indian civil aviation ministry. Reporting by Hritam Mukerjee in Bengaluru and Gursimran Khur in New Delhi. Additional reporting by Allison Lampert and David Shepardson, in Washington, and Rajesh Kumar Singh, in Chicago. Writing and editing by Jamie Freed.
How Biden's Gaza pier project unwinded
The first time President Joe Biden's administration considered buying the U.S. armed force to build a drifting pier off Gaza to deliver help in late 2023, it was put on the backburner.
The United States was under pressure to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in the war-torn Palestinian enclave, which had been worsened by Israel's closure of many land border crossings, and sea deliveries were viewed as a possible service.
U.S. Admiral Christopher Grady, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Personnel and a career Navy surface area warfare officer, told a conference that he was very worried that the sea could end up being too rough for a pier to provide humanitarian help and laid out weather-related risks, a former U.S. authorities and an existing U.S. official said.
It wasn't until early 2024 that the idea showed up again as the scenario in Gaza grew more desperate and aid organizations alerted that mass starvation among Palestinian civilians was looming.
We sort of reached a point where it appeared proper to take more risk due to the fact that the need was so excellent, a former senior Biden administration official said.
The resulting pier objective did not work out.
It included 1,000 U.S. soldiers, provided only a portion of the promised aid at an expense of nearly $230 million, and was from the start beleaguered by bad luck and mistakes, including fire, bad weather condition and dangers on coast from the fighting in between Israel and Hamas.
Biden, after assuring a massive increase in help, acknowledged that the pier had disappointed his goals. I was enthusiastic that would be more successful, he told reporters on July 11.
The internal discussions about the Gaza pier, consisting of discarded alternatives to briefly deploy soldiers to the enclave, have not been previously reported.
The pier objective, which was officially ended recently, was the most controversial of the U.S. military's attempts to help include the fallout from the Israel-Hamas war that appeared on Oct. 7, 2023, and has actually drawn criticism from Biden's Republican critics and numerous present and former help employees.
The effort also underscores the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's battles to bring the conflict to a close, both of which are in focus during his see to Washington today.
The Pentagon referred questions about the pier to remarks made at a July 17 rundown with Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, the deputy leader of U.S. Central Command. In it, Cooper said the mission was a success, delivering the largest quantity of help ever into the Middle East.
Mike Rogers, the Republican who leads the Pentagon's. oversight committee in your house of Representatives, called the. pier a humiliation.
The pier was an ill-conceived political computation by the. Biden administration, Rogers told .
NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND
With alarm rising over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza in. 2023, Curtis Reid, chief of staff at the White Home National. Security Council, was tasked with creating a working group with. various government firms to take a look at ways to increase help. into Gaza.
( It) was an ask for firms to put whatever you got. on the table, the previous senior official said. The Pentagon. then started taking a look at alternatives.
Requested comment, the NSC acknowledged inter-agency. conversations on possible policy choices.
Due to the fact that of this work, we had the ability to advance the delivery. of humanitarian assistance into Gaza, making use of every tool. possible, stated Adrienne Watson, an NSC representative.
When the head of the armed force's Central Command, General. Michael Erik Kurilla, at first briefed Defense Secretary. Lloyd Austin about the pier objective, his very first proposition included. a minimal variety of U.S. soldiers on the ground, briefly, to. attach the pier to the shore, the previous authorities stated.
Austin knew that the White Home was opposed to. releasing U.S. forces to Gaza and asked Kurilla to go back and. rework it, a current U.S. official and the previous authorities said.
Kurilla produced a plan to train Israeli forces to do the. setup of the pier on the shore, the former authorities. added. Israeli forces later carried out the plan. The Israeli. prime minister's workplace and defense ministry referred '. concerns about the pier to the U.S. military.
Kurilla's Central Command declined to discuss the record. A U.S. defense official, speaking on condition of privacy,. rejected the account and said boots on the ground was never a. factor to consider.
Present and former officials explained Central Command as. incredibly positive the pier task would succeed.
CENTCOM and General Kurilla, from Day 1, they were. consistent in stating: 'We can do this,' the previous U.S. official stated.
The first turn of misfortune began April 11, when a fire. broke out in the engine room of the USNS 2nd Lt. John P. Bobo, a. Navy ship transferring part of the pier system to the. Mediterranean.
The team put out the fire but the ship had to reverse to. the United States.
THREE FOOT WAVES
Weather condition was an even larger issue.
An early warning of the difficulties from rough seas came last. summertime, when U.S. troops attempted to set up the pier on an. Australian shore during a military workout.
The sea was too rough, a military officer who straight. dealt with the pier workout told .
In the end, the soldiers could not connect the pier to the. beach itself, and rather brought products ashore utilizing boats to. bridge the gap in between completion of the drifting pier and the. beach.
U.S. officials acknowledge that the Mediterranean weather. was a worry. However they were unprepared for how bad the sea. conditions turned out to be.
The forecast that they had (was) essentially that the sea. state was going to be three or less up till around September,. said one senior U.S. defense official, referring to sea state. three, when waves do not go beyond three feet.
Instead, waves broke the pier simply 9 days after it became. operational on May 16. The damage was so bad that it had to be. relocated to the Israeli port of Ashdod for repair work.
The occurrence would be show the norm, with bad weather condition. keeping the pier inoperative for all but 20 days-- half as long. as it required to bring the system across the sea to Gaza.
While there were no deaths or understood direct attacks on the. pier, three U.S. soldiers suffered non-combat injuries in assistance. of the pier in May, with one medically left in crucial. condition.
OVER-ESTIMATING DISTRIBUTION
Providing the food, shelter and medical care that was. brought onshore through the pier likewise proved more difficult than. expected.
The U.S. military aimed to increase to as many as 150 trucks. a day of help coming off the pier.
However since the pier was just operational for a total of 20. days, the military says it moved an overall of only 19.4 million. pounds of help into Gaza. That would have to do with 480 trucks of help. provided in total from the pier, based upon estimates by the. World Food Programme from earlier this year of weight brought by. a truck.
The United Nations states about 500 truckloads of aid are. needed everyday to deal with the needs of Palestinians in Gaza.
Simply days after the very first deliveries of aid rolled off the. pier in Gaza, crowds overwhelmed trucks and took a few of it.
Israel's killings of 7 World Central Cooking area employees in. April and its usage of an area near the pier as it staged a. hostage rescue healing objective in June also dented the. self-confidence of help companies, on whom the U.S. was relying to. bring the supplies from the coast and distribute to citizens.
A senior U.S. defense authorities acknowledged that aid. delivery showed to be possibly more difficult than the. organizers anticipated.
One previous authorities said Kurilla had actually raised distribution as. an issue early on.
General Kurilla was also really clear about that: 'I can do. my piece of this, and I can do circulation if you task me to do. it,' the former authorities stated.
However that was clearly scoped out of what the job was. Therefore we were reliant on these global companies.
Present and former U.S. officials informed that the. United Nations and help companies themselves were always cool. to the pier.
At a closed-door conference of U.S. officials and aid. companies in Cyprus in March, Sigrid Kaag, the U.N. humanitarian and reconstruction coordinator for Gaza, offered. tacit support for Biden's pier project.
But Kaag worried the UN preference was for land, land,. land, according to two people familiar with the discussions.
The United Nations decreased to talk about the meeting. It. referred to a rundown on Monday where a spokesperson for the. company said that the U.N. appreciated every way of getting. help into Gaza, consisting of the pier, but more gain access to through land. routes is needed.
The hidden concern for aid companies was that Biden,. under pressure from fellow Democrats over Israel's killing of. civilians in Gaza, was pushing a service that would at finest be. a short-term fix and at worst would take pressure off Netanyahu's. federal government to open land routes into Gaza.
Dave Harden, a previous USAID objective director to the West. Bank and Gaza, explained the pier project as humanitarian. theater.
It did ease the pressure, sadly, on having the.
(source: Reuters)