AvTalk Episode 328: Lock the cat in the lav

AVT 328 Transcript
EPISODE 328
[EPISODE]
[0:00:08] IP: Hello and welcome to episode 328 of AvTalk. I am Ian Petchenik, here, as always
with –
[0:00:16] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Hello, Ian. How are you?
[0:00:18] JR: Hello, Jason. I'm well. I'm sitting at home still. As it turns out, you are, too.
[0:00:25] JR: I am. I didn't intend to be, but sometimes –
[0:00:28] IP: You're not supposed to be.
[0:00:30] JR: That's how things work out. Sometimes you plan to go places and you don't.
You're not all that mad about it in the end.
[0:00:38] IP: In true avgeek fashion, I guess, you've been to two New York City airports this
week and have not flown anywhere.
[0:00:45] JR: Yes. Well, one of those I never intended to fly anywhere. 12 hours spent at the
two airports, I got on one plane, didn't go anywhere. On Monday, I joined the new JFK Terminal
1 for a tour of the still very much under construction terminal there. Also, a signing for its newest
airline tenant, which would be China Airlines. Very excited about that, of course. We got a good
old-fashioned hard hat tour of the new under construction terminal. You can't say no to that,
even if it is 95 degrees and 100% humidity out. Of course, the HVAC isn't working, because they
haven't installed it yet. But it was really nice. I think we're going to end up being weirdly happy
with our airports in their future state when all is said and done.
There are two major terminals being built right now, JFK Terminal 6, which is an add-on to
Terminal 5, I guess, kind of. And the new Terminal 1, which completely replaces old Terminal 1,
is also on the footprint of what was Terminal 2 and 3. It will become the largest international
© 2025 AvTalk 1
AVT 328 Transcript
terminal at JFK, which, I guess, means largest international terminal in New York, I guess. It
must mean that. It is just absolutely massive, compared to everything that predates it and
everything that is next to it, it makes the old Terminal 1 look like a little third-tier domestic airport
terminal.
It's funny how everything somewhat works there right now, but the new terminal is going to be
really something. They're especially proud, interestingly, about the CBP facility, of all things. It's
not going to be in the basement. There's going to be windows.
[0:02:33] IP: Whoa, whoa, whoa.
[0:02:35] JR: I know. We actually had a brainstorm on this there, and we can't think of any other
airport in the US with a CBP facility that isn't stashed away in the windowless basement. They're
very happy about that, to make the experience for everyone positive, which is not easy.
[0:02:52] IP: You mean, they’re going to try and welcome people to the United States?
[0:02:55] JR: Weird, yeah. I mean, they might have to import leaky drop ceiling tiles from other
terminals to really make you feel like you're in New York, but they're not planning on having any.
[0:03:04] IP: This is New York I know and love.
[0:03:06] JR: Yes, yes. If it's not leaking on you as soon as you arrive, are you really in New
York?
[0:03:11] IP: There you go. No, I don't think you are. I think that's just the way the world works.
[0:03:16] JR: Yes. Then there was yesterday, which also did not go as planned. I've probably
mentioned this before, but my least favorite route in the world, LaGuardia Dulles, the cursed
route, as I call it, the curse struck again. Really, really thought we'd beat the storms out of New
York and DC, but we didn't. We spent three hours taxiing around LaGuardia, only to be the next
departure for takeoff. Literally, you make a left, you're on the runway, you make a right, and
you're not on the runway. We turned right, unfortunately, because we didn't have enough fuel for
© 2025 AvTalk 2
AVT 328 Transcript
our reroute, which is only 150 miles added flight route, which we apparently did not have
enough fuel for, which is surprising.
Republic wouldn't have put us out there with as much fuel as possible, given LaGuardia
shenanigans in the summer, in July, whatever. When it really gets fun is when we eventually
went back to the gate to refuel, they said, you can get off the plane. Just if you get off, take all
your things and either don't come back, or you come back before we go. We spent less than 20
minutes out in the terminal, going to get something to eat. When we got back to the gate, they
were gone without us. Whoops.
[0:04:31] IP: Oh, Jason.
[0:04:33] JR: It was only 20 minutes. I don't even think it was actually 20 minutes. But they left
at least five of us behind. Then the plane just sat in the alleyway for about an hour before it went
anywhere. I didn't make it out. Does this count as me missing a flight? Because I've never
missed a flight before.
[0:04:52] IP: I think this flight missed you.
[0:04:53] JR: Yeah, that's it. I'll take that. That's more accurate.
[0:04:57] IP: Well, I'm glad you're here today, wherever you are, so that we can get this week's
episode in. A reminder for next week, we won't have an episode next week. I am being
untethered from my desk, and I'm going on vacation. I'm traveling with the family, so wish me
luck, and I will be sure to inform everyone how it goes when I return, and when we return with
new episodes in two weeks' time.
[0:05:25] JR: Yes. Some advice, if you go back to the gate for more gas and they let you off the
plane, don't go far.
[0:05:31] IP: I'm going to leave one of the kids in the plane, so that they – No, that's probably a
bad idea.
© 2025 AvTalk 3
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:05:36] JR: No, that's the worst idea. Oh, no, you got to refine this thought.
[0:05:41] IP: Okay, let's do the news, because there is a lot to get through this week before we
are off, and it's some very hard-hitting stuff, and then some not hard-hitting stuff at all. I think
we've got a good mix this week. Let's start in India, where Jon Ostrower, from The Air Current, is
reporting that investigators are now focusing on movement of the engine fuel control switches
on the Air India 787 that crashed last month. This is ahead of an expected preliminary report
that is likely going to be issued late this week, or early next week. Once that report comes out,
we will have commentary on that, if not on the podcast immediately for next week, then at least
on the FlightRatar24 blog, so keep an eye on that. What Ostrower is reporting at this point is
that the investigation does not point to any mechanical, or design issue with the 787, or the
GEnx engines that power the 787-8.
[0:06:54] JR: That checks out since we haven't heard any emergency airworthiness directives,
or really any direction from Boeing, or the engine manufacturer, really anyone to take any
action, because there's no action to be taken right now.
[0:07:07] IP: Exactly. Further to that, the investigation thus far, and this is Jon Ostrower
reporting, quoting people who have knowledge of the investigation, that there's been no sign of
fuel contamination, which was one of the, I guess, conjectures being put forth by a number of
folks, as well as no improper retraction of the aircraft's flaps, which was one of the immediate
conjectures that was being posited by a vast majority of folks.
[0:07:38] JR: Yeah. The fuel contamination being a much more plausible theory, I guess, than
the flaps being retracted that day.
[0:07:45] IP: Right, right.
[0:07:47] JR: Really wouldn't have made a ton of sense, but fuel contamination certainly would
help explain a double engine failure. Short of that, well, let's go farther into what Jon had to say.
[0:07:57] IP: Right. As Jason mentioned, there have been no emergency airworthiness
directives from anyone. There have been no multi-operator messages from Boeing, or GE, and
© 2025 AvTalk 4
AVT 328 Transcript
those are basically emergency broadcasts by the manufacturer of either the airframe, or the
engine saying, “This is something that we know needs to be changed now. Do that now.” There
have been no urgent recommendations from either the Indian Air Accident Investigation Board,
or the US NTSB, and the FAA has not said anything, or issued any CANICs, which is the
Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community, another emergency
broadcast. None of that has come across.
I will caution, and Jon wanted me to make sure that our listeners knew this. Jon's reporting is
not saying that this was the cause of the crash. That's not what this reporting is saying. This
report is saying that this is room for further investigation. We don't know why, we don't know
how, we don’t know who, we don't know any of that, and that will unfortunately, likely not be in
the preliminary report that comes out in a week or so, but we'll have to wait until the final report.
Let's step back for a moment and talk about what the fuel control switches are, where they are,
and what they do.
[0:09:32] JR: And the protections against accidentally fussing around with them.
[0:09:36] IP: Yes. The fuel control switches, the 787 being a two-engine aircraft. There are two
fuel control switches. They have two positions, run and cut off. They are located immediately
behind the throttle levers. They are small-ish. It's a half of a finger length knob-sized switch.
[0:10:05] JR: A little stubby little knobs.
[0:10:06] IP: Yeah. The ends light up if the engines are on fire. So, they light up red, which
provides a visual cue to the pilots to show that this engine is sensing fire. They are operated by
lift stops. It's not like a light switch, where you can flick it down to cut off and you can flick it up to
run. The controls need to be lifted and then pushed to get over a physical stop lock.
[0:10:37] JR: 10th, basically. There are also in this very well-annotated diagram from The Air
Current, there are also guarded brackets on either side to the left and right. If you are
manipulating, let's say, the flaps, your hand can't accidentally move to the left and hit somehow
and then lift and then move these levers. There's an actual physical piece of metal that prevents
© 2025 AvTalk 5
AVT 328 Transcript
you from hitting these two knobs as well. There's about as much protection, short of putting a
cover over these knobs as possible.
[0:11:12] IP: Yeah. That's the physical stuff. That's how it's supposed to work, that's where they
are, that's how things work. What we don't know is whether or not one, or both of those switches
were moved. What we absolutely do not know at this point and what Jon Ostrower's reporting is
saying is that they cannot rule in or out any movement that was improper, or inadvertent, or
intentional. We don't know why these switches moved, but the investigation is focusing on the
movement of those switches.
[0:12:00] JR: Yeah. I mean, maybe it's possible getting probably too far down the realm of
speculation here, but we've seen in the past issues with the A350 and its fuel cutoff switches,
basically. I believe, there were incidents where beverages were being spilled on that section of
the throttle quadrant, and it was shorting out the engine cut off and was actually leading to
engine cut off. The investigation may lead to these knobs being the source of what happened,
but that doesn't necessarily mean the knobs themselves were actually touched in any way. We
have so much to learn, so many unanswered questions that hopefully, we will figure out at some
point.
[0:12:42] IP: Yeah. I mean, it's very early days yet. We'll see what comes out in the preliminary
report. There probably won't be very much out in the preliminary report that's due this week or
next, and then we'll begin the long wait of waiting to see what the final report says, which should
give us the probable cause of this crash. Jason, let's move on to the interesting week that has
befallen Lufthansa.
[0:13:18] JR: Yeah, it's been a week for them.
[0:13:20] IP: They've had some problems. Not really anything within their control. Things have
just happened to them this week. The first was an A340 that was in Boston, and supposed to go
back to Frankfurt, but it was damaged by a high loader on arrival. They were, I assume,
unloading cargo on arrival, and the aircraft was punctured. The aircraft's skin was punctured,
which ruptured the pressure vessel. They repaired it well enough to fly back to Frankfurt to
complete the repair, but they had to fly it back, unpressurized.
© 2025 AvTalk 6
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:14:00] JR: Ooh, that's a long way to go.
[0:14:03] IP: The entire Boston Frankfurt flight was at 10,000 feet.
[0:14:06] JR: Oh.
[0:14:09] IP: 10 and a half hours.
[0:14:10] JR: Wow. What's the –
[0:14:11] IP: That's normally a six and a half hour flight. Six and a half hours. Yeah.
[0:14:16] JR: That's, oof, not a fun day.
[0:14:17] IP: Six and a half hour flight that lasted 10 and a half hours. I mean, crew alone, so I
can only imagine how fun it was for them.
[0:14:26] JR: Oh, John Walton's going to be real and happy that somebody tried to harm an
A340-600.
[0:14:31] IP: He's already on it. Don't worry. Don't worry. Our good friend, John Walton, A340
enthusiast, he's already on it, trying to understand.
[0:14:39] JR: That specifically A340-600. He would be very upset with you, if you didn't add
that.
[0:14:43] IP: Yes. Next, this is just one of those things where you go, “Huh, what was going on
here?” Then as the situation unfolds, you go, “Okay, that all makes sense. I'm really glad that
safety prevailed.” There was a Lufthansa 747 that was inbound from Frankfurt to Buenos Aires.
Buenos Aires weather was just awful. Dense fog. I want to say the ceiling was 200 feet at best
for much of the day, and nothing was really getting in.
© 2025 AvTalk 7
AVT 328 Transcript
The flight diverted to Asuncion. Then they tried it again to get into Buenos Aires. That didn't
work. They ended up in Sao Paulo. The aircraft squawked 7,700, because they were low on
fuel, and because the crew had reached their time out. They needed to get on the ground to
make sure that everything was within safety margins. They did that. Everything was fine. This
was one of those things where the squawking 7,700, internationally recognized symbol for
general emergency. However, the definition of emergency, because of the safety margins
enjoyed by commercial aviation. No one was ever in danger. This was a, we're getting near our
legal requirements for fuel and duty time, and so we need priority landing. That's exactly what
happened.
[0:16:18] JR: It's a, “Hey, look at me. I need special attention call,” basically.
[0:16:22] IP: Yeah, exactly. And they got it.
[0:16:25] JR: Yeah. I'm unimpressed by this one. It sounds like literally every flight in the New
York area. Forget New York, the Northeast, but it's compounding.
[0:16:33] IP: Exactly. It's compounding. In a way, Lufthansa ended up with, let's see, three
separate countries that they were not trying to land in. That was not bad for logbook purposes, I
guess.
[0:16:45] JR: It happens.
[0:16:46] IP: Then there's this one. This happened overnight on July 8th, so yesterday.
Yesterday evening, a Lufthansa flight from Miami to Frankfurt had a cat onboard. That's not
unusual.
[0:17:04] JR: No. I've had an odd number of cats on my flights this year, actually. Quiet cats,
which is nice.
[0:17:11] IP: This cat, I can't speak for the cats of volume on this particular flight, but what I can
speak to was the cat's containment, which was not. The carrier that the cat was in had a hole in
© 2025 AvTalk 8
AVT 328 Transcript
it. If you have a cat, or know anything about cats, they can squeeze in and out of very small
spaces.
[0:17:36] JR: They are liquid. That's true.
[0:17:39] IP: This cat got out into the cabin during the flight.
[0:17:43] JR: Not good.
[0:17:46] IP: The cabin crew found one of the linen bags that they put used first-class napkins
in. Well, that bag, well, not airtight, isn't permeable so much. They realized that the cat couldn't
breathe. They took the cat out of the bag. They left the cat out of the bag, Jason.
[0:18:10] JR: Ah, I see.
[0:18:12] IP: And they locked it in one of the lavatories.
[0:18:16] JR: I'm surprised they were able to catch the cat. That's not easy.
[0:18:20] IP: They caught the cat. They were able to lock it in one of the lavatories, slapped an
INOP sticker on one of the lavatories, and they made it to Frankfurt.
[0:18:27] JR: I hope they closed the toilet seat first. Otherwise, they could have gotten a little
messy. But that's impressive. Really, I mean, apparently none of the cabin crew were cat
owners, because all you got to do is put a cardboard box down at the galley, and the problem
will sort itself out. Go, find that box.
[0:18:44] IP: I don't know what went on there, but that's the story, as was relayed from someone
with direct knowledge of the events onboard.
[0:18:53] JR: Happy ending.
[0:18:55] IP: Thank you for sharing that story. It made my day.
© 2025 AvTalk 9
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:18:57] JR: Even if it's not true. Even if that's a completely made-up story, I'm okay with it.
[0:19:01] IP: No, it's not made up. Unfortunately, we don't have pictures, because that person
was not in a picture-taking mood, shall we say. Okay, let's go to Antarctica, but we're going to go
with permission.
[0:19:15] JR: Ah, that's the tricky bit. You need that to go somewhere where you're not really
supposed to go, ever.
[0:19:23] IP: Ethan Guo is a 19-year-old pilot on a journey to – he was trying to be the first
person, or the youngest person to fly solo to all seven continents. The idea behind these flights
was that he was going to raise a million dollars for cancer research, which is a certainly
admirable goal, and I wish him well-doing so.
[0:19:46] JR: Absolutely.
[0:19:47] IP: We may even talk to him about that at some point. But we can't talk to him right
now, because he's currently being detained by Chilean authorities on King George Island off the
North Coast of Antarctica, because he decided that he was going to fly there from Punta Arenas
and not get permission to do so. The Chilean authorities are quite upset that he did this.
The statement that they released reads, in part, quote, “The pilot's failure to provide information
immediately triggered the alert protocols for such situations, including the deployment of aerial
assets for its search, entailing the use of state resources and posing risks to operational safety.”
He was supposed to fly from Punta Arenas to Ushuaia, which is certainly well within the range of
a Cessna 182, and certainly a common flight, especially if you're trying to get closer to
Antarctica as part of what he was trying to do. That was the file destination. He ended up at
King George Island, which is basically, the northern tip of the Antarctic archipelago, I guess.
[0:21:01] JR: Which I guess, qualifies as the continent? Sure.
[0:21:05] IP: It qualifies as Antarctica for the purposes of, that's what flag is there at the station?
© 2025 AvTalk 10
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:21:12] JR: It also qualifies for the purposes of pissing off authorities.
[0:21:16] IP: Exactly. Here's the statement that representatives provided us. “Ethan is flying
around the world to raise funds for cancer patients. In this context, he departed from Punta
Arenas with an approved flight plan to Ushuaia. Due to weather conditions, and in order to
ensure his safety, he had to divert to Teniente Marsh, which is the airport on King George
Island,” and I'll continue to quote, “which is a public airfield according to Chilean regulations.”
[0:21:44] JR: That is the least plausible thing I have ever heard.
[0:21:51] IP: I thought to myself, okay, sure. I will give him the benefit of the doubt, and say,
maybe there was weather. I mean, these are areas of unpredictable weather, and winds can go
out of bounds rather quickly. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, and say, maybe returning
back to Punta Arenas, which is what he did the day before, mind you, was unavailable. Maybe
Ushuaia was unavailable. I don't know. I looked up the METAR for Ushuaia. Winds 260 at 13
knots. Scattered clouds at 4,000 feet.
[0:22:25] JR: Pleasant. Very nice.
[0:22:28] IP: Winds growing to 18 knots max, and then falling down to 11 knots minimum, all at
250, or 260. Jason, I will give you two guesses. Let me preface this again, saying the winds
were at 250 and 260 on the heading. I will give you two guesses, what the runway heading at
Ushuaia is.
[0:22:52] JR: I'm going to guess they line up real nicely with those wind headings.
[0:22:57] IP: Sure do. They've got runway 25 at Ushuaia that was certainly available to other
traffic during this time period. I also checked the satellite. There is no intense precipitation at
Punta Arenas, or Ushuaia. There is, however, poor weather between both of those airports and
King George Island where he landed.
[0:23:22] JR: As you would expect there to be, because there usually is.
© 2025 AvTalk 11
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:23:29] IP: All of that said, that's his statement.
[0:23:32] JR: Yeah. The Drake Passage isn't typically known as one of the calmest places in
the world, is it?
[0:23:38] IP: In fact, it's not. I mean, there are multiple names for the degrees of latitude that
are increasingly perilous.
[0:23:45] JR: Yeah. I think in this case, the only thing the authorities would like less than
someone trying to do this is somebody lying about why they're doing it, because he caught red-
handed here. He's still there, right? Or at least the aircraft is still there.
[0:23:59] IP: Here's the thing. We know for sure the airplane’s still there. I have no knowledge
of him leaving. The Chilean authorities filed, I'm not exactly sure what it is in Chile, but basically,
a complaint to the public prosecutor's office saying, “Hey, this guy did a bunch of bad stuff.” The
Chilean prosecutor agreed and they're detaining him up to 90 days, while the investigation
continues. I guess, he's still there on the island. I don't know if he's been flown back to the
Chilean mainland, or what, but he's at least still in Chile as far as I know.
[0:24:37] JR: All right. Well, it makes the press outreach, or the media outreach they did to us,
literally the day before all that much more timely. I wish we had spoken to him the day before
and said, “Do you think that's a good idea?”
[0:24:51] IP: That would have been a fun episode of the podcast.
[0:24:53] JR: It would have been.
[0:24:54] IP: You're doing what now?
[0:24:56] JR: Are you sure?
© 2025 AvTalk 12
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:24:58] IP: His invitation to come on the podcast is open. I would love to hear his side of the
story. I absolutely would, to learn more about what was going on here.
[0:25:06] JR: There's always two sides to a story, but this one, I don't know.
[0:25:11] IP: We'll leave it there and move on. This next story, it happens from time to time and
it's never less shocking and horrific and sad when it does. This week, a person was ingested by
a Volotea A319 engine at Milan Bergamo Airport. The person made it onto the airfield by
entering the air side via car, driving the wrong way down, basically, the entrance exit road. Then
they led security and police on a foot chase throughout the apron area and on the ramp, and the
chase ended when that person was ingested into one of the aircraft's engines. They were fatally
injured and that's all we know about what happened so far. We don't know if this was a plan that
this person had. We have no information on that at this point. But all of the passengers and
crew onboard were safe and no one else was injured, which is a certainly very real possibility
given that the aircraft was basically just pushed back and getting ready to taxi and there were
still other people around the aircraft. We will continue to follow this story, but a very sad event
taking place. Like I said, these things happen from time to time and it's never less sad.
[0:26:42] JR: No. Usually, it's very sad when it's an airport, an airline, and boy, but in this case,
it's also just strange.
[0:26:48] IP: Absolutely. Absolutely. More information when that becomes available, if it
becomes available. The NTSB late last week released its preliminary report on the close call
between Delta Airlines A319 and a flight of four T-38s that were set to perform a flyover at a
funeral at Arlington National Cemetery. The preliminary report, I had to read I think three or four
times before I began to understand what was happening. The preliminary report is pointing to a
misunderstanding, miscommunication, variation in what words mean between two people
situation, between air traffic controllers at the Potomac TRACON and the Washington National
Tower facility.
The communication that there would be a flyover and that departures from DCA should stop
was never an issue. Controllers at both the Potomac TRACON as well as DCA Tower knew that
there was going to be a flyover. They even knew about what time it was going to take place, so
© 2025 AvTalk 13
AVT 328 Transcript
they communicated and said, the T-38s were going to be around DCA at a little after 3, or 15:00.
Let's keep it all 24-hour clock, that way, I won't get confused. Then later on, they said that
there's a stop time of 17. Meaning that the tower should pause departures at 17 minutes past
15:00.
[0:28:34] JR: Okay.
[0:28:35] IP: Then at 15:02, the TRACON controller said, “Your new time on target is 15:15.” At
15”12, the TRACON supervisor contacted the tower again and then said, “Stop all departures.
Hard time is now 17.” “Hard time” is going to be the key phrase here. Because the tower
controller then replied, “Hard time 17. We will stop all departures.” Jason, what does that mean
to you?
[0:29:10] JR: Hard stop, as in stop everything you're doing at the hard time. Not exactly
phrasing I'm familiar with, but that –
[0:29:19] IP: Nor I.
[0:29:20] JR: - context seems to make sense.
[0:29:21] IP: But in this context, I take that to mean, okay, the hard time is now 17. Meaning at
15:17, I –
[0:29:28] JR: Stop what you’re doing.
[0:29:29] JR: - the DCA tower controller will stop all departures. At 15:15, Delta flight 2983 was
cleared for takeoff from runway 19. As the Delta jet was taking off, the TRACON called the tower
and said, “Hey, why is that jet taking off?” The tower controller said, “I've got two more minutes.
You said a hard time of 15:17.” The Delta jet was almost in the air at that point. They
coordinated to make sure that there would be no closer approach between the T-38s and the
Delta jet. They were quite close, but there was no contact between the flights between the Delta
A319 and the T-38s.
© 2025 AvTalk 14
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:30:18] JR: Sounds like, they interpreted that as a soft time, not hard time, or mushy time. I
don't know.
[0:30:27] IP: Yeah. I think that that could have been much more clearly communicated.
[0:30:31] JR: Yes. Next time, maybe just say, “Don't move any airplanes after this time.”
[0:30:37] IP: Right. That's the preliminary report. Hopefully, we'll get a bit more between the
when the doc gets released and we'll get the interviews from the air traffic controllers, because I
think the transcript of those interviews will actually be much more illuminating than the
preliminary report.
Moving over to the commercial side of the industry, let's pick it up with Boeing, now going to end
up with not that they want it to, but end up with Spirit’s Belfast assets, I guess. Basically, the
Shorts Brothers’ factory in Belfast, except for the A220 wing production. Airbus is going to get fat
and Boeing is going to get everything else, which will include Bombardier fuselages. That's
going to be interesting.
[0:31:27] JR: Okay.
[0:31:28] IP: They're embracing it, so they say. I mean, they're saying that this is something that
they're, “We will warmly welcome Short Brothers Belfast to the Boeing family. Boeing taking
ownership of Belfast is an outcome we've known was a possibility for some time.” Real ringing
endorsement there.
[0:31:45] JR: Oh, an outcome we knew could happen one day is, I feel like, they would have
preferred Airbus. Or maybe, literally anyone else.
[0:31:54] IP: No, no. That was Boeing's comment.
[0:31:56] JR: Oh. Ooh. That's even worse somehow.
© 2025 AvTalk 15
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:32:00] IP: I know. This is the thing where Airbus agreed to take over the A220 wing
production facilities. Boeing was trying to find someone else to buy the rest of it. No one wanted
to buy it, and so now it's Boeing's to figure out what to do with.
[0:32:19] JR: I feel like, we could have stood a chance here, looked under the couch for some
coins. Could I have a production facility?
[0:32:26] IP: Hey, hey. There's still time. I'm sure that we would be able to scrounge up some
change for that.
[0:32:30] JR: Oh, well. Next time.
[0:32:31] IP: There you go. The US has now lifted the prohibition on aerospace component
exports to China, specifically the LEAP-1C engine that powers the C-919 and the CF34 engine
that powers what is now known as the C909, formerly the ARJ 21-700. That comes after a few
months ago, late May, the agreement reached between the US and China over US access to
rare earth minerals found in China. A very heavy-handed transactional lifting of the prohibitions,
but engines are now able to move again. For its part, GE and CFM said, “We continued to build
the engines the whole time.” Now, it’s just a matter of shipping.
[0:33:26] JR: Basically, they said, “We just ignored this the whole time.”
[0:33:29] IP: And just didn't ship anything. Yes.
[0:33:31] JR: Yeah. Then we just shipped it once the nonsense ended. Maybe nonsense comes
back. Maybe this happens over again. I don't know. But if I were Comac, I would have been not
too happy about the prospects of that lasting for all too long.
[0:33:45] IP: Certainly not.
[0:33:46] JR: Hey, that's great to have bargaining chips. I don't really know what rare earth
minerals are exactly, but I know they're important. That was a good bargaining chip.
© 2025 AvTalk 16
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:33:55] IP: Speaking of things ending, Jason, Sweden is ending its flight tax. This was a per
passenger, per flight tax introduced in 2018. That was commonly known as flight shaming, or
the tax that was associated with flight shaming, that came out of the climate activism by young
Swede, Greta Thunberg. This scrapping of the tax comes as the government now looked
around and said, “Hey, our aviation sector is not doing so well.”
[0:34:38] JR: Hey, wait a minute. May have gone too far. Well, I for one, I'm looking forward to
my next flight to Stockholm to be a little bit cheaper, because I was going to take it anyway. But
if it's a little bit cheaper, I'll be happy about that.
[0:34:53] IP: This was a tax that was between 76 and 517 crowns, which roughly equates to $7
and 80 cents to $53, give or take, depending on what exchange rate, what days exchange rate
you're using. The tax, at least initially worked. Airports saw passenger levels drop. Rail
operators saw passenger levels climb. However, smaller airports in the more remote regions of
Sweden that are the lifeline similar to Alaska and the US, where the airport is the hub of
community for a lot of folks, those airports suffered shrank and lost commercial services.
[0:35:44] JR: Yeah, that checks out. IATA is obviously happy about this, being the aviation
industry's or commercial aviation’s lobbying body. They were quoted as saying, “We
congratulate the Swedish government for abolishing the aviation tax.” It's excellent news, which
recognizes the taxation of air passengers counterproductive economically and ineffectively
environmentally. I guess, part of that is true. It did turn out to be ineffective for environmental
purposes in the end. It started off strong, but didn't quite stay that way, did it?
[0:36:16] IP: Yeah. It's not to say that the goal is not admirable and not worthwhile.
[0:36:23] JR: It is.
[0:36:24] IP: I think that's certainly one of the things that often is lost in the conversation here, is
that any reduction in emissions by aviation, until there's a magic way to not emit, that reduction’s
going to have to come from fewer flights. In a way, this was very effective. The unintended
consequences, as we've seen with a lot of climate-friendly policies, were not necessarily
worthwhile, as far as the government was concerned for the people of Sweden.
© 2025 AvTalk 17
AVT 328 Transcript
Another thing where these certainly very well-intentioned climate-friendly policies have had
unintended practical effects on existing folk. How we figure that out is, I think, the key to making
all of these things work.
[0:37:20] JR: Yeah. That will make your SAS flight slightly cheaper. You know what's going to
make your SAS flights probably a bit more expensive in the very near future, Ian?
[0:37:29] IP: I do. I'm not entirely thrilled about this one.  But I am happy about it. I'm generally
speaking. I'm happy that this is –
[0:37:37] JR: Generally positive for SAS's future prospects of being a going concern. But Air
France KLM has announced that they want to take a majority stake in SAS. Not just a minority
stake, but a majority stake, which will make this, basically, make it the Air France KLM-SAS
group at this point. That will almost certainly mean SAS the Atlantic joint venture in the future,
which will normalize its prices with Air France and KLM, which means fares will just go up, which
means passengers will fly less, which, hey, maybe we'll meet our environmental goals that way,
except the increased –
[0:38:14] IP: Maybe.
[0:38:15] JR: - fare won't be a tax that goes to the Swedish government to do other things with.
It'll just go to Air France KLM.
[0:38:23] IP: Yeah. This was always the plan. When Air France KLM came in and invested in
SAS, this was always the plan that Air France KLM would take a majority stake, or outright
ownership of SAS eventually. The good thing is, is that this is happening much sooner than they
thought, because of how well SAS has turned things around. That's the good news.
[0:38:50] JR: That’s nice.
© 2025 AvTalk 18
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:38:51] IP: The people who fly SAS on a regular basis, I agree. They have quite in fact turned
things around. What's interesting here is that as part of this new phase in things, Air France
KLM is saying, SAS is a very undersized fleet, given the size of the market they serve.
[0:39:11] JR: And an elderly fleet at that. At least the wide bodies.
[0:39:13] IP: Very interesting to see how many more A350s they plan on picking up.
[0:39:21] JR: Well, they shed quite a number of them in recent years, right?
[0:39:24] IP: But they never had that many to begin with.
[0:39:26] JR: That many to begin with. Yeah.
[0:39:27] IP: Yeah, exactly. We'll see how that one goes. We'll also see, as Jason mentioned,
how long it takes for them to enter into the joint venture. It'll be some time, because the majority
ownership won't happen overnight. Then the joint venture agreement would have to be
approved by the USDOT. That timeline could be, who knows how long when it's all said and
done? This isn't something that's going to happen next week, but it is something that is on the
horizon.
[0:39:57] JR: Yes. I will certainly be submitting comment to the USDOT in opposition of that, if
and when it does happen. I expect you, too.
[0:40:07] IP: I look forward to reading your comments. Let's go through some orders and
deliveries. We have a couple post-Paris Airshow, a couple more really. We talked about a few
last week, a couple more post-Paris Airshow orders. These both going to Airbus as part of a
state visit by Malaysia to France last week. The first being Malaysia Airlines exercising options
for an additional 20 A330-900neos. That will take the total fleet up to 40 when it is all said and
done. Though, it sounds like Malaysia Airlines might not be all said or all done yet with their
order book.
[0:40:50] JR: Quite the little rebound.
© 2025 AvTalk 19
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:40:52] IP: Yeah. AirAsia has purchased 50 plus options for 20 A321-XLRs. That comes on
top of a slight reconfiguration of an existing order to slide a few more of those orders to the XLR
variant. Tony Fernandez also says that they're looking into a “up to 150 aircraft order.” That
order is said to be comprised possibly, probably, of Embraer E2s and A220s and will likely be
announced within the next month.
[0:41:32] JR: AirAsia just can't get enough aircraft, can it? Reminds me of the very old
Simpson's episode where the devil, or whatever is just jamming donuts into Homer's mouth and
he just keeps going, “More, more, more.” This is AirAsia. They just can't get enough airplanes.
[0:41:49] IP: So many airplanes.
[0:41:50] JR: More.
[0:41:51] IP: All the airplanes. For its part, Airbus has reported the deliveries for June and the
first half of the year. Airbus deliveries for the first half of the year are on par with the first half of
the last two years as well. 23, 24, 25, roughly the same number of deliveries. But deliveries
have surged in June with 63 aircraft going home to airlines and one government in June. 12
A220-300s, that's 300s, not A220s generally, because no one wants the A220-100 anymore.
[0:42:30] JR: I like them.
[0:42:32] IP: Fine. Jason wants them. 20 A320neos, 23 A321neos, one A330-200. That was an
MRTT for Canada, which I believe calls them The Husky. Then you've got two A330-900neos,
and five A350-900s. Airbus took in 156 net orders in June. Net orders, because they lost all
seven A350 freighter orders from lessor, Air Lease, which was previously the launch customer of
the A350.
[0:43:14] JR: Do we know why that happened?
[0:43:16] IP: We don't.
© 2025 AvTalk 20
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:43:17] JR: Interesting.
[0:43:18] IP: Air Lease says, “That all shall be revealed when we release our second quarter
earnings.”
[0:43:23] JR: Ooh. Okay. We'll take a look at that when that happens.
[0:43:27] IP: Then a couple small points to round out the show. We talked about the proposed
takeoff performance monitoring software that the European Union Aviation Safety Agency is
considering adopting, or is pushing towards adoption. An A350 pilot wrote, or A380 pilot wrote in
and said, “Hey, we've had this for five years,” and sent us a screenshot. That was pretty neat.
Yes, all of this is already happening. This would require it more broadly on a much wider array of
aircraft. The technology is there. It just needs to be required, so that it's elsewhere.
The Frontier A321 that had a very, very, very hard landing in San Juan in April 15th has now
been repaired enough to ferry back from San Juan to – it’s supposed to go to Birmingham. It's
powered up right now. It was supposed to leave earlier today, but we'll see if it actually gets out.
This was the A321neo that bounced so hard, the left nose landing gear came off and departed
the aircraft, impacted the engine and created a right mess for the airline and the airport.
[0:44:50] JR: All things considered three months to do that work, at least to ferry it home, that's
not too terrible.
[0:44:56] IP: No, not too terrible at all. Delta's going, “Hey, we could have done it in six weeks.”
[0:45:00] JR: Could have been six days.
[0:45:02] IP: Could have been six days. We would have just used a wheel from some kid’s
bicycle and some duct tape and would have been fine. That aircraft will hopefully be on the
move soon. Keeping an eye on that one. In news that, okay, sure, why not, the TSA has
changed their policy, seemingly overnight, and you don't have to take off your shoes anymore.
© 2025 AvTalk 21
AVT 328 Transcript
[0:45:26] JR: Oh, okay. This one trickled out real weird. There was a Forbes blog post referring
to someone on TikTok, who used to work for the TSA that doesn't anymore and that every
mainstream media just picked up on and lo and behold, two days later, it was confirmed by the
TSA that you don't have to take your shoes off anymore. Which, okay, great. But apparently,
technology has progressed to the point where that's no longer a necessary thing.
[0:45:56] IP: Excellent.
[0:45:57] JR: Okay. Great. Let's just hope it's consistent and applied evenly across all
checkpoints in the US, because we know how much the TSA loves to have different rules per
different lanes, per different terminals in different airports in different parts of the country, and
they will certainly bark those rules at you as loud as possible. It's always your fault.
[0:46:18] IP: To be fair, Jason, it is always your fault.
[0:46:22] JR: It is. That's true.
[0:46:26] IP: All right. This has been episode 328 of AvTalk. As a reminder, no new episode next
week. We will be back the following week with whatever has happened in the time that we are
gone. Until then, I am Ian Petchenik, here, as always with –
[0:46:46] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Thanks for listening.
[END]
© 2025 AvTalk 22