AvTalk Episode 331: Stuck on the plane for 28 hours

AVT 331 Transcript
EPISODE 331
[EPISODE]
[0:00:07] IP: Hello and welcome to episode 331 of AvTalk. I am Ian Petchenik, here, as always
with –
[0:00:16] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Hello, Ian. What's up?
[0:00:19] IP: Hello, Jason. Happy Wednesday. I had to check, like I didn't know what day it was,
because we record on a variety of days all the time, right?
[0:00:29] JR: All of them ending in Wednesday.
[0:00:31] IP: All of them ending in Wednesday. Indeed, we are here. Once again, it is
Wednesday, August 6th, and it is time for another episode. I feel like we're in that weird, it's still
summer, but everyone's pretty much almost done with summer, and I don't know if I speak for all
parents, but I am ready for my children to go back to school.
[0:00:55] JR: I mean, maybe from a parental point of view, it feels like summer is over. But if
you're in a business professional setting, this is right smack dab in the middle of summer, where
it seems like nobody beyond the continent of Europe works. It's pretty slow right now, and I'm
okay with that.
[0:01:14] IP: There's a Slack channel that we have for FlightRadar24 staff plans. The number of
staff plans listed increases when people are out of the office. There was a lot of scrolling today.
Certainly, folks taking time off. But we're not off. We're here. Let's do the show. We have some
updates from day two and three of last week's three-day, 30 hours of testimony at the NTSB
hearing on the DCA mid-air collision. We recorded last Wednesday, which allowed us to discuss
what we learned on day one, but then we have day two and day three.
© 2025 AvTalk 1
AVT 331 Transcript
Day two focused a lot on air traffic control aspects of the airspace, of DCA, in particular, of how
the Potomac TRACON facility and DCA tower work together, how everyone's under a lot of
pressure. After all of that, most of the media headlines completely missed the point.
[0:02:36] JR: What was that point?
[0:02:37] IP: The point was the discussion about what's going on at an institutional level, and
how the FAA manages air traffic control facilities, how they're resourced, and how DCA in
particular is impacted by political wins, shall we say, that are often beneficial to members of
Congress, but not necessarily beneficial to the airport and/or the airspace in which it sits. The
New York Times headline, Jason, do you remember seeing what it was?
[0:03:14] JR: I don't. I tend to not pay attention to the New York Times much these days.
[0:03:19] IP: They went with the headline of ‘Controllers were not Tested for Alcohol After the
Crash’.
[0:03:26] JR: That's why I don't pay attention to the New York Times a lot, because of nonsense
like that. Now, I remember.
[0:03:33] IP: What they talked about was how the airspace around DCA is structured, and also
how many aircraft are coming into DCA. Not only how many aircraft are coming into DCA, when
they are coming in, and how compacted demand for DCA is, because DCA is basically, it's a
rush hour airport, where you have huge peaks in demand at very specific times of day, and
those just happen to be early in the morning, because people want to get to DC for business,
and in the evening when people want to leave. It's not spread out throughout the day. That
raises very interesting questions about how the airspace is designed, and how much air traffic it
can handle, based on the resources that air traffic controllers have at the moment.
The Potomac TRACON manager, Bryan Lehman, said that he requested the arrival rate into
DCA be reduced in 2022 and 2023. The FAA has still not accepted this proposal, and Congress
has since then, in the FAA reauthorization bill of 2024, added more slots to DCA.
© 2025 AvTalk 2
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:05:00] JR: Yeah, that was in hindsight, that really did turn out to not be a great idea. It's one
thing to have, I think, awarded additional perimeter exemption flights, but then to also to add
those and to add additional slots to DCA has turned out to be not a great idea. If they wanted to
add additional beyond perimeter flights, it probably should have taken that from the pool of
existing slots. Then you get into the argument of, well, then that means you're going to take
connectivity away from cities that are within the perimeter that I'm going to lose service entirely.
It's a no-win scenario, really.
[0:05:37] IP: Yeah. The other point that came out of day two was that DCA tower staffing, there
are fewer controller staffing in DCA tower now than there were in January at the time of the
accident.
[0:05:49] JR: Not great. Not what you want to hear, but at least these days, it seems like the
FAA is far more willing and able and proactively putting in traffic management programs,
seemingly every day, even on clear blue days, that limits the amount of traffic during all of the
busy hours into DCA. I mean, I've personally been affected by that on a clear weather day. We
had an hour and a half round delay program, and that was very much not the norm before
January.
[0:06:18] IP: Yeah. I think that –
[0:06:19] JR: Not a solution, but –
[0:06:21] IP: No, it’s not a solution. It's certainly not a total solution, but it's –
[0:06:27] JR: It’s like a we Band-Aid. It'll work for a little bit, but it's not really your preferred
method of treatment here.
[0:06:37] IP: I've never considered that analogy.
[0:06:39] JR: I mean, think about a wet Band-Aid, right? It’ll work, but it's gross and icky and –
[0:06:45] IP: You're not wrong.
© 2025 AvTalk 3
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:06:46] JR: Yeah, it might help, but you really don't want to have it on for too long.
[0:06:51] IP: I'm going to recover from wet Band-Aid, and we’re going to move on. Well, we go
to day three. Day three of the hearing focused a lot on the role that different technologies
played, could have played, and can potentially play in the future across avoiding collisions.
We're looking at things like TCAS on the regional jet, a similar system on the helicopter, as well
as a discussion about ADS-B out and in. The discussion about TCAS was actually really
interesting, because TCAS works by detecting possible collisions and then providing pilots with
immediate guidance at its most basic level.
The discussion that the FAA's collision avoidance expert brought to the table were statistics
about how pilots comply with TCAS resolution advisories. The question was about altitude. I'm
quoting from, this is The Air Current’s live feed from the hearings, because they were able to
note down these statistics. This is above 2,000 feet, 90% of pilots comply with resolution
advisories to slow, or increase a vertical rate of descent. That's 60% of the total alerts given.
Resolution advisories instructing a pilot to climb have a 65% compliance rate, and those to
descend have a 70% compliance rate. Below 2,000 feet, compliance rates plummet. They drop
down to about 30% for those that instruct the pilot to climb.
That sounds really bad, but they do note that often at these low altitudes, pilots are able to
visualize and determine whether or not they can see and avoid those particular aircraft, without
necessarily immediately complying with the RA.
[0:09:19] JR: That's above, what was it? Above 10,000 feet is 90% -
[0:09:23] IP: 2,000 feet. 2,000 feet.
[0:09:25] JR: 2,000 feet. Yeah. 90% sounds pretty good. I mean, getting 90% of people to do
anything is pretty good. This is the thing where it really does need to be as close to 100% as
possible, or the system doesn't work. If 10% of pilots, when given a TCAS resolution aren't
following it, then the system doesn't work at all.
© 2025 AvTalk 4
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:09:48] IP: Well, here's the problem there, though, it only works if the aircraft are equipped
with collision avoidance.
[0:09:53] JR: There's that.
[0:09:56] IP: The Army's Black Hawk helicopter was not.
[0:09:59] JR: It didn't even have ADS-B out turned on. There was a whole lot of stuff not going
on in that helicopter.
[0:10:07] IP: If the helicopter had been equipped with the helicopter version of TCAS designed
for military aviation, the helicopter would have received an alert a little over a minute before the
collision.
[0:10:26] JR: Which is an eternity.
[0:10:28] IP: Yeah. That system will only be installed in 2027 pending the results of testing and
pending the results of funding from Congress.
[0:10:41] JR: Having these exemptions for military aircraft likely due to cost, or operational
needs, or whatever, it's not great, since military aircraft obviously often share civilian airspace.
Basically, every civilian general aviation aircraft had to be equipped with ADS-B out and all this
other technology where they can't fly in that airspace, it's crazy that government aircraft like this
were completely exempt up until maybe 2027, especially operating within such confined
airspace like this. Hindsight is 20/20, but this is, really makes me think.
[0:11:22] IP: Yeah. Some folks have actually done some thinking, and Senator Ted Cruz and a
few other senators at the end of July, so late last week, introduced a bill to mandate changes to
the current exemptions for military aircraft in regards to ADS-B, and increase the mandate not
only to have ADS-B out on civil aircraft, but also ADS-B in. That would be a huge change. This
proposed law would require that within five years, all commercial aircraft and all aircraft that
have ADS-B out be equipped and use ADS-B in.
© 2025 AvTalk 5
AVT 331 Transcript
ADS-B out sends information, well, out to anyone and everyone. The FlightRadar24 receiver
network, air traffic controllers, and other aircraft if they also have ADS-B in. We've talked about
ADS-B in and a lot of the benefits when we spoke with a pilot and program manager at
American Air. I'll put a link in the show notes to that episode. That was a fascinating episode.
But basically, all the ADS-B data, all the ADS-B out data that is being sent out by aircraft can be
interpreted by other aircraft and then used in those aircraft systems to give pilots a better
overview of what is happening around them.
[0:12:58] JR: Yeah. Basically, like pulling out the FlightRadar24 app on your phone and looking
at what's around you. Obviously, it'd be a lot less graphically stimulating, I guess. A lot more –
[0:13:10] IP: Seemingly, less graphically stimulating.
[0:13:11] JR: Slightly less pixels and dashes and things. But you'd at least be able to have the
same general awareness that anyone can have just by looking at an app on their phone.
[0:13:26] IP: It also allows for a lot of operational efficiencies, and that was most of our
discussion around ADS-B in. But what this bill also does is it mandates that military aircraft
operating in class Bravo, or Charlie airspace use ADS-B out. It further defines sensitive
government missions, because right now the DOD has a carve out for any sensitive government
missions they don't have to have ADS-B on. Then, they just decided, of course, that all of their
missions were sensitive government missions and they were not going to use ADS-B.
[0:14:18] JR: Not great. Even if it was just a training flight. Yeah, of course, you want training
flights to mimic as close as you can to whatever the actual real-world scenario would be. But if
you're doing this so constantly and you're flying on that air up that takes you within 100 feet of
the arrival path of DCA, maybe look past that and just be a good neighbor, so everyone else can
see you.
[0:14:47] IP: I can't imagine a scenario where if you're operating commercial – If you don't want
to operate in commercial airspace, or if you don't want to operate with ADS-B, don't operate with
commercial airspace. Or, go the whole hog and say, “We need to close the airspace.”
© 2025 AvTalk 6
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:15:01] JR: Oh, that would go over poorly.
[0:15:04] IP: I'm just saying. I think that's my point here.
[0:15:11] JR: Yes. Hopefully, things change and for the better. But as with many things, the
rules of aviation are written in blood. And here, there was a lot of blood, unfortunately, and rules
will be changed because of that blood. Hopefully, that will be the last of it, but too little too late
for the lives lost. This shouldn't have happened, is basically the outcome. Of course, it shouldn't
have. But just putting all the pieces together and hearing it after the fact makes me angry that –
[0:15:43] IP: Even more should not have happened.
[0:15:44] JR: Yeah. Any of this was ever allowed to happen.
[0:15:47] IP: Late last week, a Delta Airlines flight from Salt Lake City to Amsterdam
experienced severe turbulence over southern Wyoming and ended up diverting to Minneapolis,
where 25 people onboard were taken to local hospitals. That included crew and some
passengers. Photos from inside the cabin showed stuff everywhere. Usually, when there's
turbulence, it's clear on the ADS-B data. But in this particular case, it's extremely clear. This was
not a case, and I've used this example before. This was not necessarily the case, where you
have you're holding carbonated beverage in your hand, you keep it level, but shake it vigorously.
This was a case where it was shaken vigorously and moved up and down quite a bit.
The aircraft was at 37,000 feet. They went all the way up to 38,075 feet, and all the way down to
35,775 feet, before climbing back up to 37,000 feet, and then diverting. Just very clear picture of
a turbulence encounter, one, I think, is most the most clear, I think, I've ever seen, as far as
turbulence and then continuing to fly off. Another reminder to always wear your seatbelt. Always
wear your seatbelt.
[0:17:23] JR: Well, yes. The aircraft, I don't even think it was out of service all that long, but it is
back in service, operating Copenhagen back to Minneapolis. Hopefully, it has a less eventful
flight today.
© 2025 AvTalk 7
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:17:33] IP: Absolutely. This morning, Cathay Pacific ordered 14 more 777X aircraft, bringing
their order book all the way up to 35. Jason, when was the last time Cathay Pacific ordered a
Boeing aircraft?
[0:17:51] JR: I don't know. Is there some sort of relevant important date in the near past that I'm
not remembering?
[0:17:57] IP: No. It's just not in the near past. This is their first order since 2013.
[0:18:03] JR: That's why I can't remember. It predates this podcast.
[0:18:06] IP: Exactly.
[0:18:08] JR: Yeah. That's a long time. But hey, teen more, up to 35, that's a nice round order.
But it was a big week for the 777X. Things happened.
[0:18:17] IP: It was indeed a big week for the 777X. It was so big that Boeing made a video
about it, which is unusual. The fifth 777X to fly made its first flight this week.
[0:18:32] JR: How old is this aircraft?
[0:18:35] IP: It's old. It's not new.
[0:18:37] JR: It ain't new, but it had its first flight.
[0:18:41] IP: It did have its first flight.
[0:18:42] JR: I think, it's what? It's been on the ground for five years now?
[0:18:44] IP: Right around five years. This is also the first flight of a 777X in just under five
years.
[0:18:53] JR: The first, first flight.
© 2025 AvTalk 8
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:18:54] IP: Right, right. This is the fifth 777X to fly ever. N2007L. It is eventually destined for
Singapore Airlines, but first as reported by Jon Ostrower at The Air Current, the aircraft is going
to be used for high-intensity radiated field testing.
[0:19:16] JR: I don't know what that means.
[0:19:18] IP: How well the aircraft responds to electromagnetic interference.
[0:19:22] JR: Oh, that's fun. Hopefully, well. That’s good.
[0:19:25] IP: Yes. We would hope.
[0:19:27] JR: Yeah. Love the video that Boeing posted. It has the vibes of the actual first flight
of an aircraft. This is not a normal, for an airframer, to post the video of the first flight of the fifth
produced version of an aircraft, but it almost feels like they're taking it as a reboot of the
program like, hey, this isn't the actual first flight, but it's the ceremonial makeup first flight. From
now on, we've got things figured out, we've got a path to getting this thing certified and just
pretend that this was the actual first flight. Start the timer from yesterday, until delivery of the
first 777X. Maybe, let's just let's just look at that as the time from first flight to first delivery.
[0:20:14] IP: Well, Cathay for its part says, that they're confident they will get their first aircraft in
2027.
[0:20:22] JR: We'll see.
[0:20:24] IP: We will see. Speaking of Cathay, Jason, Cathay Pacific is no stranger to ultra long-
haul flights. I mean, we're looking at 15, 16-hour flights from North America to Hong Kong. But
28 hours and change that's a bit rough, especially –
[0:20:43] JR: It’s a bit rough.
© 2025 AvTalk 9
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:20:44] IP: - if 11 hours of that is spent on the aircraft on the ground, after you've already
diverted and been in the air for 15 hours.
[0:20:54] JR: Yeah. They've had quite a bit of nasty weather in Hong Kong. They were so close
to landing in Hong Kong, it looks like they were right there, they were down to 6,000 feet and
they didn't actually even make an approach, but they noked out of there, went over to Taipei
where Cathay has a bit of a little mini-hub there in Taipei. But I'm really, really confused about
why they were kept on the aircraft for so long. Cathay, this is not some out station, or some city
that Cathay doesn't even serve. This is a little mini hub for Cathay, so what do we know why
they were kept on the plane for so long?
[0:21:30] IP: I don't. I've seen conflicting reports, so I don't want to say which it might be. I
haven't heard back from the airline yet with a statement. But it doesn't make any sense to me. I
mean I'm sure there were reasons. I can't think of a really good one, because as Jason
mentioned, this isn't like diverting to – I was going to pick a random Canadian city, but folks
there are all seem to move very well.
[0:21:57] JR: Medicine hat. Let’s go into medicine hat.
[0:21:59] IP: Sure, there aren't facilities for folks.
[0:22:02] JR: This is Taipei, an actual mini-hub for Cathay. Something must have gone very
wrong, whether there was, I don't know, perhaps, Visa issues or I don't know I can't think of a
legitimate reason why people would have been kept on this aircraft for as long as they were.
That is very odd. But hey, that's why we have laws and rules about that, at least here in the US,
that the airline has to take extraordinary efforts, basically, after the four-hour mark to get
passengers off that aircraft, or face extremely heavy fine, something United is learning all about
this year at Newark. But really weird for this to happen to Cathay at this particular airport. I feel
bad for those passengers.
[0:22:48] IP: Oh, so bad. They eventually made it to Hong Kong.
[0:22:51] JR: That's great. The bare minimum.
© 2025 AvTalk 10
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:22:55] IP: 28 hours. Wow. We made it pretty much halfway through the show, without
mentioning Alaska's new livery. We should we should do that now, yeah?
[0:23:07] JR: Okay.
[0:23:08] IP: It's kind of a new livery. It's only for certain aircraft. I would like to point out, Jason,
it's not as good as the one you suggested.
[0:23:17] JR: No. Well, it's the one that I prompted ChatGPT to make, which actually did a
really good job, where it blended the –
[0:23:26] IP: It did do a really good job.
[0:23:27] JR: - Aurora Borealis with the Hawaiian flower and it had the face on the tail. I think
it's quite nice. But what Alaska went with is, I don't want to call it boring, but it's a bit more
reserved. What we saw is the render on the 787. So, I believe all of Hawaiian 787s will be
transferred over to Alaska, which will operate transpacific and then also transatlantic flights, but
it's got your traditional Alaska billboard tile upfront, and then weirdly reminds me of the
Caribbean Airlines livery with – it looks like the hummingbird a little bit, but it's just the Aurora
Borealis tail. There's some green, there's some blue, but there's a lot of white on this airplane. A
lot of white. I’m indifferent. I don't like it, but I don't not like it. It just is.
[0:24:18] IP: It's like, if somebody took ZIPAIR and said, “We need something a little more,” and
they turned the dial up one more, and we're like, “Okay, good enough.”
[0:24:27] JR: Yeah. Yeah. It's nothing special, but the point of this different livery, oddly, is to – if
they somehow don't already know when they're staring out the window at their gate to let
passengers know that they are going to be something special of a very different Alaska Airlines
aircraft. They also announced a very interesting new route from Seattle to London, not just
London, but London Heathrow, like the real London Airport, the one that's really difficult –
[0:24:56] IP: The real London Airport.
© 2025 AvTalk 11
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:24:58] JR: One that’s really difficult to end up flying to, because you need slots. We don't
really know where they got those slots from, but we can speculate that it came from partner BA,
or AA, which is really interesting, because there's no lack of lift from Seattle to London.
Hopefully, these fares are pretty compelling for people in Seattle. But they also announced
Reykjavik, Iceland, which will not be out of 787.
[0:25:22] IP: No, it will not.
[0:25:24] JR: It will be 737-8. I'm sure, partner Icelandair, is probably not all that happy about
this one.
[0:25:33] IP: I mean, I don't think the passengers are going to be all that happy about that.
[0:25:37] JR: No, no. That is a long flight on a 73. Coincidentally, my parents were actually just
on one of Alaska's, actually, I think Alaska's the longest 737 flight from New York JFK to
Anchorage. Yeah, that's a long time on a 73. But when I'm thinking of Alaska transatlantic, I
would be thinking of this nice 787 experience. Not the same thing you might be flying from John
Wayne to Las Vegas, all the way to Iceland. That's a long way at a plane. Not configured for
that.
[0:26:13] IP: Seattle-Keflavik is about 200 and some odd miles longer than JFK-Anchorage.
[0:26:22] JR: That's a long way. I also wonder, will they'd be serving free meals and economy
on that plane? Again, something that aircraft isn't really configured to be doing. Maybe if you
want to go long haul in Alaska, track down those 787s. But in the future, an unspecified timeline,
they'll also be refurbishing Hawaiian’s old A330s, which is nice. No real details, but that one's
overdue, so good to hear that one. Not that flight, Alaska long haul here in New York, so not
really a factor for me, but nice to know anyway.
[0:26:54] IP: Good to know, and hopefully, one of our listeners, or some of our listeners can get
something out of that. In other airline news, Canadian airline, Nolinor has inaugurated a new
737-200.
© 2025 AvTalk 12
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:27:08] JR: Huh?
[0:27:08] IP: I mean, new to them.
[0:27:10] JR: I mean, still, huh?
[0:27:14] IP: Nolinor now operates, or continues to operate the world's largest 737-200 fleet.
This one is CFTWW, which was formerly with Chrono Aviation, so the one that was in all matte
black –
[0:27:32] JR: That's good. Before that, with Sierra Pacific Airlines. Not one to hear about much.
Then Midway Airlines before that. Midway Express before that and Air Florida before that, who
initially took delivery of that aircraft in March 1981.
[0:27:50] IP: There you go.
[0:27:51] JR: Wow.
[0:27:51] IP: All right.
[0:27:53] JR: Good stuff. Well, get on a 737-200 while you can. There isn't anything to replace
these aircraft out there, but there maybe with this raffle kit, if the thing at least that [inaudible
0:28:05] is doing in some of its runways by doing something with it to allow the NG to operate
there, it feels like the 200 will never go away, but it may just.
[0:28:14] IP: I mean, at some point, they do in fact need to go away.
[0:28:18] JR: But not yet.
[0:28:19] IP: Well, Jason, this week one thing unfortunately does need to go away. ANA is
retiring the R2D2 special livery 787.
© 2025 AvTalk 13
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:28:30] JR: So, do we not yet know if that means the license to use the likeness of these
droids has expired, or are they actually retiring this 9-year-old 787-9?
[0:28:41] IP: The airline in response to that direct question said, that after the plane lands, it will
begin the airline's standard retirement process.
[0:28:51] JR: That can't be right, right? There’s no way.
[0:28:57] IP: That's what the airline said. I have so many emails to airlines this week about
trying to clarify things that have happened, but one of them is, do you mean standard retirement
process for a livery? Like, you're taking the Star Wars stuff out? Or, is this retiring this specific
aircraft and you're going to fly it to the desert? I mean, we’ll know sooner rather than later, either
way, I guess. But yeah, I would I would be really surprised if they just –
[0:29:25] JR: There's just no way. It's a 9-year-old 787-9. Airlines don't just retire those
airplanes. Those are coveted right now. This one actually works and everything. Yeah, that
would be surprising. I think there's some missing links in the communication here.
[0:29:43] IP: Yeah. I think that's correct. What my initial take was that they were just repainting
it. But now with this added “clarification from the airline,” I don't know. I'm waiting to hear back
for sure, and we'll update as accordingly. The C3PO livery 777 is still flying, and that will
continue to fly until the end of March 2026. From there, ANA will be done with the Star Wars
liveries.
[0:30:17] JR: Well, they had a good run.
[0:30:18] IP: They did have a good run. A 10-year run. Not bad. Not bad at all. We talked about
how happy Boeing seems to be with the revived 777X flight test program moving towards
certification. A few weeks ago, we talked about how happy airlines are now with 737 MAX
deliveries. This week, we get to talk about another happy customer, Allegiant. Allegiant says,
that Boeing has surpassed their expectations with deliveries in the second quarter of this year.
They were talking on their second quarter earnings call. They're happy with what's going on.
That's great news for Boeing.
© 2025 AvTalk 14
AVT 331 Transcript
The 737 MAX, apparently, is doing really well. in Boeing's earnings calls, Kelly Ortberg said, that
they will soon, and then he clarified, soon is not right away, but in the near future, within a few
months, as things stay stable, they will address the rate of production for the 737 MAX with the
FAA.
[0:31:29] JR: All right. That's progress, right?
[0:31:34] IP: Progress, yes. The first increase, seemingly, would go from 38 per month up to 42.
[0:31:41] JR: Yeah. From what I hear from the Internet, there is actually 737 assembly going on
up in Everett right now. Maybe that testing, playing around with the tooling there, but things are
happening. Interesting. Of course, they can't really – I don't think they could build a single
aircraft. They're officially without that cap going up, unless they ramped down in Renton, which
seems extremely unlikely. But things are happening.
Apparently, if you take the tour of the of Everett facility and look really closely in the corner,
that's something that they're not going to point out and tell you about. You can see a little bit of
this going on.
[0:32:19] IP: Ha, interesting. The Everett facility is the former production facility for the 747 and
the soon to hopefully be fourth 737 production line that will be devoted exclusively to the
737-10, assuming they get certified.
[0:32:40] JR: When and if those are ever certified, they'll be cranking them out up there.
[0:32:43] IP: There you go. We'll keep an eye on what soon means, as far as a rate increase.
The FAA has issued an NPRM for BVLOS UAS ops in the US NAS.
[0:32:58] JR: I deciphered this one. Federal Aviation Administration notice of proposed
rulemaking for beyond visual line of sight, unmanned aerial systems operations in the United
States National Air System.
© 2025 AvTalk 15
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:33:10] IP: Give that man an avgeek cookie. Good job, sir.
[0:33:13] JR: All right, well we can decipher – It's like reading a NOTAM 1,700 times.
[0:33:20] IP: Exactly. Yes. They're all about cranes and birds. In this particular case, it's 647
pages.
[0:33:31] JR: Oh, of course.
[0:33:32] IP: Mostly acronyms. Let's actually do this. List of abbreviations and acronyms
frequently using this document covers one, two, three, four pages.
[0:33:44] JR: That's a lot. Imagine how long the total document would be if they didn't do these
abbreviations.
[0:33:50] IP: We need smaller print. We need bigger margins.
[0:33:51] JR: Span the margins.
[0:33:53] IP: Exactly.
[0:33:54] JR: Double-sided printed.
[0:33:56] IP: What this proposed rulemaking does is sets forth what the FAA believes, or wants
the beyond visual line of sight operations for UAS to be when they fly in the US National
Airspace System. Think more along the lines of commercial drone activity. Things like, as the
DOT secretary said today, bringing you a Starbucks coffee with a drone.
[0:34:35] JR: No. Don't want that.
[0:34:37] IP: No. Don't want that. But what this does is it lays out throughout 647 pages, which
you can read via a link in the show notes if you need to be put to sleep, I guess, at night. It lays
out everything that they want to require for identification, markings, operations for various sizes
© 2025 AvTalk 16
AVT 331 Transcript
of anchored air systems for what happens in the event of this, what happens in the event of that,
all sorts of good fun stuff. What medical will be required for operators, etc., etc., etc. It's a
comprehensive document that lays out the FAA's approach to regulating these activities.
Good news is a lot of this has already been taking place, so there's some real-world experience
here because of the exemption carve outs that have existed up till now. This isn't, we're making
this up as we go. Well, it is kind of. We're making it up as we go –
[0:35:44] JR: There’s a little bit of that.
[0:35:46] IP: But this isn't we have no data, and we think this is how it should go. It's, this is the
data we've gathered so far, and this is what we want to do based on what we've learned so far.
Give that a read, if you like. Or you can just read the summary. I think that'll probably be enough
for most people. But exciting to see, but also very, I'm nervous about this.
[0:36:13] JR: I mean, yeah, but certainly, there's got to be better applications and use cases
than delivering lukewarm coffee to you beyond line of sight. I mean, hasn't Amazon already
been doing this, moderately successfully in some test locations, where they just dispatch drones
and they drop crap on your driveway?
[0:36:36] IP: Yes. This would codify all of that, so that anyone who wants to deliver stuff could
deliver stuff on your driveway. Could be fun, indeed. These rules are a ways off and there will be
a lot of public comments, which regulators know I really look forward to reading. Jason, last
week we talked about Brazilian aviation in context of Embraer’s sales of jets to the US.
Specifically, we talked about the applicability of tariffs. At that time, it was a little uncertain. You
had the text in front of you that ended up being the actual text, where commercial aviation and
associated parts and things are exempt from the additional tariffs. But Embraer also is trying to
argue to the US that, “Hey, we shouldn't have to pay that 10% tariff that's on top of everything
either.” We’ll see how that goes.
[0:37:39] JR: Yeah. I agree. I don't know what else to say to that. Yeah.
© 2025 AvTalk 17
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:37:45] IP: That is where we leave that particular story, with an update there. Jason, I didn't
see this one coming, and neither will the pilots if they go with the aircraft that they showed
during the announcement.
[0:38:01] JR: Yeah. Who are we talking about?
[0:38:04] IP: We're talking about Somalia Airlines.
[0:38:07] JR: They're back, maybe, after a couple decades of not being around. Apparently, the
federal government of Somalia has, or will shortly acquire a pair of A320s and they intend to
relaunch Somali Airlines after decades of, well, having all sorts of reasons to not be operating
an airline. But they want to try to claw back some of the air traffic in Somalia from foreign
airlines. Their first stab at it and in some of their materials they put out includes a, well, you say,
this is a 707, but it looks a single-deck A380 to me, but also it's – I really hope it's an AI
rendering of an aircraft and not a photo of something somebody actually had on a desk,
because if this is what Somalia is putting down on the desk, they should not be allowed to start
up an airline, because, wow.
[0:39:12] IP: Among other things, the aircraft has no flight deck windows.
[0:39:15] JR: It also has no horizontal stabilizer. Tails on backwards.
[0:39:20] IP: Details, details.
[0:39:21] JR: It’s missing a winglet. I'm pretty sure the engines are not securely attached to the
pylons, which is a problem. Yeah, there's a lot going on here. Whether or not this was real or AI
generated, I can't imagine there are many people looking at this and saying, “Yes, this is
airplane. This is what airplanes look like. Good job, everyone.”
[0:39:42] IP: Hopefully, the A320s are in better shape.
[0:39:47] JR: Okay.
© 2025 AvTalk 18
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:39:47] IP: I wonder if Steve over at Nomadic is the one bringing those over.
[0:39:53] JR: There’s always a chance. If he finds this model that they have on the table, if he
finds that actually part of the Somalian Airport somewhere, I would like to see that in the next
episode of this show.
[0:40:06] IP: Absolutely. Elsewhere in the world, Russia is set to fly a completely domesticated
MC-21 for the first time this month. The MC-21 began as a co-mingled Russian and western
aircraft. It has been partially domesticated thus far, and they have finally completely
domesticated the aircraft, removing all parts due to – all parts from the aircraft that are restricted
under the current sanction’s regime. It's taken them a couple years, but they've done it and
they're going to fly it this month, I guess.
[0:40:49] JR: All right. Good for them.
[0:40:51] IP: Good luck. Also, good for Lufthansa Group, they've walked away from the Air
Europa talks.
[0:40:59] JR: Too bad.
[0:41:00] IP: Every time we talk about this, I always forget that Air Europa is still around. Yet,
they are. Turkish Airlines now remains the only interested party in providing any financing to Air
Europa, which is continuing to just limp along as best they can. We will likely see Turkish invest
some money in them in the near future, I guess.
[0:41:29] JR: Okay.
[0:41:30] IP: Such a long-winding story.
[0:41:33] JR: This started, I think, back in 2019, right? IAG was originally going to scoop up Air
Europa, and then that went wayside. Then Lufthansa Group, if Lufthansa Group can even make
it work. I don't know. Maybe Turkish has got something, a couple tricks up its sleeves. But
Lufthansa, if they could take ETA, they can't make Air Europa work, I don't know.
© 2025 AvTalk 19
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:41:54] IP: I don't know either, and they rejected my bid.
[0:41:58] JR: Oh, well. Probably for the best.
[0:42:00] IP: Probably. Yeah, for all of our sakes. A few episodes ago we talked about the
impending launch of Iranian 777 operations. These were former Singapore and NokScoot 777s
that were in storage in Cambodia, and then were then ferried to Iran, using permits that we now
know were either falsified, or expired –
[0:42:36] JR: Shocking.
[0:42:36] IP: - based on a registry in Madagascar.
[0:42:40] JR: Huh?
[0:42:42] IP: Folks have been now arrested, because Madagascar was super mad that
somebody dared to use their aircraft registry for all of these shenanigans.
[0:42:53] JR: Yeah. Not a country I expected to be involved in the delivery of Southeast Asian
777s to Iran. Yeah, Madagascar probably doesn't want to have a reputation of becoming that
country to register your illicit aircraft with plans to illegally deliver them to sanctioned country.
Good for them. I don't know who they arrested, but –
[0:43:17] IP: I will tell you. Actually, I won't tell you, because these names I've tried to
pronounce the names before we started and did not have much luck. Because I actually learned
this recently from a YouTube video one of my kids was watching. In Madagascar, it's like
German nouns with names. As families go from generation to generation, get married and the
family grows and things like that, names just get put together, so they just get longer and longer.
I'm not going to try and pronounce all of these names, but I will say that the company was
UDAAN potentials limited, which was operating as Fly Madagascar. They've never flown
anything in their lives. There was also an Indian man who was involved in this, falsifying the
© 2025 AvTalk 20
AVT 331 Transcript
documents to extend the registrations of these aircraft, so that they could then be ferried from
Cambodia to Iran.
[0:44:17] JR: Oh, I guess, their potential really was limited.
[0:44:20] IP: Those guys have been arrested. The two people have been arrested. And the
transport minister has been sacked. It brought down part of the government.
[0:44:31] JR: I hope the transport minister wasn't involved in this and is being scapegoated, but
really seems like Madagascar does not want to become that place where these shenanigans
are pulled.
[0:44:41] IP: No. They absolutely do not. There's no indication that the transport minister was
involved in this, but I think this is one of those face-saving –
[0:44:54] JR: Yeah. I just can't help but wonder how Madagascan natives get drawn into such a
thing like this. Not the kind of place you expect it from. It seems like Madagascar really doesn't
want to make it the kind of place you expect this to happen. Good on them, I guess.
[0:45:13] IP: Yeah. The world of aviation registration for the beginning of all of this was that the
permits were issued, so that the aircraft could be ferried from where they were in China, or
where they were supposed to be in China, to Kenya for maintenance. That never happened.
Then, once they had those permits, then they illegally extended those permits and forged them,
so that they could then fly these aircraft from Cambodia to Iran. They were very mad about this.
In legitimate aircraft news, Rolls Royce has retired its 747-200 flying testbed. That's N787RR.
The 787 comes from its extensive use for the 787 engines.
[0:46:10] JR: Yes. I'd love to see a list of all of the different engines and technologies that this
elderly 747-200 tested over the years. We know it tested the Trent 100, the GE – did it do the
GE9X? No. Did it?
[0:46:27] IP: No. That would be the GE757.
© 2025 AvTalk 21
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:46:30] JR: Yeah. That makes sense, doesn't it? I'm reading an article that has all sorts of
things listed. I'm like, “No, that doesn't make any sense.” But I'd love to see just a list of all of the
different engine types of this aircraft. It had the good graces of testing over the years, and I can't
immediately find one, and you would think it would be easy, but it's not.
[0:46:48] IP: We could always just ask Rolls Royce.
[0:46:50] JR: That's true.
[0:46:53] IP: We could do that. In fact, Jason, I'll do that for you.
[0:46:57] JR: Okay. Thank you.
[0:46:59] IP: Okay. One of the engines that it did carry was the Rolls Royce Trent 1000. The
specific Trent 1000, the Trent 1000 TEN engine celebrates an interesting anniversary this week,
because this week marks the anniversary of the world's largest aircraft self-portrait. This was
August 2017, so not long after we had started doing this podcast that Boeing took a 787 test
aircraft up for an 18-hour test flight to do ETOPS testing on the Trent 1000 TEN, which would
then go on to power the 787-10. They, during the course of this 18 hours, decided that it wasn't
good enough to just fly around willy-nilly, or make a big circle around the US, or anything like
that, no. They were going to draw a 787 and draw one they did. For those that don't remember,
or haven't seen it in a while, we'll put a link in the show notes to the 787 artwork. But they did a
really nice job.
[0:48:09] JR: Mm-hmm. Colored in the lines and everything.
[0:48:14] IP: That would be a difficult feat.
[0:48:17] JR: Might take a while.
[0:48:18] IP: Yeah, exactly. Let's see how long we can we can stay in the air. To close out the
show, we're going to get to some listener mail and some comments. But before we do that,
Dorkfest and Spot LAX are coming up at the middle of September. Let me pull up my calendar,
© 2025 AvTalk 22
AVT 331 Transcript
so I have the correct dates. September 13th is the date that you're looking to put on your
calendar. That's going to be both Dorkfest and Spot LAX, though Spot LAX extends throughout
the week. Jason and I are getting in there on Friday, if you're staying at the H Hotel and
attending the NYC Aviation Spotting Party, I'll be there as well. Saturday, we're doing the early
morning ramp tour at LAX by the Flight Path Museum. Then there is the raffle and regular little
Dorkfest over by the In and Out at LAX. But this year, you need to RSVP for Dorkfest if you want
to be entered to win prizes. I will not be running around like a chicken with my head cut off
distributing raffle tickets this year.
[0:49:32] JR: You'll be running around like a chicken with its cut off doing other things.
[0:49:36] IP: Exactly.
[0:49:36] JR: But it won’t be for the raffle.
[0:49:39] IP: But it won't be for the raffle. There's a link in the show notes that takes you to Brett
over at Cranky Flier’s, website where you can RSVP for both the ramp tour and the raffle. So,
you have to RSVP to be entered into the raffle this year. There were too many problems. It's a
good problem to have. There's just so many people that show up, that doing it with raffle tickets
has become too cumbersome. This way, everyone gets a fighting chance at the raffle and it's
much easier on Brett and well, and it's also a little easier on me. Do that, click the link, go there.
Now, to the listener mailbag. Jason, Jonah wants to know what scope clause is. We talk about it
a lot, unfortunately. I feel like, we need a concise definition. So, what is scope clause?
[0:50:35] JR: Scope clause is more than just the arch nemesis of Embraer, unfortunately. It is a
clause in the contract that the US majors, so Delta, United, American have different versions of
these scope clauses that dictates, basically, the flying that these airlines can farm out to their
regional operators. Each airline has different limitations, be it weight of the aircraft, or size of the
aircraft, and limitations for the number of those aircraft they can have. There was a good video
put out by Wendover Productions recently that gets into a lot of this on the United side. So, we'll
link to that in the show notes as well. But basically, it says, at least for United, that they can
operate as many 37-seat turbo aircraft, turboprop aircraft as they want. Of course, we know
these days they don't operate any of those.
© 2025 AvTalk 23
AVT 331 Transcript
Then there is the next level up, 50-seat aircraft, which has traditionally been the ERJ145 and
the CRJ-200, they can operate just as many of those as they want, because they're undesirable
aircraft, are hugely expensive. Apparently, in the United contract, they can operate as many 50-
seat aircraft as they want, provided that such aircraft do not number more than 90% of the
number of single-aisle aircraft in the company fleet. I don't foresee that happening at any time in
the near future. So, they are free to operate as many 50-seat aircraft as they want.
However, where it gets really impactful is the number of 70, or 76-seat aircraft, really anything
above a 100, there are firm limitations to both the weight of these aircraft and the number of
seats onboard. In United's case, they can operate a total of 255 76-seat aircraft, plus 70-seat
aircraft. Out of all of those, only 153 maybe 76-seat aircraft. Of course, Ian, if United is allowed
to have 255 70-plus-seat aircraft, how many do you think they have?
[0:52:44] IP: 255.
[0:52:45] JR: On the nose. Year after year after year. This has become an interesting case
here, where United's regional aircraft are actually derated, or limited and operate well under
their capabilities, and this is how we end up with the situation of the CRJ 550, which is really, a
CRJ-700, which can hold 70 to 76 people. But because of the scope clause, they've actually
reduced the number of seats onboard and the range of the aircraft to only seat 50 passengers.
They can have as many of those as they want and it lets them operate some first-class routes
and have some additional aircraft that passengers don't actively hate. But that's essentially what
that is. It preserves the mainline network and mainline pilot flying job, so that they can't farm out
all of their flying to regional airlines, because if the scope clause didn't exist, there's a chance
that you can end up with a United Airlines that doesn't even have any domestic aircraft, that
they farm that all out to regional partners.
Realistically, that's not going to happen. But these scope clauses ensure that the majority of
domestic operations, or narrowbody operations really stays within the actual proper company.
Doesn't get contracted out to Republic, or SkyWest, or whomever else.
© 2025 AvTalk 24
AVT 331 Transcript
[0:54:08] IP: Just for clarity sake, the scope clause, the clause that we're talking about is a
clause in the pilot's contract with the airline. The Pilot's Union contract.
[0:54:18] JR: It can be changed. It never is changed. That's how many companies have learned
this the hard way, be it Embraer with the E2, or Mitsubishi with the MRJ, which met its ultimate
demise, because of the scope clause never having been changed. Probably should be changed
at some point, but nope, doesn't really seem to likely, doesn’t.
[0:54:42] IP: It does not seem –
[0:54:43] JR: That's a whole other conversation.
[0:54:46] IP: That is then. This conversation is just what is, not what should. The other piece of
listener mail that we got was, hey, you guys haven't talked about the 747 and space shuttle
Lego set. That, due listeners is, it's by design, because you'll know, I hope, that we also have a
YouTube channel. Over on that YouTube channel, soon, we'll talk a lot about the 747 and space
shuttle Lego set. Stay tuned for that. If you saw the Concord video that we did, think similar and
hopefully, look forward to that, where maybe you'll have a chance to win a Lego 747 and space
shuttle set. We'll see. Stay tuned for that. That'll be coming up. In the, I don't want to say next
couple of weeks, but in in the near future.
[0:55:42] JR: Ian’s working on it, putting them together piece by piece.
[0:55:45] IP: Working it brick by brick. On that note, we have built this episode brick by brick,
and the episode is done. Thank you all so very much for listening to episode 331 of AvTalk. I am
Ian Petchenik, here, as always with –
[0:56:04] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Thanks for listening.
[END]
© 2025 AvTalk 25