Snippets - Daily Changing Aviation Safety News Items of Interest

In November 1998, two months after the crash of Swissair 111, Santa Barbara Aerospace - the company that approved of the In-Flight Entertainment Network (IFEN) on board that aircraft - was forced to surrender their DAS certificate to the FAA.

Less than one year later, they filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy.

Since then, several parties have made bids to acquire the assets of SBA in a court-ordered auction. Despite early offers as high as $4.25M, SBA finally sold last month to a Carolina-based aviation company for $2.3M.

But there's a surprising new development.

Last week it was announced in Riverside California, that the sale is temporarily delayed because Boeing (?) wants to check SBA's records pertaining to the IFEN, it's certification, and links to the Swissair crash.

from this link

Jan 30, 2000

Runway incursions pose the most serious air-safety threat in the United States, but government officials are stumped as to how to reduce that threat, reports Aviation Week's in its January 31 issue.

Safety advances have cut the risk in the U.S. of accidents involving controlled flight into terrain and loss of control - the leading safety threats worldwide.

But runway incursions, in which a taxiing airplane ends up on a runway where it should not be and poses a collision hazard to another aircraft taking off or landing have increased every year since 1993 despite FAA efforts to reduce them, the magazine says.

Every surface incident is an accident waiting to happen, say FAA officials, and incursions are far more common than the agency's tally indicates.

Officials are divided on a clear solution to avert runway collisions, and see little promise of solving the situation soon, Aviation Week said.

Some safety officials call for pilot training and tools to reduce incursions. Others say technological countermeasures are key to averting runway collisions, but see little promise of fielding effective ones soon, the magazine reported.

From Air Safety Week;

More on the MD-11 airflow tests

A few extra details are herewith offered on the cabin airflow tests that began last week (Jan 27th ) on a sister ship to the crashed Swissair Flight 111 MD-11. The test airplane was flown to the U.S. with its in-flight entertainment network (IFEN) de-activated, with all wires coiled and stowed. While the IFEN was reconnected to the aircraft power supply for the tests, the hookup was modified to feature a direct power switch to the flight test crew. Readers may recall from our earlier coverage that the only means Swissair flight crews had of removing electric power to the system was by pulling the circuit breakers. Indeed, pulling the IFEN circuit breakers was part of the 'parking' checklist for Swissair MD-11 flight crews.

It may be worth noting that aircraft circuit breakers (CBs) should not be used as switches. They were not designed to be used as such, and with constant use the failure rate for their primary function can be expected to rise. Frequent action of the circuit breaker can lead to a "floppy" action, and CBs so used may fail to pop when they should. When the circuit protective device fails to open a faulty circuit, one can reasonably expect electrical fireworks to result. With luck, the fireworks will be at that end of the circuit where instruments and other "black box" items are positioned. If one is unlucky, the fireworks may occur at the distribution bus, the loss of which means loss of systems en masse. As one pilot quipped, the smell of burning wire insulation may well alert the cockpit crew to the dismaying fact that the rest of the day is not likely to go according to plan

MD-11 Airflow tests

This week a Swissair MD-11 will undergo a series of in-flight tests to determine the airflow pattern in the interior of the forward cabin and cockpit. A Swissair MD-11 was flown to Long Beach, Calif., and its in-flight entertainment network (IFEN) was reconnected and fully-powered. Since the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) voided the supplemental type certificate authorizing the original IFEN installation, effectively prohibiting its use forevermore in U.S. airspace, a Special Flight Permit was granted for the purpose of conducting these important tests. The IFEN wiring remains on the list of possible causes of the fire and/or its propagation in the Sept. 1998 crash of Swissair Flight 111, an MD-11. The crash in Halifax is under investigation by the Transportation Safety Board (TSB) of Canada.

TSB investigators will be supervising the airflow tests. They will be using theatrical smoke, and its propagation pattern will be recorded by a gallery of television cameras, located at different places throughout the cabin and synchronized to shoot together.

The reasoning behind these tests is fairly straightforward: Fire development is influenced by airflow. Up to now, the airflow pattern in the cabin, cockpit, and above the inner ceiling of the MD-11 is not known. In order to determine how a fire may have spread, and the corresponding carbon-blackened pattern, TSB and Boeing experts are conducting the tests. Swissair contributed by making an MD-11 available that is as close as possible to the configuration of the accident airplane, including the IFEN system. Meanwhile, wire testing continues.

Ongoing Wire Testing
While the airflow tests are underway, wire testing continues. TSB investigators have launched an extensive program of testing to assess if the wires were damaged by fire first, and then arced, or if they arced first.

Chemical testing of the molten material should provide evidence regarding the atmospheric conditions at the time the arcing took place. If this true, theoretically it should be possible to sort out the wire that arced first in a "clean environment". To confirm this theory, 100 wire samples have been exposed to arcing in deteriorating atmospheric conditions, ranging from clean to carbon-blackened. Initial results have been problematic as unexpected substances were found. Air Safety Week understands that only if the tests prove reliable will the original wires from the accident aircraft be examined.

The Federal Aviation Administration said late on Friday it plans
to let BOEING CO 777 twin-jets stray further from shore on Pacific
routes, trimming flight time for 777 operators. The decision,
published in Friday's Federal Register, will likely help the 777
wide-body compete against the four-engine Airbus Industrie A340,
which has no restrictions on its distance from shore. "It's good
news for the triple-seven and particularly for operators of the
triple-seven," said Boeing spokesman John Dern. Airlines
represented by the Air Transit Association had asked the FAA in
February 1999 to let the 777 travel up to 207 minutes in flight
time from the nearest airport, up from the current limit of 180
minutes, in place since 1988. (Reuters 06:12 PM ET 01/21/2000)
http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2563535350-f10

Main Story

Report: Airline travel safer despite more accidents

January 21, 2000
Web posted at: 2:58 p.m. EST (1958 GMT)

LONDON (Reuters) -- Air travel became safer in the last decade compared with the 1980s despite

a higher number of airline accidents, according to a report to be released by Flight International

Magazine on Monday.

The number of airline accidents worldwide rose by 28 percent to 480 in the 1990's compared to the

previous decade, with deaths increasing by 12.5 percent to 11,950, according to the report.

RELATED SITES

Airsafe.com: Fatal passenger event by airline since 1970

Flight International Magazine

Note: pages will open in a new browser window

But since the number of travelers on airlines rose by 32 percent and there were 30 percent more

flights, the average risk per passenger fell, the report added.

"Indeed, the 1990s saw a gradual improvement in safety rates; passengers at the end of the decade

were statistically safer than when they were at the beginning," it said.

David Learmont, author of the Flight International report, added that -- with newer technology

being used by airlines across the world -- travelers had reason to be optimistic about the future.

NTSB: Hall statement on EgyptAir Flight 990 -- NTSB Disturbed

The National Transportation Safety Board and the Egyptian Civil
Aviation Authority agreed this week to a plan for further study of the
EgyptAir Flight 990 accident. Both agencies believe that operational and
aircraft system issues remain for consideration. Plans were drawn for
further work in the correlation of voice and data recorders, and for flight
simulation at Boeing facilities in Seattle. Additionally, investigators
from Egypt and the United States will undertake a review of the Boeing 767
elevator system, examining hydraulic components, studying linkages and
breakouts, and undertaking system modeling. Metallurgic examination of
engine pylon components is also scheduled, as is additional work in the
operational and human performance specialties. No decision has been
reached at this point as to whether further wreckage recovery will
ultimately be necessary, and both agencies agree that additional work
needs to be accomplished before a final decision can be made.
NTSB is disturbed to see that again this week unidentified sources
were used as the basis of a news report purporting to have informed
knowledge of our work. As is often the case in these matters, the story
was wrong. No hypothesis for the cause of this accident has been accepted
and the activities that I have outlined indicate that there is much that
still needs to be done before a determination of cause can be reached.
http://www.ntsb.gov/pressrel/2000/000121.htm

Cadors No.: 2000C0066    Registration: C-FVKC
Other Identification: ABS 278    Reported By: NavCanada
Date: 2000/01/19    Time:2338    TimeZone: Z
Location: La Ronge, SK

Occurrence: Incident    Fatalities: 0    Phase of Flight: Approach
First Event : 210 Fire/Smoke (Warning)
Second Event: 280 Declared Emergency / Priority

Aircraft: BEECH 1900D
Aircraft Category: Aeroplane    Gear: Land    Year Built: 1995
Engine Type: Turbo prop
Engine Manufacturer: PRATT & WHITNEY CANADA PT6 TURBO PROP
Aircraft Owner: ATHABASKA AIRWAYS LTD
Aircraft Operator:
Record Last Updated By: Rod Ridley
***Details***
ABS 278, a Beech 1900, enroute from Prince Albert to La Ronge, was on
approach to La Ronge when the pilot advised of smoke in the cockpit.
ABS 279 declared an emergency and the fire department was contacted
at 2339Z. ABS 279 landed safely at 2343Z and taxied to the apron
without assistance. The fire truck arrived at 2350Z and attended the
aircraft. TSB will be contacting the operator.

"This site is also cross-linked to the NTSB Aviation Accident/Incident Database given
you in the last message. Here, a third MD-11 was involved in failures of a
wire bundle as it sat on the ground. Were it in the air, the outcome may
have been more ominous. All these reports are public documents posted on the
FAA's official sites and may be reproduced anywhere."

Instructions to find this report; Search site URL > http://nasdac.faa.gov/asp/asy_asrs.asp

Under "Enter a word or phrase for which to search", type "431017"

Click "Begin Search" Click "Report: 431017"

Note the references to circuit breakers not working and "brittle wire".

Narrative: Possible problems in aircraft xyz wiring after a fire in the wire bundle.
Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following info: The reporter
stated the M-11 was parked outside of the hangar where the wiring work was
accomplished and was powered with a GPU (Ground Power Unit). The reporter
said the aircraft was moved into the hangar where it was found the aircraft
would not accept GND PWR (Ground Power), and in the process of troubleshooting the GND PWR circuit, the smoldering wire bundle was discovered. The reporter stated the cause appeared to be a wire shorted to a bundle clamp when
installed improperly by pushing it through the clamped bundle, instead of
opening the clamp and installing the wire. The reporter said the wire
insulation is brittle and may have been stripped off when pushed through the
bundle. The reporter said 14 wires had to be replaced, and the circuits
involved included the #3 ENG (engine) fuel shutoff valve wiring, pax
(passenger) entertainment wiring, and some spare wires not used. The reporter
stated some circuit breakers tripped and some stayed set.

Data-driven, not data-free analysis of Flight Data
The paltry number of parameters and/or power wipeouts to flight data recorders can push crash investigations into the miasma of what might be called data-free analysis. For this reason, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chairman Jim Hall has been waging a campaign for improved recorder technology. The transportation recorder symposium hosted by the NTSB last year marked a major effort in consciousness-raising (see ASW, May 10, 1999). At the annual meeting last week of the Transportation Research Board, Hall outlined two important upcoming recorder-related events:
"The legal, privacy and proprietary implications of recording systems need to be addressed so that the safety of the travelling public and the privacy rights of vehicle operators are both protected. That is why the Board will be sponsoring a symposium on April 25th and 26th in Crystal City, Virginia, to discuss many of these issues."

"In addition, I'm pleased to report that the study of future requirements and capabilities of flight data recorders that FAA Administrator Jane Garvey and I announced at the Board's recorder symposium last May is underway. The Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, or RTCA, has formed a committee to examine these issues, especially as they pertain to accident investigation and fleet management. Administrator Garvey and I will chair a public meeting here in Washington to solicit input on the committee's work in early May

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT IN ANNOUNCEMENT ON AIRLINE SAFETY

The Roosevelt Room 14 Jan 2000
Now, let me begin my remarks by welcoming and thanking the people who are here with me, beginning with our FAA Administrator Jane Garvey, Deputy Secretary of Transportation Mort Downey, American Airlines Chairman Don Carty, Delta Airlines CEO Leo Mullen, First Vice President of the Airline Pilots Association International Dennis Dolan, Allied Pilots Association President Richard LaVoy, and Mark DeAngelis, the Aviation Safety Action Program Representative for the Transport Workers Union. Three years ago, I asked Vice President Gore to lead a commission on aviation safety and security, looking at how to make our skies as safe as they can possibly be. Already, there is less than one fatal crash for every one million commercial flights. But we know we can do better still. Any accident, any death in the air is still one too many. The commission set a goal of reducing fatal accidents by 80 percent over 10 years. Its members agreed that the best way to meet the goal was to stop accidents before they happen and identify problems before they have terrible consequences. This is a completely different way of looking at safety. It requires business, labor and regulators to work together in a completely different way -- as partners, not adversaries. Everyone must focus on fixing problems, not fixing blame. I'm proud to be here with all these people today to announce a new partnership among business, labor and government to set us ahead of the curve on safety. Under aviation safety action programs, pilots will report problems or concerns immediately to safety experts at their airline and the Federal Aviation Administration. They'll be encouraged to share their valuable insights about doing a job more safely. They will be freed from the fear of being disciplined for admitting that something went wrong. The FAA will still have the right to take action against deliberate violations of aviation rules, criminal activity or drug and alcohol use. The experts will get the data they need to stay in front on safety, to solve problems, evaluate existing safety systems and propose new ones. We know these programs will work because American Airlines and its pilots have run one as a demonstration for more than five years now. Pilots reported literally thousands of concerns to the FAA. Those reports produced real improvements, in procedures and in equipment. They even helped designers and builders create safer planes and airports. For example, pilots' expertise changed the way some airports use lights and signs on the runways, and pilots helped to rewrite the safety checklist they must complete while planes taxi from the gate. And when American extended its program to mechanics and dispatchers, they improved equipment manuals and maintenance procedures. I hope we'll be able to follow their example and open this program to all the people who make airplanes fly -- flight attendants, mechanics, dispatchers. For the first time, we have regulators, business and labor working as real partners. When it comes to safety, everyone has a responsibility. We want everyone on the team. And let me again say, I have only the profoundest gratitude, on behalf of all the American people, and especially those who will be in airplanes in the future, to all those who are here with me today, and those whom they represent.

AIR CRASH RESCUE NEWS:
>
> December 7, 1999 (READER SUBMISSION) - Smoke In Cockpit Forces Landing In Frankfurt
>
FRANKFURT, Germany - An Airbus 300 en route from Berlin made an emergency
landing in at Frankfurt's International Airport, after a strong odor of
smoke was reported in the cockpit. The aircraft landed without incident, as fire
crews stood by. The passengers were removed form the plane without
injuries The airport fire crews used a thrmal imaging camera to try to locate the
cause of the odor, but was unable to determine it's origin.

January 13, 2000 - Administration Promotes Air Safety by Encouraging Whistleblowers

WASHINGTON (USA) - Aiming to promote air safety, the Clinton administration has forged a deal granting airline personnel immunity from punishment if they report operational and procedural errors to the Federal Aviation Administration. The agreement, which barring a last-minute snag could be announced at the White House as early as Friday, is the culmination of more than a year of discussions among the airline industry, the pilots and administration officials. It aims to improve understanding of the errors that cause accidents -errors that might go unreported by pilots or crew members who fear reprisals or even punishment for violating FAA regulations.

``It is a reporting system that allows pilots to report safety discrepancies and have them addressed by the FAA, the union and the airline in a non-punitive environment,'' said one person familiar with the agreement. Three people familiar with the deal said they expected the announcement to be made Friday at the White House. All spoke on condition of anonymity. Pilots at American Airlines and ground crew members of the Transport Workers Union already are experimenting with safety committees that share information among workers, airline officials and government regulators. Under the expanded deal, unionized pilots from American Airlines, Continental Airlines and members of the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 50,000 pilots at 51 airlines, and others would participate in the``Aviation Safety Advancement Partnerships.''

Pilots, mechanics and other airline personnel could go to committees established by the program with problems they observe or even errors they themselves commit. The aim is to increase the pool of safety information to try to stop accidents from happening. ``If you self-disclose, you can track trend information,'' said another person familiar with the details of the program, who likened it to whistleblower protection for airline pilots and other personnel. ``The thought is, let's talk about it.''

USA TODAY – Nationline 12 January 2000

http://www.usatoday.com/news/digest/nd1.htm

Domestic air deaths down

In 1998, there were no deaths aboard major U.S. air carriers - a first; 1997 had 8 fatalities
Odds that a U.S. flight will crash: More than 1 in a million

For the third year in a row, only a handful of deaths were associated with air carriers in the USA as the numbers of major accidents continued a long-term decline. Last year, 12 deaths were recorded. Eleven came from the June 1 crash of an American Airlines jet that slid off a Little Rock, Ark., runway; the other came July 28 as a ramp worker was struck by a propeller, also in Little Rock. The statistics from the National Transportation Safety Board do not include foreign carriers. "These have been great years," MIT professor and air-safety expert Arnold Barnett says of the unprecedented decline in fatalities.

01/11/00- Updated 11:56 PM ET

http://www.usatoday.com/news/ndstue01.htm

Rise in airline mishaps may not be bad sign

By Alan Levin, USA TODAY

On Oct. 15, an America West Airbus A-320 loaded with 88 passengers struck a pedestrian walkway as it was pushed back from the gate in Phoenix.

Mishaps at airports are somewhat common. This time, although no one was injured, damage to the tail section of the jet was so substantial that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) listed the incident among 27 cases last year through November in which aircraft were significantly damaged.

The numbers of these incidents, along with accidents causing injuries but no fatalities, rose during the 1990s to hit record or near-record levels through the first 11 months of last year.

The question for air safety experts is whether these accidents are indications of safety lapses among domestic air carriers or statistical aberrations.

No one is sure.

Many airline officers, public officials and academics who study aviation safety say that fatal crashes have become so rare - occurring in this country fewer than once every million flights - that studying less tragic events can provide the best clues about how to reduce the already low accident rate.

Jets that skid off runways, land so hard that their gear is damaged or strike birds in flight might indicate problems that, if not properly addressed, could lead someday to more serious crashes, experts say.

NTSB records show an average of about six cases of significant aircraft damage each year in the early 1990s, compared with an average of more than 20 in the past three years. Though rare, such incidents occurred about three times as often per million hours of flight in the past three years as in the early 1990s.

A similar trend has occurred in incidents causing serious injuries but not deaths, such as severe air turbulence. These occurred, on average, nearly twice as often per million hours of flight in the late 1990s as in the early 1990s.

The experts disagree whether these data signal an increase in safety lapses.

"That is a very serious trend," says Michael Barr, director of the Aviation Safety Program at the University of Southern California.

Many of the incidents damaging aircraft, he says, "are the precursors of major accidents."

However, Arnold Barnett, an aviation safety expert at the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, says that an equally plausible explanation is that safety enhancements have turned what previously would have been fatal accidents into less serious ones that merely damage aircraft.

The increase, Barnett says, "could be a sign of progress."

It is too soon to conclude that the increase in more minor incidents signals trouble, according to Stuart Matthews, president of the Flight Safety Institute, based in Arlington, Va.

He and other safety experts say the numbers deserve further study .

Airline representatives say that so few of these events occur each year - about 1.4 damaged aircraft for every million hours in the air, for example - that a series of increases over several years does not signal anything.

If nothing else, the experts say, the numbers indicate the difficulty officials face as they attempt to further limit the numbers of accidents.

January 10, 2000 - 'Event' in EgyptAir Plane's Tail Caused Crash

CAIRO, Egypt - "Something happened" in the tail of the EgyptAir Boeing
767 which crashed into the sea on October 31 shortly after take off from New
York, killing all 217 people aboard, the chairman of EgyptAir announced on
Monday.

"The plane plummeted because of something that happened in its tail,"
Mohammed Fahim Rayyan told journalists, but did not say whether it was an
accident or an act of sabotage.

He said the Egyptian team working with the US investigators "refuted all
the allegations made about the plane's crew".

The US press had cast suspicion on the co-pilot Gamil al-Batouti, alleging
that he had crashed the plane to commit suicide.
Another EgyptAir team is to go to New York next week to join the one
already there, Rayan said.

About 70 percent of the plane was recovered from the sea bed before the
search was called off at the end of December. The investigators have parts
of the wings, tail, fuselage and one of the two engines.

AirSafe.Com: Fatal Event Rates for Selected Airliner Models

Fatal Event Rate Per Million Flights

Model                         Rate     Events   Flights
Airbus A300               1.0        8         8.0M
Airbus A310               1.48      4         2.7M
Airbus A320               0.67      4         6.0M
Boeing 727                 0.66      46        70.0M
Boeing 737-1/200       0.71     35        49.0M
Boeing 737-3/4/500    0.41    11         27.0M
Boeing 747                 1.55     23        14.8M
Boeing 757                 0.56      4         7.2M
Boeing 767                 0.46      3         6.5M
Boeing DC9                0.76     42        55.5M
Boeing DC10              1.97     15         7.6M
Boeing MD11              4.29     3          0.7M
Boeing MD80              0.35     7          20.0M
BAe 146                      0.89     4          4.5M
Fokker F70/F100        0.67     3          4.5M
Lockheed L1011         0.91     5          5.5M
http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm

McDonnell Douglas MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes: AD, final rule, requires a one-time inspection to determine if metallic transitions are installed on wire harnesses of the tail tank fuel transfer pumps, and to determine if damaged wires are present; and repair, if necessary. This amendment also would require repetitive inspections of the repaired area; and a permanent modification of the wire harnesses if metallic transitions are not installed, which terminates the repetitive inspections. Actions are to prevent wire chafing and damage. Effective January 18. Docket No. 99-NM-71-AD; Amendment 39-11457; AD 99-25-14. Contact: Roscoe Van Dyke, 562/627-5254; fax 562/627-5210.

McDonnell Douglas MD-11: AD, final rule, requires repetitive general visual inspections of the power feeder cables, terminal strip, fuseholder, and fuses of the galley load control unit (GLCU) within the No. 3 bay electrical power center to detect damage; and corrective actions, if necessary. Actions are to prevent such damage due to the accumulated effects over time from overheating of the power feeder cables on the G3 GLCU. Effective January 4. Docket No. 99-NM-262-AD; Amendment 39-11463; AD 99-26-03. Contact: Brett Portwood, 562/627-5350; fax 562/627-5210.

December 28, 1999 - Jet Fire Injures Two

MILWAUKEE, Wisconsin (USA) -A fire in a corporate jet still on the ground at
Mitchell International Airport put two people in the hospital. It broke out in the cockpit of a private aircraft that seats about 12 people. The airport fire department evacuated six passengers from the plane. None of them were seriously injured, but two were taken to St. Luke's Medical Center for treatment of smoke inhalation.

ALPA and the hazards of a/c fires ASW Magazine
12/20/1999 08:57 pm EST
Coincidental Development

The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) is mobilizing its expertise to address the hazard of aircraft fires. The goal is to produce recommendations for regulatory authorities and industry addressing the full range of areas where hazards can be mitigated: from certification of aircraft and electrical system design to fire detection, suppression, emergency procedures and checklists. ALPA's in-flight fire project may be unprecedented in the scope of its work.

The effort features two overall thrusts: to assess the hazard posed by wiring (smoke, overheats, electrical system design, etc.) and to improve crew capability for coping with in-flight fire. Near-term efforts are focused on reviewing checklists, both in form (legibility of print) and content (logic of procedures), and to assess the state of the fleet with respect to electrical system and fire detection/suppression capabilities.

The group's first meeting was held last month. The next meeting in January is slated to develop a more detailed plan of work. >> ALPA, tel. 703/481-4440 <<

Thursday, December 16, 1999

Flight 111 investigation chronology

A chronology of the crash of Swissair Flight 111.

Sept 2, 1998: Swissair Flight 111 crashes off the coast of Nova Scotia killing all 229 people on board.

Sept. 6: Divers recover one of the plane's flight recorders; the plane's final moments are not recorded.

Sept. 11: The second black box, a voice recorder, is located by divers. It does little to solve the mystery of the crash. Like the data recorder, the last six minutes of flight are not recorded.

Oct. 30: Swissair announces it is disconnecting a video gambling and entertainment system available on some planes. Flight 111 had such a system. Speculation is fueled the entertainment system may have caused electrical problems leading to a cockpit fire.

Dec. 9: The Flight 111 investigation prompts an immediate check of all U.S. registered MD-11 airplanes for damaged wires.

Dec. 22: All 229 victims are identified. The RCMP recommends a world-wide DNA bank for airline employees and frequent flyers to aid identification efforts in the event of a crash.

Jan. 11, 1999: The Canadian Transportation Safety Board recommends the immediate inspection of cockpit electronics in all MD-11 aircraft after wiring problems are detected in planes still flying. The U.S. orders inspections a week later.

March 9: The Transportation Safety Board recommends sweeping changes to flight recorders to make them record longer and to equip them with backup batteries. The recommendations are applauded but have not been issued as directives.

Aug. 11: Metalized mylar insulation blankets ordered out of aircraft as a result of Swissair investigation because of flammability tests.

Sept. 1-2: Families of victims and Nova Scotians gather for services honouring the people killed aboard Swissair Flight 111.

Sept. 30: Dredging ends and the exclusion zone is opened to boaters.

Dec. 15: Field recovery work is finished and 98 per cent of the airplane has been recovered. Investigators continue to sift through millions of pieces of wreckage.