(Source: Flight Global & FAA Press  Release)

The FAA today finalised amended certification standards that will require makers of transport category aircraft to either have icing protection systems that automatically activate or provide a method to alert pilots that the system should be turned on.

The final rule follows more than a decade of research by the FAA, NASA and others initiated by the fatal crash of an American Eagle ATR 72 near Roselawn, Indiana, in 1994 due to ice build-up on the wings.

Under the new rule new aircraft and those undergoing “significant changes” that impact icing safety must either have an ice detection system that automatically activates or alerts pilots to turn on the system; a definition of visual signs that indicate ice build-up along with an advisory system; or a method of identifying temperature and moisture conditions conducive to airframe icing, alerting pilots of the need to turn on the protection system.

Regardless of the activation method, ice protection systems must then operate continuously, automatically turn on or turn off, or alert the pilots that the system must be cycled again after the initial activation.

“We’re adding another level of safety to prevent situations where pilots are either completely unaware of ice accumulation or don’t think it’s significant enough to warrant turning on their ice protection equipment,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt.

The FAA has previously addressed activation of pneumatic deicing boots on many aircraft models by requiring activation of boots at the first sign of ice accumulation. This new certification standard further increases safety by not relying on the pilot alone to observe whether the airplane is accumulating ice. Also this certification standard applies to all types of ice protection systems, not just pneumatic deicing boots.

The full text of the final rule is available at: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-18483.htm

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Detroit News via Autoblog & Bloomberg)

Image Courtesy: Apture - Ford Focus

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has processed 80,500 transactions so far, and the early winner of Cash For Clunkers appears to be the Ford Focus. The Detroit News is reporting that the Focus is the number one vehicle purchased under the government program, showing us why Ford’s C-Segment vehicle gained 43.6% in July. Ford also saw an amazing 97% increase in Escape sales in July, a tally that was likely improved with the help of Cash For Clunkers.

The controversial and somewhat clumsy program is drawing plenty of attention for its popularity amongst car buyers, and Detroit automakers appear to be taking more than their fair share of sales.

The White House says 47% of all vehicles sold through the bill so far come from US automakers; 2% higher than the domestics’ 45% overall share. Four of the top 10 vehicles purchased under the program come from domestic automakers, and over half of all vehicles were built in the States.

This wildly popular program is currently all but spent and is awaiting the Senate nod for a further $2Billion cash infusion to keep it going.   On Friday, the House approved the $2 billion increase. The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday or Thursday; the White House is pressing it to act. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told MSNBC that the program has been a “lifeline to the economy.”

To drum up support for more dollars, the White House is touting the program’s value. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says the average fuel economy increase so far is 9.4 mpg; a 61% increase verses the vehicles destined for a sodium silicate bath. So far, 83% of the vehicles traded in have been trucks, while 60% of the vehicles purchased under the program have been cars. The White House estimates that Cash For Clunkers will save the average car buyer $700 – $1,000 in gas prices during the life of the vehicle.

The sales last month from the federal incentives may result in fewer buyers later this year after the program ends, George Pipas, Ford’s sales analyst, told CNBC today.

A similar program in Germany won’t sustain sales growth into 2010 as those incentives expire, said Matthias Wissmann, president of the German carmakers, today at a Frankfurt news conference. Germany’s car market expanded by 26 percent from a year earlier in the first half, propelled by increases of at least 40 percent in May and June.

Our favorite auto website,  Jalopnik, offers a comprehensive list of the top 10 vehicles  sold and trade-ins) dealt under this CARS program.

The Ten Most Traded-In Vehicles (vehicle’s EPA mileage)
1. 1998 Ford Explorer (14-17 mpg)
2. 1997 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
3. 1996 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
4. 1999 Ford Explorer (14-18 mpg)
5. Jeep Grand Cherokee
6. Jeep Cherokee
7. 1995 Ford Explorer (15-18 mpg)
8. 1994 Ford Explorer (15-18 mpg)
9. 1997 Ford Windstar (18 mpg)
10. 1999 Dodge Caravan (16-18 mpg)

The Ten Most Purchased Vehicles (vehicle’s EPA mileage)
1. Ford Focus (27-28 mpg)
2. Honda Civic (24-42 mpg)
3. Toyota Corolla (25-30 mpg)
4. Toyota Prius (46 mpg)
5. Ford Escape (20-32 mpg)
6. Toyota Camry (23-34 mpg)
7. Dodge Caliber (22-27 mpg)
8. Hyundai Elantra (26-28 mpg)
9. Honda Fit (29-31 mpg)
10. Chevy Cobalt (25-30 mpg

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

GM’s domestic sales of the automaker and its joint ventures in China jumped to 144,593 units—an increase of 77.7 percent compared to last year. This was GM China’s best July ever, extending an uninterrupted series of single month sales records that started in January 2009.

For the first seven months as a whole, GM China and its joint ventures sold 959,035 vehicles, up 42.8% in comparison with the first seven months of last year.

Shanghai GM registered year-on-year sales growth of 60.6% in July to 56,489 units.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Green Car Congress & NGVA Europe)

Image via Apture

The monthly sales rate of natural gas vehicles in Sweden has increased from about 150 to more than 700 units,according to NGVA Europe. The results are largely driven by the new Volkswagen TSI Passat EcoFuel (earlier post) (60% of sales) and the Mercedes B 170 NGT (earlier post) (24% of sales).

Most of the company cars are medium sized sedans or wagons. Cars like the new Volkswagen Passat TSI EcoFuel, and the Mercedes B 170 NGT (see picture on the right while refuelling at a NG/biomethane filling station of Fordonsgas), belong in this category, and explain the strong growth this year of the Swedish NGV sales. More than 50 % of all new cars sold in the Swedish market are company cars supplied to employees and used both for company and private purposes.

The employee pays income tax based on the assessed value of the car and the value of any fuel paid for by the company. For hybrids and for NGVs the value of the car is reduced by 40 % and for flex fuel cars by 20 %, to stimulate the use of environmentally superior technologies. The 40 % reduction is limited to maximum 16.000 SEK annually which, with a marginal tax rate of 50 %, means a net tax saving of 8.000 SEK (some 800 EUR) annually. The lower fuelling costs also mean a corresponding reduction of tax on the value of fuel paid for by the company. A reduction of the annual fuel costs by say 600 EUR thus normally means a 300 EUR tax saving.

Sweden at the end of 2008 had just under 17.000 NGVs and the Swedish NGV sales in June ran at an annual rate of 8.700 vehicles. Sales of new NGVs are now accelerating and may soon reach about 800 units monthly, corresponding with an annual sales rate of close to 10.000 vehicles. The graph shown below clearly illustrates the importance of the now available new models in the company cars segment (also well suited for the Swedish taxi cab segment).

In June 2.9 % of all new passenger cars sold in Sweden were NGVs!

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Bloomberg)

The future of the U.S. “cash for clunkers” program depends on the Senate backing a $2 billion infusion this week, with at least one Republican saying he was going to try to block the effort.

“We’ve got to slow this thing down,” Senator Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican, said on “Fox News Sunday.”

The House voted 316-109 on July 31 for an emergency measure adding $2 billion to the program aimed at reviving U.S. auto sales, after a burst of demand exhausted most of the initial $1 billion in less than a week.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a C-SPAN interview Sunday he expects the current $1 billion in funding to be gone by the end of the weekend. The administration will continue the program until the Senate acts, and dealers will be reimbursed for deals in the pipeline, he said. The government will make a “good-faith effort” for transactions beginning tomorrow, he said.

DeMint said he opposes the program because “we’re helping auto dealers while there are thousands of other small businesses that aren’t getting help.”

Named the Car Allowance Rebate System, the program provides credits of as much as $4,500 for the purchase of a new car when turning in an older vehicle to be scrapped. Lawmakers had expected the first $1 billion to generate about 250,000 vehicle sales and last until about Nov. 1.

(Source: BBC)

A spate of car crashes across Russia has killed more than 100 people in one week – leading the government to blame the country’s “systemic” road problems.

Interior Minister Rashid Nurgaliev blamed criminal negligence and a road culture lacking basic driving skills.

He admitted Russian roads are bad, infrastructure is weak and drivers often chat on their mobile phones at high speed or drive while drunk.

Over 10,000 people died on Russian roads in 2009 – Europe’s highest toll.

In the last week a drunk driver in Perm hit a pregnant woman and child in a car-park, killing them both.

The Russian government has made earnest attempts to combat bad driving – including employing legions of traffic police with stop and search powers.

But Mr Nurgaliev admitted most drivers in Russia still think they can break the law and get away with it.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Reuters via Yahoo & Autoblog Green)

YOKOHAMA, Japan  – Nissan Motor Co took the wraps off its much-awaited electric car on Sunday, naming the hatchback “Leaf” and taking a step toward its goal of leading the industry in the zero-emissions field.

Japan’s No.3 automaker and its French partner, Renault SA, have been the most aggressive proponents of pure electric vehicles in the auto industry, announcing plans to mass-market the clean but expensive cars globally in 2012.

Nissan will begin selling the first Leaf cars in the United States, Japan and Europe toward the end of 2010, adding two more models soon after. It expects production to start with around 200,000 units a year at the global roll-out in 2012.

Twinning the car’s unveiling with the inauguration of Nissan’s new global headquarters in Yokohama, south of Tokyo, Chief Executive Carlos Ghosn drove up to a stage in a sky-blue Leaf prototype, carrying former Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and two other guests to greet a throng of journalists who made the trip from all over the world.

“We celebrate today the start of a new chapter of our company’s life,” Ghosn said.

Nissan is returning to the port city of Yokohama, where it was founded in 1933, after being based in Tokyo’s posh Ginza district for the last 41 years.

Designed as a four-to-five seat, front-drive C-segment hatchback, Nissan says the Leaf is not just for use as a specialty urban runabout, but rather, it was designed as an everyday vehicle – a “real car” whose 160-kilometer+ (100 mile) range meets the needs of 70% of the world’s motorists. In the case of U.S. consumers, Nissan says that fully 80% of drivers travel less than 100km per day (62 miles), making the Leaf a solid fit for America’s motoring majority, even taking into account power-sapping external factors like hilly terrain, accessory draw, and extreme temperatures.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: NY Times )

New York Times’ Sarah Lyall has penned a funny but interesting & intriguing profile of Mr. Michael O’Leary, chief executive of the European budget airline Ryanair.  A must read for those in low-cost commercial aviation business.  Here are some interesting excerpts from the article.

——————————————————————————————————————————

He once dressed as the pope to advertise Ryanair’s new route from Dublin to Rome. He has declared that fat people should pay more for their seats, but that it would take too long to weigh them at the airport. And, at a news conference to discuss the possibility of starting trans-Atlantic flights, he suggested — to the consternation of the young woman gamely translating his remarks into German — that business-class customers would receive oral sex.

At 48, the quick-talking, blue-jean-wearing Mr. Michael O’Leary, chief executive of the European budget airline Ryanair,is one of the most successful businessmen in Ireland, presiding over an airline that is, remarkably, flourishin g in a brutal climate for airlines (and most other businesses). He is known for thick-skinned aggression, outrageous public statements and an implacable belief that short-haul airline passengers will endure nearly every imaginable indignity, as long as the tickets are cheap and the planes are on time.

“Soon he’ll be charging us for oxygen and number of limbs,” The Sun groused in a columnin June, when he unveiled his latest proposal — getting people to carry their own bags to the plane.

Ryanair’s post-tax profit fell by 78 percent in the year that ended in March, but still amounted to $149 million. While most carriers are hemorrhaging passengers, Ryanair expects its passenger numbers to increase, to 68 million this year from 57 million in 2008.

The mystery is why so many people are willing to put up with an airline that, in the words of The Economist, “has become a byword for appalling customer service, misleading advertising claims and jeering rudeness towards anyone or anything that gets in its way.”

(Source: Times of India)

Taking a leaf out of employees’ labour union books, private airlines on Friday threatened to suspend domestic operations on August 18 if the government did not give in to their demand for a bailout package in the form of lower sales tax on fuel and airporttaxes. Never before has an entire industry threatened to pull out from the market to arm-twist the government into buying its line.

“The airline industry realizes its role in the life of the nation. But in view of the indifference shown by the government, it may not be able to continue its operations… and so we have decided not to operate nationwide services on August 18,” Anil Baijal, secretary general of the Federation of Indian Airlines, the lobby group of airlines in India, announced at the Jet Airways office in Mumbai. “The idea is to highlight the urgency for the government to intervene urgently. If, however, an adequate response is not received, member airlines will be compelled to suspend their services for an indefinite period.” Baijal did not spell out the nature of the response or the level of commitment the airlines are expecting from the government in the next 18 days.

The no-fly decision was taken following an afternoon meeting attended by Jet Airways’ Naresh Goyal, Kingfisher Airlines’ Vijay Mallya and other members of FIA except those from Air India and Paramount Airways. Following the meeting, Baijal read out a statement to the media which began with the financial difficulties faced by the industry. The total losses incurred by the Indian airline industry in 2008-09 are estimated to be Rs 10,000 crore, he said, listing ATF sales tax, airport charges, depreciation in the value of India rupee, the economic meltdown and terrorists attacks as contributory factors.

Sudhakara Reddy, president, Air Passengers Association of India, a consumer rights organization, was scathing. “The losses are of their own making,” he said. “The two big airlines, Jet and Kingfisher, bought loss-making airlines like Air Deccan and Air Sahara. The government, on the other hand, gave airlines benefits like a credit period for payment to oil companies and airports. Then again, IndiGo and Spice Jet made a profit in the last quarter, which means there is a turnaround in the industry. When they make a profit, do they share it with the government or public?”

Although the relationship between governments and airline operators worldwide has never been an easy one, the threat by Indian private airlines is a first in the century-old history of the global airline industry. If it is indeed carried out, it will mean cancellation of about 12,000 domestic flights by airlines such as Kingfisher, Kingfisher Red, Jet Airways, Jetlite, IndiGo, Go Air and Spice Jet on August 18. The only option for the domestic air traveller will be the 300 scheduled flights operated by Air India and the additional ones it may mount to meet the demand.

Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel on Sturday said that the government would not bailout private airlines. Patel advised the private carriers to withdraw their strike call on August 18. He stated, “Passengers interest would be safeguarded and DGCA would take action if needed.”

Air India will increase the number of flights to reduce inconvenience to passengers, Mr Patel said. It is not known if Paramount Airways will join its private sector peers in the strike.

The minister said that the ATF tax was an issue even before the private carriers started operations. Painting a desperate picture of their situation, industry lobby body Federation of Indian Airlines (FIA) said unless the government helps them by lowering taxes on jet fuel and bringing down airport charges, their survival is in doubt.

Click here to read the entire article.

TransportGooru Musings: I can understand the plight of the airline operators in India, a country where rulers take a serious view of situations only when such harsh measures are called for.  As a proud practitioner of Democracy, the country has developed a unique way of making its rulers listen – Indefinite Strike.  Though this method has often been abused by many labor unions, especially the ones associated with employees of public sector banks & railways, this is the first time an entire industry is threatening to go on strike.   During my recent trip to India, me and my family flew on some of the domestic carriers mentioned here.  Though the original price of the tickets were really enticing, the additional costs for a ticket incurred by a passenger were often sky high.

For example, the price for two tickets from Coimbatore to Chennai (two Southern Indian cities) was Rs.1598 (roughly $35).  But the invoice showed a shocking total of Rs.5638, with a line stating  “Other Charges” worth Rs.4,391.44 (~$80). I am assuming that this “Other Charges” line envelops all the above mentioned items that the airline operators are fighting to remove.  If the airlines managed to achieve this, the cost of flying should become really cheap and would fuel a boom in traffic.  These sky high tariffs did really make me re-examine whether it is worth flying and given that the next best alternative is the Indian Railways, which takes six times longer to get me to the same desitination, I went ahead and paid for the ticket inspite of the heart-ache.

Here I’dlike to share an interesting story. My family hired this young driver, Suresh, to drive me around during this recent trip.  I spent a considerable amount of time with him in the car as he drove me around for nearly 2000 kms in a period of 20 days.  Sitting in traffic and during long stretches of driving (while I am not on the phone or sleeping), we asked a lot of questions about how it is to be living in our respective worlds (America & India) and shared stories about driving and the multitude of transportation problems we faced in our daily lives.  He was so fascinated by the idea of flying between cities in such short times compared to the trains.  When I asked him if he had ever flown in an airplane before, he said in a longing voice that he has never been inside an airport all his life (24years of age) and has always wanted to fly but never could afford a ticket due to his financial siuation.  He added that he always wanted to save money to buy a ticket to the nearest destination possible but was not sure how expensive it could be to fly compared to the buses or trains . When he picked me up at the airport, he inquired about how much I paid for the trip and I promptly shared the information.  He was sorta disappointed and said may be he will never get to fly if the prices were to be so high.  He said that flying will never become a reality for many people like him.

It got me thinking.  How is that a driver in India cannot afford to fly while someone holding the same job can do so in a country like America?  Here we have people like Suresh who are ready to fly but can’t afford to do so. There is a huge market that remains untapped and the private airline operators are definitely ready and willing to feast on this bonanza.  If the economics are worked out properly, this could be a wonderful way to resuscitate the ailing aviation industry.  I am no economist but it is not hard to understand what we are dealing with.  It is as simple as this:  There is a Huge Market, there are a number of willing operators, and a thriving industry that is raring to do everything possible to remain profitable.  With growth in passenger traffic, the Government can compensate for the loss of revenue experienced by the reduction in tariffs.   Moderizing the airport infrastructure and streamlining the current services can also help India’s aviation industry to a large degree.

But the only stumbling block that remains is some of the regressive policies of the Government, which is holding back the dreams of soaring high for people like Suresh. As a Transportation industry practitioner, I’d love to see the Ministry of Aviation taking a hard look at this issue and bring down some of these ridiculous charges.  Failing to do that would pretty much doom the industry and would prohibit the development of the aviation infrastructure, which the country needs to develop so badly.  Mr. Praful Patel, are you listening?

With all that said, I totally agree with Sudhakara Reddy, president, Air Passengers Association of India. Airline operators have goofed up tremendously in the past with their bad business moves (some of the horrible mergers and acquisitions are top among them) and can’t go penalizing the passengers like this.  It violates the obligation they have for serving the general public who put their faith in these airlines when they made travel plans.  For the airlines, it is their right to go on strike but that can’t come at the expense of the passengers.  It is a huge discomfort for the very passengers who keep these airlines in business.  It is the worst form of customer service.  Hope the issue gets resolved amicably.