Position: Maintenance / Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer
Company:  The Employment Solution 
Company Info:  TES delivers IT and Engineering staff augmentation solutions across the North American market. We give our clients the winning edge through constant innovation, technological savvy, and a customer-centred approach that influences everything we do. We give our candidates access to exclusive opportunities in leading-edge technologies and organizations, and a chance to enhance their skills and build their dream career. TES is fully pandemic-ready, with alternate and backup delivery channels to protect the flow of services to clients and candidates.

Job Title:  Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer
Location:  TORONTO Ontario Canada
Salary Range:  30.00-Neg

Job Desc:
Under the supervision of the Production Manager, the chosen candidate will maintain, supervise and control the maintenance activities of their respective assigned aircraft in the form of scheduled and unscheduled inspections, defect rectification and AOG support.

Requirements:
Qualifications
Must have completed all transport Canada exams and hold a valid AME license category M2 with 5 to 10 years experience.
Must be available to work shifts as needed during major projects;
Must have experience in Corporate Aviation and endorsed on the HS125-800XP and HS125-850XP
Experience and endorsements on various Cessna Citation models is an asset.

Contact: Karen Roe
Email: karenr@tes.net
Fax Number:  (514) 426-1790
Address:  6600 Trans-Canada Highway
Suite 340 Pointe-Claire
Quebec H9R 4S2 Canada
Web Address: www.tes.net  Email: Geoffn@tes.net

Last Date for Aviation Engineering Scholarship Applications is Feb. 15

Ross Wagner Aviation Scholarships: Local high school students looking for a career in engineering are encouraged to apply for the Ross Wagner Scholarship.

Several full-expense reimbursement scholarships have been established by Gemini Incorporated in honor of Ross Wagner, who was chairman of the company's Board of Directors from 1988-1992.

The Ross Wagner Scholarships provide full-ride scholarships for students majoring in civil, biomedical, aeronautical, mechanical, electrical, aerospace, and chemical engineering. Students seeking degrees in chemistry and physics may also apply.

It is open to students in the United States and Canada attending the local high school in cities where Gemini has plants, including Decorah.

For a complete list of guidelines and an application for the Ross Wagner Scholarship, go to rosswagnerfoundation.org. Students must apply no later than February 15.

Couple of Finnish papers with aeronautics related topic

I have been flying all kinds of planes and been kind of figuring slowly out what is the optimum for power loading. It turns out like 9 lbs/hp produces the "fun" experience. That is the "RV-grin" I would say.

So what comes together is:
- Optimum aircraft would consist of 2 x 100 hp engine
- Very low drag fuselage
- Very low drag wings
- High aspect ratio
- High wing loading, 22 lbs/sqft.
- Double slotted flaps
- Power loading 9 lbs/hp
-> mtow 1800 lbs = 818 kg
Empty weight should be under 450 kg to have enough useful load (368 kg, includes fuel).
=> wing area = 81 sqft.

For more general purpose use, it could be written:
- for high performance use, mtow limited to 818 kg.
- for long range use, mtow limited to 950 kg.

This becomes:
- the wing loading limit of 24 lbs/sqft can not be exceeded for the 950 kg because otherwise the stall speed gets too high
=> this becomes:
- 2090 lbs / 24 lbs/sqft
The wing area can be then assumed to be 87 sqft. 7 sqft more than on the case of high performance case.
- Wing loading calculation for the high performance case becomes:
87*22 = 1914 lbs MTOW.
1800/87.0 = 20.6 lbs / sqft

This would cause the airframe to gross weight ratio to be 0.47. This is very low and may not be realistic without special structure. A more realistic figure would be 0.55 ratio. This becomes: 450.0/0.55. Guess what, we get the 818 kg = 1800 lbs gross weight from that. So structurally the 450 kg empty weight and 818 kg gross weight should be feasible. Dynaero MCR-01 is 0.53; 260 kg / 490 kg = 0.53). The LH-Aviation LH10 is 260 kg/500 kg = 0.52. Both of these are carbon fiber structures. With lower cost materials, this may not be even nearly feasible.

If we take a pessimistic value for airframe to gross weight ratio - 0.6 and we have set the gross weight to 830 kg (based on optimizing the power loading), this gives 498 kg empty weight. This should be easily feasible if turbos and pressurization is not taken into account.

A flying club friend (Samuli Pänttäjä) kindly offered a familiarization flight on his Dynaero MCR01. I flew with Pertti Husa (a flight instructor and friend).

The short story is that the plane is very interesting, it is very different from any other same category plane.

It is close to the maximum performance one can get out of Rotax 912 in tractor configuration without utilizing laminar flow over the fuselage (I don't mean only speed, but overall performance) - the climb rate, takeoff distance, climb speed, minimum speed, stall behavior and cruise speed at low altitude (IAS) and landing distance. This plane really rocks, it surely blows average Cessna-pilot away. Despite of the low horse power in the engine, this is maybe even more high performance aircraft than turbo Cirrus SR22 is with over 300 hp. This plane has 100 hp Rotax 912 with MT propeller hydraulic constant speed propeller. With Rotax 914 this...

The takeoff is very similar than on Cirrus SR22. Everything happens maybe even faster than with the Cirrus. The plane accelerates like a rocket, is airborne almost at the same moment, time to switch flap ups, trim the plane, reduce power and propeller speed all come very quickly.

The economy cruise speed (manifold pressure at 26, rpm at 4600) settled to about 250 km/h (135 kts IAS). We didn't try flying at altitude, I don't yet know how much TAS the plane collects at high altitude. At low altitude the cruise speed is anyhow about the same as on Cirrus SR20 leaned to best power setting. It really moves compared to Cessnas etc.

It also became apparent that the plane would cruise, with little more power, a lot faster. With a little pitch down causes the IAS to go over 300 km/h and it happens effortlessly and quickly. Watch out when pitching down or you will go over the VNe very quickly!

The plane takes of and lands to a very short distance. The approach speed is very low. The double slotted flaps are very effective and the plane can be flown insanely slowly. We did one approach at 80 km/h. On the other hand, in take off, the after the plane gets airborne and out of ground effect, the speed very quickly rises to 170 km/h (91 kts). Very comparable to Cirrus SR20. The big difference to Cirrus is that, on Dynaero, the climb angle is steep. It is going up like an elevator. Takeoff from very short runway is possible and it finely clears the obstacle with ease.

Feelings on landing pattern are quite similar than on SR22, one has to act quickly and not fall behind the aircraft. Pitch down, even on landing pattern, easily makes to plane go 300 km/h. If you are trying to be behind a Cessna that flies the pattern about 130 km/h, you are going to take over it, and very fast.

The "secret" of the plane is:
- very low empty weight
- very low cross sectional area
- small wetted area
- low cooling drag
- double slotted flaps (high Clmax)
- relatively high wing loading

Everything in the plane is made out of carbon fiber. Even rudder pedals are carbon fiber.

It is beneficial to have as low as possible empty weight, high Clmax, high wing loading and as great as possible power to weight ratio. This plane has those in better balance than other types I have flown to the date.

Some pictures:

Video of landing to EFHF at Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIojuZsGfUo

  Air India​ may sell aircraft to raise around $600 million



Sale of the five 777-200s will alone fetch the carrier $500 million, and the 747s are expected to fetch $30 million each
P.R. Sanjai

Mumbai: Air India, the money-losing flag carrier that is seeking a government bailout, is expected to raise about $600 million (around Rs. 3,200 crore) by selling seven planes as part of a plan to pare its debt by March, according to two airline executives familiar with the development.

Of the seven aircraft, five Boeing 777-200​ long-range planes will be sold and taken back on lease for 12 years, while two Boeing 747-400​ aircraft are meant for outright sale, the executives said, requesting anonymity.

Sale of the five 777-200s will alone fetch the carrier $500 million, and the 747s are expected to fetch $30 million each, they said.

Air India has also sought the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) approval for a special arrangement to treat the company’s debt, if the carrier fails to pay dividends due to the banks within the prescribed eight-quarter limit.

The airline, which has a total debt of Rs. 43,777 crore, including loans and dues it owes to vendors such as oil companies and airport operators, is in the midst of a debt restructuring programme scripted by SBI Capital Markets Ltd.

Representatives of investment bankers and lenders said a final approval for the financial restructuring plan by RBI may happen next week.

The Air India executive said the carrier has repaid $800 million of loans since September 2007. “The sale-and-leaseback agreement is backed by the sovereign guarantee. While selling seven Boeing 787s, we will fetch a premium,” he said.

The first Boeing 787 plane will join Air India’s fleet by the end of this month. The delivery of that plane will be taken by the company selected for the sale-and-leaseback arrangement. The 787 will replace the routes being serviced by the 777s.

State Bank of India​ chairman Pratip Chaudhuri said Air India may not be able to make a profit to pay dividends on preference shares in the near term, and hence the carrier is asking for more time to pay the dividend.

Other lenders to Air India include Bank of India, Punjab National Bank​, Bank of Baroda​ and Central Bank of India​.

“The total outgo in terms of interest for Air India is Rs. 3,400 crore, including working capital and long-term loans. The debt restructuring will give them a relief of Rs. 1,000 crore. The selling of planes may yield more cushion,” said the consultant, who advises several airlines excluding Air India. “The real challenge is to bring back the passengers that they have lost to private carriers. They have to enhance their service levels and ensure reliability. It has to strike a balance between financial and operational turnaround.”

Apart from the financial restructuring programme, the airline has asked the government for an immediate equity infusion of Rs. 6,750 crore to tide over the crisis.

Air India is seeking a total equity support of Rs. 42,920 crore till fiscal 2021. The carrier also wants government guarantees for aircraft loans worth Rs. 30,584 crore till fiscal 2021, according to the latest plan submitted to the government.

Indian airlines are set to post a record loss of $2.5 billion on a total projected revenue of $10 billion this fiscal year, according to the estimates of Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation (Capa). Private airlines, excluding IndiGo, will account for $600 million of that loss; the rest will be borne by Air India, according to Capa.

 Private airlines in India have often complained that they are forced to operate unviable routes by the government. Some have even demanded subsidies to maintain connectivity.

Their wish may be one step closer to reality. A Bloomberg report on Monday said the Union civil aviation ministry has mooted a Rs.100 crore fund to help airlines for this purpose.

Seen dispassionately, there is no reason why private individuals— airlines and flyers— should be subsidized in any manner. There may be some logic in trying to maintain connectivity between remote parts of the country and better- connected transport hubs. But surely there can be other ways to do that, instead of giving in to the demand of private airlines. Another problem in such schemes is that when implemented, they always lead to runaway financial expenditures that seldom benefit those for whom it is meant in the first place.