Regulations & Safety
Chicago Midway Airport Security Breach Highlights US Aviation Vulnerabilities
September 2025 breach at Chicago Midway exposes vulnerabilities in US airport security amid rising runway incursions and legal challenges.
Airport Security Breach at Chicago Midway: A Comprehensive Analysis of Runway Incursions and Aviation Security Vulnerabilities
The September 2025 security breach at Chicago Midway International Airport, where a woman infiltrated a private aviation hangar, stole a shuttle bus, and drove it onto an active taxiway, has raised serious questions about the effectiveness of Airports security in the United States. This incident, involving a 39-year-old woman who claimed she was “testing security,” spotlights persistent vulnerabilities in airport perimeter protection, despite significant investments in aviation security. It also underscores the broader challenges facing American airports, as similar incidents have occurred across the country, indicating systemic security issues rather than isolated lapses.
The breach at a Signature Flight Support facility, a major provider of services for business and private aviation, resulted in felony criminal trespass charges. It reflects a troubling trend, with over 300 documented cases of passengers bypassing airport security checkpoints in the US over a recent 13-month period. As aviation security continues to evolve, this event prompts a re-examination of protocols, infrastructure, and the legal framework designed to protect critical transportation assets.
This article examines the details of the Midway incident, contextualizes it within broader national trends, analyzes the legal and economic ramifications, and explores future considerations for airport security.
The Midway Airport Incident: Details and Context
The breach at Chicago Midway occurred in the early hours of September 23, 2025. According to police reports, the suspect gained unauthorized access to the secure side of the Signature Flight Support hangar around 4:25 AM. She then commandeered a shuttle bus, drove it onto a taxiway, circled, and returned to the hangar. The operation of an unauthorized vehicle on an active taxiway constitutes a Category A runway incursion, the most serious type under FAA classifications, posing immediate risk to aircraft and passenger safety.
Witnesses reported that the woman appeared to exploit routine activities, such as holding open a hangar door for someone pushing a food cart and asking about restroom facilities, to maintain her presence in the restricted area. This suggests a level of planning and awareness of airport operations beyond mere impulse. When apprehended by police, the woman stated, “I was just testing security” and “Free Palestine,” indicating both a challenge to security protocols and a possible political motive. She was charged with felony criminal trespass to an airport and two misdemeanor trespassing counts. The court allowed her to remain free pending trial, with regular check-ins required.
The incident’s timing, early morning, when staffing and surveillance are typically lower, may have been chosen deliberately. Signature Flight Support, the facility breached, operates over 200 locations globally and serves high-value corporate and private aviation clients, making it a potential target for those seeking to exploit security gaps.
Although no flight delays or passenger evacuations were reported, the event demonstrated a significant failure in layered security measures. The perpetrator completed her stated objective of “testing security,” highlighting vulnerabilities that could be exploited by individuals with more dangerous intentions.
“The unauthorized vehicle operation on an active taxiway represents a Category A runway incursion under Federal Aviation Administration classifications, the most serious type of incident that poses immediate risk to aircraft operations and passenger safety.”
Airport Security Breach Patterns and Trends Across the United States
The Midway breach is not an isolated event. Data from Osprey Flight Solutions documented 32 notable security breaches at US aviation facilities in 2022 alone, spanning business and regional airports, major hubs, and military installations. These incidents reveal systemic vulnerabilities in perimeter security and access control.
For example, at John Wayne Airport in California, an individual breached a terminal, accessed the tarmac, stole a vehicle, and drove onto the taxiway. The suspect was eventually apprehended after hiding in the terminal ceiling. At San Jose International Airport, a man breached security, stole a work truck, and drove it to a terminal before being arrested. Notably, San Jose experienced three separate breaches in a single year, including a case where a teenager stowed away in the wheel well of a jet.
TSA data from March 2023 to April 2024 recorded at least 300 instances of people bypassing parts of airport security, including 200 attempts to enter secure areas through exit points and 80 incidents bypassing identification checkpoints. While many were inadvertent, the volume of incidents demonstrates the challenge of maintaining secure boundaries in busy, complex environments.
Historical data from the Associated Press found 268 security breaches at the nation’s 30 busiest airports (plus one other) between 2004 and 2015. In 44 cases, intruders reached runways, taxiways, or aircraft gate areas, with seven involving direct contact with aircraft. Most arrests were made within 10 minutes, but response times are not always disclosed for security reasons.
Internationally, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency found that 11.6% of runway incursions involved vehicles, highlighting that while these incidents are less common than those involving people or aircraft, their unpredictable nature poses unique risks.
Academic research from Purdue University found that airports with intersecting runways and multiple crossing taxiways are more prone to incursions, suggesting that airport design can influence security vulnerabilities.
“Between March 2023 and April 2024, at least 300 instances occurred of people bypassing parts of airport security, including approximately 200 people attempting to enter secure airport areas through passenger exit points and 80 incidents of individuals bypassing TSA identification checkpoints.”
Legal Framework and Criminal Penalties for Airport Trespassing
The legal consequences for breaching airport security are severe. In Illinois, trespassing in restricted airport areas can be prosecuted as a Class 3 felony, punishable by two to five years in prison and fines up to $25,000. The Midway suspect was charged accordingly, reflecting the seriousness with which authorities treat such violations.
Illinois law escalates penalties based on the type of property and the security implications. Standard trespassing is a misdemeanor, but airport-related offenses can result in felony charges. The legal framework also allows for federal prosecution in cases with terrorism or national security implications, especially if the act is intended to intimidate or disrupt aviation operations.
Penalties are further increased if the breach results in operational disruptions, risk to public safety, or is motivated by political or ideological reasons. In the Midway case, the suspect’s statements are under investigation to determine whether federal charges might be warranted. Prosecutors may also seek restitution for costs incurred by airport operators, airlines, and government agencies.
For non-citizens, felony convictions for airport trespassing can trigger deportation proceedings and permanent inadmissibility to the US. Defense strategies often focus on reducing charges to avoid such consequences.
Comparative analysis shows that penalties for airport trespassing are among the most severe for property-related offenses, reflecting the heightened risk to public safety and national security.
“Criminal trespass to an airport is a Class 3 felony in Illinois, punishable by two to five years in prison and fines up to $25,000.”
Economic Impact and Security Infrastructure Investment
The economic impact of airport security breaches is substantial, extending beyond immediate response costs to include investments in infrastructure, operational disruptions, and effects on public confidence. The FY 2025 US federal budget allocates $11.8 billion to the Transportation Security Administration, with significant funding for screening infrastructure, personnel, and research and development.
TSA’s budget includes nearly $99 million for checkpoint support systems, $89.6 million for property screening, and $9.3 million for credential authentication technology. Investments in advanced imaging and emerging threat detection technologies are ongoing, with $18 million allocated for R&D in FY 2025.
Airports also face direct costs from security upgrades, emergency response, and operational changes after breaches. For example, RAND Corporation estimated that annual security costs at a large airport can range from $2.5 million to $60 million, depending on the measures implemented. Vehicle checkpoints with bomb detection can cost $14 million annually, while remote parking requirements may cost up to $60 million per year.
Vehicle theft at airports is another economic concern. At Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, an organized theft ring stole 52 cars worth $4.9 million in 2023–2024. Atlanta’s airport reported 300 vehicle thefts in 2024, prompting increased security measures.
The balance between security and operational efficiency is a persistent challenge. While some measures may not provide a proportionate reduction in risk relative to their cost, public confidence in aviation safety remains a crucial, if intangible, economic asset.
Insurance costs can rise after breaches, affecting operators like Signature Flight Support, which manages over 200 locations worldwide. Federal grants, such as those from the Airport Improvement Program, help offset some costs, but airports often must provide matching funds or use their own resources.
“The FY 2025 President’s Budget allocates $11.8 billion to TSA operations, including $98.9 million for Aviation Screening Infrastructure and $18 million for security technology research and development.”
Broader Implications for Aviation Security and Future Considerations
The Midway breach highlights the need for continuous improvement in aviation security. While FAA data shows a significant decline in serious runway incursions in 2024, incidents involving unauthorized personnel and vehicles remain a concern. The sophistication of some perpetrators, who exploit operational knowledge and procedural gaps, suggests that current perimeter protections may not be sufficient.
International data shows that vehicle-related runway incursions, though less frequent, pose unique risks due to the unpredictability of vehicles in aircraft environments. Factors such as airport geometry, communication breakdowns, and training deficiencies contribute to these vulnerabilities.
Addressing these challenges requires a combination of technological upgrades, improved personnel training, and better integration of private aviation facilities into overall airport security systems. Enhanced surveillance, AI-powered threat detection, and real-time monitoring can play roles, but must be balanced with privacy and operational efficiency.
Legal and regulatory frameworks must also adapt to changing threats, ensuring that penalties remain a strong deterrent while allowing for appropriate discretion based on individual circumstances. International cooperation and information sharing are essential as threats and methods transcend national borders.
Ultimately, the Midway incident serves as a reminder that aviation security requires constant vigilance and a willingness to adapt to evolving risks. Comprehensive approaches that integrate technology, training, and policy are essential to protect critical infrastructure and public safety.
“The successful ‘testing’ of security vulnerabilities by the perpetrator demonstrates that determined individuals can identify and exploit weaknesses in current protective systems, making it essential that airport operators, federal agencies, and aviation industry stakeholders work collaboratively to address these vulnerabilities before they can be exploited by individuals with more dangerous intentions than security testing or political protest.”
Conclusion
The security breach at Chicago Midway International Airport exposed significant vulnerabilities in airport protective systems, highlighting the need for ongoing improvements in security protocols, infrastructure, and personnel training. The incident is part of a broader pattern of breaches across the US, demonstrating that systemic issues, rather than isolated lapses, pose challenges to aviation security.
Addressing these vulnerabilities requires a multi-faceted approach, including sustained investment in technology, effective legal deterrents, and continuous adaptation to evolving threats. The aviation industry, government agencies, and private operators must work together to ensure that incidents like the Midway breach become increasingly rare and less likely to result in harm.
FAQ
Q: What happened during the Midway Airport security breach?
A: A 39-year-old woman broke into a private hangar at Midway International Airport, stole a shuttle bus, and drove it onto the taxiway. She was arrested and charged with felony criminal trespass.
Q: How common are airport security breaches in the US?
A: TSA data shows over 300 instances of people bypassing parts of airport security between March 2023 and April 2024. Breaches range from inadvertent actions to deliberate attempts.
Q: What are the penalties for trespassing in restricted airport areas?
A: In Illinois, trespassing in an airport’s restricted area can be charged as a Class 3 felony, punishable by two to five years in prison and up to $25,000 in fines.
Q: How much is spent on airport security each year?
A: The FY 2025 US federal budget allocates $11.8 billion to the Transportation Security Administration for aviation security operations and technology.
Q: What steps can be taken to improve airport security?
A: Solutions include advanced surveillance, AI-powered threat detection, improved personnel training, and better integration of private aviation facilities into overall security systems.
Sources
Photo Credit: CBS News
Regulations & Safety
New Mexico Medical Plane Crash Kills Four in Capitan Mountains
A Beechcraft King Air 90 medical transport crashed near Ruidoso, New Mexico, killing four. FAA and NTSB investigate amid difficult weather and terrain.
This article summarizes reporting by KCRA and Dylan Hyman.
A tragic aviation accident occurred early Thursday morning in New Mexico when a small medical transport plane crashed, resulting in the deaths of all four individuals on board. The incident has prompted a multi-agency emergency response and federal investigations into the cause of the fatal flight.
According to reporting by KCRA and journalist Dylan Hyman, the crash took place in the rugged terrain of the Capitan Mountains outside of Ruidoso. The loss of the aircraft and its crew highlights the inherent risks associated with emergency medical aviation, particularly in challenging environmental conditions.
We are closely monitoring the ongoing recovery efforts, which have been complicated by a resulting wildfire and hazardous weather conditions in the southern New Mexico region.
Incident Details and Flight Path
The aircraft involved in the May 14, 2026, incident was operating as a medical transport flight. Research reports indicate the plane departed from the Roswell Air Center and was en route to the Sierra Blanca Regional Airport when it went down at approximately 4:00 a.m. local time.
All four people aboard the flight were confirmed dead at the scene. Authorities have withheld the names of the victims pending the notification of their next of kin.
“A small medical plane crashed in New Mexico Thursday, killing four people on board, officials said,” according to the initial report by KCRA.
Aircraft Background
The downed aircraft has been identified as a Beechcraft King Air 90, a dual-propeller plane frequently utilized for both medical and corporate transport due to its reliability and cabin size. Secondary reports indicate the specific plane involved in Thursday’s crash was owned by a company named Angel’s Envy.
Emergency Response and Environmental Impact
First responders faced significant logistical challenges upon arriving at the scene. The Capitan Mountains feature difficult, mountainous terrain that complicates both access and recovery operations. Lincoln County Manager Jason Burns publicly confirmed the crash and highlighted the arduous nature of the ongoing recovery efforts.
The impact of the crash ignited a brush fire in the immediate vicinity of the wreckage. As of Thursday morning, a coordinated effort by the U.S. Forest Service and local New Mexico agencies had successfully contained the blaze to an area of less than five acres.
Weather Conditions
Hazardous weather may have played a role in the incident or the rapid spread of the subsequent fire. The Ruidoso area was under an active “red flag” fire risk warning due to hot, dry conditions and low humidity. Furthermore, wind gusts reaching up to 35 mph were reported in the area, creating a volatile environment for both aviation and firefighting efforts.
Federal Investigations and Next Steps
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) have launched a joint investigation to determine the exact cause of the crash. The primary factors leading to the accident remain unknown at this time.
Federal investigators are currently evaluating the wreckage. A key focus of the probe will be determining whether the post-crash fire was solely a result of the high-speed impact or if mechanical failures contributed to the tragedy before the aircraft hit the ground.
AirPro News analysis
Air ambulances and medical transport flights inherently operate under high-stakes conditions. Flying at 4:00 a.m. in mountainous terrain with 35 mph wind gusts presents a highly complex operational environment for a small aircraft like the Beechcraft King Air 90. While the exact cause of the crash remains under investigation, the combination of darkness, rugged topography, and severe wind conditions will likely be a focal point for the NTSB.
We anticipate the NTSB’s preliminary report, which is typically released within 30 to 60 days of an aviation accident, will provide crucial insights into the flight’s final moments. This initial documentation should clarify whether weather, mechanical issues, or human factors were the primary drivers of this tragic event.
Frequently Asked Questions
What type of plane crashed in New Mexico?
The aircraft was a Beechcraft King Air 90, a small dual-propeller plane operating as a medical transport flight.
How many casualties were reported?
Four individuals were on board the aircraft, and all four were confirmed deceased.
Where exactly did the crash occur?
The plane went down in the Capitan Mountains area outside of Ruidoso, New Mexico, while en route to the Sierra Blanca Regional Airport.
Who is investigating the crash?
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) are leading the investigation into the cause of the accident.
Sources
Photo Credit: KOAT
Regulations & Safety
NTSB Urges FAA to Mandate Simulator Training for Smoke Emergencies
NTSB recommends FAA require realistic simulator training for smoke-in-cockpit emergencies following a Southwest Airlines incident in 2023.
This article is based on an official press release from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
On May 13, 2026, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued new safety recommendations urging the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the broader airline industry to mandate realistic, scenario-based simulator training for smoke-in-cockpit emergencies.
The regulatory push follows a harrowing December 2023 incident involving a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 MAX, where a bird strike led to dense smoke rapidly filling the flight deck. According to the NTSB press release, the FAA receives reports of smoke-related emergencies on a “nearly daily” basis. Despite this frequency, current pilot training relies heavily on verbal discussions rather than immersive, physical simulations.
The safety board warned that without realistic, stress-inducing training, flight crews remain underprepared for the sudden loss of visibility.
“Without realistic training, a similar event occurring at night or in poor weather could be catastrophic,” the NTSB warned in its assessment of current training shortfalls.
The Catalyst: Southwest Airlines Flight 554
A Sudden Emergency Over New Orleans
The foundation for these new recommendations stems from Southwest Airlines Flight 554 on December 20, 2023. The Boeing 737-8 (MAX) was departing Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport (MSY) for Tampa, Florida, carrying 139 people on board.
As the aircraft climbed through approximately 1,000 feet, its left engine ingested a bird. The NTSB reports that the plane began to shake violently, and within seconds, the cockpit was inundated with acrid white smoke.
Visibility deteriorated so quickly that the First Officer reported being unable to clearly see the Captain, who in turn struggled to read the instrument panel. The crew successfully donned airtight oxygen masks, executed emergency checklists, declared an emergency, and returned safely to the airport with no injuries reported. According to the NTSB’s findings, the flight crew later told investigators that the surprise, adrenaline, and severely restricted visibility were far more challenging than anything they had ever experienced in their standard training.
Mechanical Flaws and the LEAP-1B Engine
The Unintended Consequences of the Load Reduction Device
To understand the severity of the smoke intrusion, the NTSB detailed the mechanical sequence within the aircraft’s CFM International LEAP-1B engines. When the bird struck, it triggered a safety mechanism known as the Load Reduction Device (LRD).
The LRD is designed to intentionally disconnect the engine’s fan blades from the turbomachinery during severe vibrations, preventing the shaking from causing structural failure to the aircraft. While the LRD successfully halted the vibration on Flight 554, its activation dislodged oil tubes.
This dislodgment allowed oil to leak into the engine’s hot sections, where it rapidly vaporized. The aircraft’s air conditioning system then pumped this vaporized oil directly into the cabin and cockpit as smoke. The NTSB previously addressed this mechanical flaw in June 2025 with an urgent safety recommendation (AIR-25-03), urging the FAA, Boeing, and CFM International to develop a software fix to close pressure valves faster and prevent smoke intrusion.
The Core Issue: Inadequate Pilot Training
Moving Beyond Verbal Discussions
With the latest report (AIR-26-03), the NTSB has shifted its focus from the mechanical vulnerabilities of the 737 MAX to human factors and pilot preparedness. Under current FAA regulations, passenger airlines are not required to conduct realistic smoke-in-cockpit simulation training.
Instead, existing recurrent training typically consists of verbal discussions about emergency procedures. The NTSB argues that verbal reviews completely fail to prepare flight crews for the elevated workload, extreme stress, and time-critical decision-making required when visibility is suddenly lost in the flight deck.
Underscoring the urgency of the situation, the NTSB revealed a startling statistic: the FAA receives notifications of flights declaring emergencies due to smoke in the cockpit on a nearly daily basis.
Official NTSB Recommendations
To close this critical gap in aviation safety, the NTSB issued three formal safety recommendations on May 13, 2026:
- To the FAA: Work with the aviation industry to develop standardized, realistic scenario-based simulator training for smoke-in-cockpit events.
- To the FAA: Incorporate this new training requirement into the FAA’s official guidance for overseeing airline training programs (FAA Order 8900.1A).
- To Airlines for America (A4A) and the Regional Airline Association (RAA): Disseminate the findings of the Southwest Flight 554 incident to all member airlines and proactively encourage them to adopt realistic smoke-event simulations before a formal FAA mandate is issued.
AirPro News analysis
At AirPro News, we observe that this development highlights a recurring theme in aviation safety: regulatory frameworks often lag behind real-world operational risks. Despite the FAA receiving near-daily reports of smoke events, it took a severe, high-profile incident on a 737 MAX to catalyze a formal push for modernized simulator training.
Implementing these recommendations will present a significant financial and logistical hurdle for the airline industry. Carriers will need to update multi-million-dollar flight simulators to physically replicate smoke or severely restricted visibility. However, the NTSB’s stark warning that a similar event in adverse weather could be catastrophic places immense pressure on the FAA to act swiftly. The FAA has not yet issued a formal response to the May 13 recommendations, but industry stakeholders will be watching closely to see how quickly these mandates are adopted.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What caused the smoke on Southwest Flight 554?
A bird strike triggered the engine’s Load Reduction Device, which stopped severe vibrations but dislodged oil tubes. Oil leaked into hot engine sections, vaporized, and was pumped into the cockpit by the air conditioning system.
What is the NTSB recommending?
The NTSB is recommending that the FAA and airline industry mandate realistic, scenario-based simulator training for smoke-in-cockpit emergencies, replacing current verbal discussion-based training.
Were there any injuries on Southwest Flight 554?
No. The flight crew successfully donned oxygen masks, declared an emergency, and safely returned to Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport with all 139 people on board unharmed.
Photo Credit: ABC News
Regulations & Safety
South Akron Plane Crash Kills Two Near Coventry Crossing Home
A 1963 Piper PA-28 crashed into a South Akron home on May 14, killing two aboard. The family inside escaped uninjured. Investigation ongoing by FAA and NTSB.
This article summarizes reporting by WKYC and Dave DeNatale.
A tragic aviation incident occurred in South Akron on Thursday afternoon when a small aircraft crashed into a residential neighborhood, resulting in two fatalities. According to reporting by WKYC, the crash ignited a massive fire but miraculously spared the family of four who were inside the home at the time of the impact.
The incident, which took place on May 14, 2026, has prompted a multi-agency response involving local emergency services, state patrols, and federal aviation authorities. We are closely monitoring the developing details as investigators work to secure the scene and determine the underlying cause of the fatal crash.
Incident Details and Timeline
At approximately 3:45 p.m. local time, a 1963 single-engine Piper PA-28 Cherokee went down in the Coventry Crossing residential development. Based on the initial reports from WKYC and local authorities, the aircraft struck a home located on the 2200 block of Canterbury Circle.
The flight had recently departed from Akron Fulton Regional Airport, which is situated just three to four miles east of the crash site. Akron Fire Department crews responded to emergency 911 calls from neighbors describing a descending plane followed by loud explosions. Upon arrival, first responders encountered a fully engulfed structure and heavy black smoke, initially treating the scene as a severe house fire to prevent the flames from spreading to adjacent properties.
Casualties and Miraculous Escape
Authorities confirmed that the two occupants aboard the Piper PA-28 Cherokee perished in the wreckage. Their identities are currently being withheld pending notification of next of kin by the Summit County Medical Examiner’s office.
In a remarkable turn of events, the family residing in the primary home, a couple and their two children, escaped without physical harm. The Akron Fire Department confirmed that the residents were able to evacuate the burning structure safely.
“They were all home, and they were able to get out with no injuries, so we’re very fortunate,” stated District Fire Chief Sierjie Lash, according to WKYC reporting.
Property Damage and Neighborhood Impact
The impact of the aircraft and the subsequent explosion caused severe structural damage to the primary residence, completely destroying the home’s garage. An adjacent property also sustained fire damage, prompting emergency crews to execute a precautionary evacuation of at least two nearby homes. Chief Lash noted that while residents are being allowed back to their houses, the direct crash scene remains strictly secured.
Ongoing Investigation and Agency Response
A coalition of local, state, and federal agencies is currently managing the crash site. The Akron Police and Fire Departments handled the immediate emergency response, fire suppression, and initial perimeter security. The Ohio State Highway Patrol (OSHP) is taking a leading role in securing the site and coordinating state-level resources.
“The crash remains an active investigation, and troopers, local law enforcement, fire, and EMS personnel continue to assess the scene,” the OSHP noted in a public statement.
Federal authorities will take over the primary investigation. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is tasked with reviewing the flight history, pilot credentials, and air traffic communications. Concurrently, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will examine the aircraft’s mechanical integrity and flight data to determine the official cause of the crash.
AirPro News analysis
As aviation safety observers, we note that incidents involving general aviation aircraft in densely populated residential areas often lead to rigorous scrutiny of local flight paths and zoning regulations. The proximity of the Coventry Crossing development to Akron Fulton Regional Airport, just a few miles away, highlights the critical phase of flight (takeoff and initial climb) where pilots have limited time and altitude to react to mechanical failures. The NTSB’s forthcoming preliminary report will likely focus heavily on any distress communications made by the pilot and the engine’s performance in the moments immediately following departure.
Frequently Asked Questions
When and where did the Akron plane crash occur?
The crash occurred on Thursday, May 14, 2026, at approximately 3:45 p.m. local time in the Coventry Crossing neighborhood of South Akron, specifically on the 2200 block of Canterbury Circle.
What type of aircraft was involved?
Authorities identified the aircraft as a 1963 single-engine Piper PA-28 Cherokee.
Were there any survivors?
The family of four inside the home escaped uninjured. Tragically, the two occupants aboard the aircraft were killed in the crash.
Sources
Photo Credit: News Channel3 NOW
-
Regulations & Safety6 days agoFrontier Flight Hits Pedestrian on Denver Runway Causing Emergency Evacuation
-
MRO & Manufacturing6 days agoBoeing Proposes Fix for Grounded MD-11 Fleet with FedEx Return Plan
-
Regulations & Safety5 days agoDelta Worker Dies in Aircraft Tug Accident at Orlando Airport
-
Training & Certification4 days agoCAE Explores Strategic Alternatives for Flightscape Aviation Software
-
MRO & Manufacturing6 days agoIAI Advances Airbus A330-300 Passenger-to-Freighter Conversion