Drone nearly hit plane over NAIA – report

A drone hovering unauthorized within the Manila airport’s jurisdiction nearly collided with a commercial airliner last month. Aviation officials are clueless on who flew the drone in forbidden air space. Airport sources say the incident is being hushed up.

The “near miss” occurred between 5 and 5:25 p.m. last May 16. A Singapore Airlines flight was descending to the Manila airport runway when the drone flew by within dangerous distance.

It was the second serious safety breach in as many months, sources say. In April was a near collision of an ascending airliner with an unknown aircraft. The Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP) denies that second incident.

CAAP is tasked with air traffic control in all government airports. It is supposed to enforce its own rule against unmanned aerial vehicles within airport premises and flight paths. Not even kites or balloons are allowed.

The Singapore jumbo jet was about 3,500 feet from touchdown when the pilot spotted a white circular drone zipping below its right side. A collision severely could have damaged the aircraft that was carrying several hundred passengers.

The pilot immediately radioed CAAP’s Air Traffic Control (ATC) about the sighting. The latter also queried the crew for more information. The pilot consequently filed a “hazard report” with the Manila office, which relayed it to CAAP. The STAR was shown details, including the pilot’s name and official position.

The CAAP action is yet unknown, if any. It has a deputy for safety, and another, though yet unconfirmed, for security.

Drones can be sucked into and knock out a jumbo jet’s turbine engines, thus the ban in airport zones. Drones also can become terrorist weapons of mass destruction. In Mosul, Iraq, was reported last February the Islamic State’s use of drones to guide car bomb attacks and for small-scale air strikes on Iraqi forces.

Details also were shown The STAR of the “near mid-air collision” of Apr. 5 at the Manila airport. A United Airlines flight had just taken off at 3:10 p.m., with instructions from ATC to ascend to 7,000 feet. Making a turn at 5,000, the airliner encountered another aircraft at the same altitude, descending precariously fast only 100 feet to its left. The pilot noted that the other plane was so close he could hear it whooshing down. He complained about receiving no alert about the other aircraft, and two reports to the ATC were left unanswered. Instruments indicated that the odd craft had no radio contact with ATC.

The pilot supposedly told his superiors of the matter. The Manila office was expected to relay it to CAAP, as well as the Civil Aeronautics Board and the Manila International Airport Authority.

Sources say the CAAP dismissed the incident. A high official scolded several airline reps who report safety hazards first to their head offices before the CAAP.

About terrorist drones, the Associated Press recently reported: “The extremist group is spending freely on drone technology as it faces pressure from coalition forces, hacking store-bought machines, applying rigorous testing protocols, and mimicking tactics used by U.S. unmanned aircraft... A half-dozen storehouses IS used to make and modify drones have been found recently in Mosul... The AP visited the largest drone workshop uncovered so far, a warehouse in the Shura neighborhood. Scattered around were pieces of Styrofoam wings, fins and radio transmitters... Spreadsheets the fighters left behind showed purchases totaling thousands of dollars a month for drone equipment.”

*      *      *

‘Port-mageddon’

Pushed to the wall by port regulators, the commercial operator of Manila’s North Harbor is throwing in the towel and shutting down on Thursday. Chaos begins the next day, as in- and outbound cargoes pile up unattended. Expect worse port congestion, traffic gridlock, and business opportunity losses than in 2014. The national economy would choke when the harbor ceases to handle 80 percent of the steel, coal, asphalt, grains and Manila's other bulk and break-bulk shipments – capital goods that fuel industries.

The root of it all allegedly is red tape at the Philippine Ports Authority. The PPA already had extended in advance, in June 2016, the operating franchise for 15 years of Harbour Centre Port Terminal Inc. (HCPTI). It is to receive P150 million a year, like in the first 13-year arrangement since 2004. The early extension was to give HCPTI ample time to put in multibillion-peso new equipment for the fresh start on June 9, 2017.

But last April, HCPTI alleges, the PPA began imposing piecemeal three new conditions. HCPTI claims to have proven the first two as unnecessary, and complied with the third. Still, last May 31 the PPA gave it till June 8 to apply anew for operation extension. Such application would not be for the previously granted 15 years but only for six months. Failure to meet the deadline would illegalize any operation thereafter, the PPI stated. Since such application entails months of intense grilling by PPA officials and staff – the past one took five sessions from Oct. 2014 to June 2016 – HCPTI saw no choice but to stop operation.

Appeals have been sent to Malacañang and to Transport Sec. Arthur Tugade. HCPTI thinks only higher authorities can make PPA abide by two previous affirmations, in June 2016 and Apr. 2017, of the 15-year extension. As well, of the PPA’s own rule to issue operating permits within three weeks of board approval. Not to forget, an opinion from its own legal defender, the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, that any delay would be detrimental to PPA’s interest.

Time is running out.

*      *      *

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).

Gotcha archives on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jarius-Bondoc/1376602159218459, or The STAR website http://www.philstar.com/author/Jarius%20Bondoc/GOTCHA