The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) on 26 May called for changes in the way runway conditions are assessed during heavy rainfall. The current system "increases the risk of a runway overrun", the US agency says. The NTSB has issued three safety recommendations to the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aimed at improving its runway condition assessment matrix (RCAM). Landing distances on wet runways are calculated using the current matrix, it explains. "NTSB recommends the FAA update the RCAM to account for the progressive decrease in the wheel braking friction coefficient, the measure of the slipperiness of the runway, associated with increasing rainfall intensity," the NTSB says. "NTSB also recommends the FAA add additional rainfall intensity descriptors for aviation weather reports to identify rainfall intensities that can exceed the current heavy rain threshold of 0.3 inches per hour. The rainfall intensity descriptors currently used in aviation weather reports do not identify the highest rainfall intensities that are possible at an airport, limiting flight crews' ability to accurately assess the runway condition and the required landing distance." The recommendations follow NTSB investigations of 11 runway overrun accidents and incidents from 2008 through 2022 that occurred after landings on wet runways. In one of those investigations, the 2019 runway overrun of a Boeing 737 in Jacksonville, Florida, the NTSB determined the probable cause was, in part, "an extreme loss of braking friction due to heavy rain and the water depth on the ungrooved runway, which resulted in viscous hydroplaning." Rainfall intensities at the time were two to eight times the heavy rain threshold value, the NTSB says, noting that under such conditions, braking can be reduced to such an extent that pilots should not attempt to land. The FAA tells Cirium: "The FAA takes NTSB recommendations seriously and will carefully consider those issued today."

Ongoing conflict in the Middle East dragged worldwide passenger demand down sharply in April, despite growth in every other region. According to data released by airline association IATA, total global passenger demand fell 3.4% year on year in April. This decline was entirely driven by the crisis in the Middle East, as demand rose 1.2% across the other regions. Global capacity was cut 2.9%, but the passenger load factor slipped 0.4 percentage points to 83.1%. Middle Eastern carriers' demand cratered 47%. They cut capacity 37%, and their load factor contracted 12.5 percentage points to 70.6%. "The situation for air transport remains highly volatile," states Willie Walsh, IATA's director general. "The cost of jet fuel more than doubled in April, which is pushing airfares up. Forward schedule data is showing a reduced offering in the coming months, indicating that airlines are balancing high fuel costs and weaker demand." In international markets, Middle Eastern airlines suffered a 48% year-on-year drop in demand and cut capacity 38%. IATA notes that while traffic remains heavily impacted by the ongoing Iran war, the decline was slightly slower than in March, amid an uneasy ceasefire. The devastation in the Gulf contrasted with fortunes elsewhere. Latin American airlines led international growth with an 8.9% surge in demand, while Asia-Pacific carriers saw a 3% rise. For the airlines of Europe, there was a 0.9% increase, directly aided by a 15% jump in direct traffic between Europe and Asia as passengers replaced routes that had previously transited through the Middle East, notes IATA.

International air services remain safe amid the current outbreak of Ebola, but governments and aviation stakeholders should "adhere strictly" to World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations to mitigate any risk, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has said. ICAO, like the WHO, is an agency of the United Nations (UN). ICAO notes that since the Covid-19 pandemic, there are new protocols for "rapid, standardised information sharing" among states, airlines, airports and health agencies. "Digital innovations, such as electronic health declarations and contactless border processes, have been integrated into ICAO's recommendations to track and manage health risks more effectively," it adds. ICAO is co-ordinating with the WHO and its member states to "provide risk-based and evidence-informed mitigation measures to prevent the transmission of the disease through air travel while protecting the health of aviation personnel and passengers, reassure travellers, and maintain essential air connectivity". The WHO's guidance notes that the current Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Uganda has been caused by the Bundibugyo virus, which does not spread through casual contact or through the air. Rather, transmission occurs through direct contact with the blood or other bodily fluids of an infected person. The Zaire virus has been responsible for the largest outbreaks to date, including the 2014-2016 epidemic in West Africa and the 2018-2020 epidemic in DRC, according to Dr Charles Whittaker, assistant professor of infectious diseases and vaccinology at UC Berkeley in a 26 May Q&A published on UC Berkeley Public Health's website. The Sudan virus, he adds, has driven several outbreaks around South Sudan, Uganda, and the DRC. Tai Forest is "very rare", with only one known human case, in Cote d'Ivoire in 1994. The Zaire virus kills up to 90% of those it infects when untreated, while the Bundibugyo strain behind the current outbreak has historically killed 25-40%, he says. "The first thing worth saying about this outbreak is that it’s already the third largest Ebola outbreak ever recorded," he says. "And it started that way, which is the worrying part. For an outbreak to be that big the moment we notice it means the virus had been spreading quietly for some time before anyone recognised what was happening." On 17 May 2026, the director-general of the WHO determined that the outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). The WHO considers the risk for transmission at the global level to be low. "In countries where the event is occurring, exit screening can be implemented for persons at international airports with unexplained illness presenting with fever and other symptoms consistent with potential BVD [Bundibugyo virus disease]," ICAO says, citing WHO advice. "Health authorities should ensure that confirmed cases and contacts of BVD are isolated and that such individuals do not undertake international travel unless it is part of an appropriate medical evacuation." Current WHO advice regarding international travel includes that countries should not close borders or impose restrictions on travel and trade, and that national authorities should work with airlines and other transport and tourism industries to ensure that they do not exceed WHO's advice on international traffic. The USA, which withdrew from the WHO in January 2026, on 18 May imposed restrictions on non-US citizens entering the USA who had recently been in Uganda, the DRC or South Sudan. Four days later, it extended those restrictions to US permanent residents. Whittaker says that while the travel bans "might have some scope to initially limit importations, they're a very blunt tool, and the version we have now is both broader than the epidemiology warrants and risks compromising the response". He adds that "treating Kinshasa, on the opposite side of the [DRC] from the outbreak, the same as Bunia, which is at its centre, isn't epidemiologically sound." Reuters reported on 26 May that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has asked staff to volunteer for urgent deployment in support of Ebola screening at US entry points.