The USA – Aviation Nirvana?
Just over the way, across a puddle known as the Pacific ocean lays America; land of the free etc. A mecca for aviators, for the USA does it in style and they do lots of it, despite some fairly significant terrain and unruly, often unpleasant weather conditions. There is a misconception that it is ‘easy’ the US to get things done; and, up to a point, this is true, primarily due to the regulatory system and a ‘can do’ attitude. But, it would be an error to believe that clear cut rules are ‘soft’ - they ain’t; particularly when the legal eagles get involved. So where are the big differences between Australia and the USA?
Approach and attitude do have an impact:-
“Angel Flight accidents In 2007 and 2008 the NTSB investigated four accidents that involved flights that were operating as charitable medical transport flights, organised by various Angel Flight agencies. Three of the accidents occurred with patients on-board; one was a positioning flight to collect a patient. The age range of the pilots was from 57 to 81 years old. While the circumstances of the accidents differed, the NTSB was sufficiently concerned that a number of similarities existed between the occurrences that on 9 June 2010, they issued a Safety Recommendation to the Air Care Alliance (ACA). According to their website, the ACA is a nationwide league of humanitarian flying organizations whose volunteer pilot members are dedicated to community service. The three separate Angel Flight charities that had organised the four accident flights in 2007 and 2008 were members of the ACA.”
Safety concern neatly identified, no great theorising or statistical models; just a plain straightforward identification of a ‘problem’ area, followed by an offered solution.
“The NTSB recommended that the ACA: Require voluntary pilot organizations to verify pilot currency before every flight. Require that voluntary pilot organizations inform passengers, at the time of inquiry about a flight, that the charitable medical flight would not be conducted under the same standards that apply to a commercial flight (such as under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 or Part 135). In conjunction with your affiliate organizations and other charitable medical transport organizations, develop, disseminate, and require all voluntary pilot organizations to implement written safety guidance, best practices, and training material for volunteer pilots who operate charitable patient transport flights under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The information should address, at a minimum, aeronautical decision-making; proper pre flight planning; pilot qualification, training, and currency; and self-induced pressure.”
What happened next is an almost perfect example of ‘Operator’, Safety Agency and Regulator making certain that a legitimate safety case was properly and comprehensively dealt with; done right, finished tidy and the tools put away. This did not happen overnight, it took time, effort and probably cost money, from all parties. But it worthy of note that it was a collaborative effort. ACA did the heavy lifting, NTSB assessed and commented on the proposed solutions. When the dust settled, the FAA ran a compliance rule over the proposal and made sure it was all Kosher and issued exemptions which encompassed the areas which fell outside the rules – as writ.
In short; a first class example of how a safety oversight system functions. Today, in the USA there will be ACA members operating public service flights under an improved safety management system, quite legally; and, holding their operation, the NTSB and the FAA in high regard. Win, win for all concerned.
Just over the way, across a puddle known as the Pacific ocean lays Australia; land of Senate committee inquiries into just what part of Hell aviation safety oversight has descended into. The links below may provide a clue or two on ‘how’ ‘professional’ organisations set about resolving a ‘safety case’ - a decade ago.
Operation of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, and in particular its report on the June 2017 crash of a flight conducted on behalf of Angel Flight Australia
The Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee is conducting an inquiry into the operation of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, and in particular its report on the June 2017 crash of a flight conducted on behalf of Angel Flight Australia, under Standing Order 25 (2) (a).
Submissions close on [b]Wednesday, 4 September 2019.[/b]
[b]ref: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus...sport/ATSB[/b]
Just over the way, across a puddle known as the Pacific ocean lays America; land of the free etc. A mecca for aviators, for the USA does it in style and they do lots of it, despite some fairly significant terrain and unruly, often unpleasant weather conditions. There is a misconception that it is ‘easy’ the US to get things done; and, up to a point, this is true, primarily due to the regulatory system and a ‘can do’ attitude. But, it would be an error to believe that clear cut rules are ‘soft’ - they ain’t; particularly when the legal eagles get involved. So where are the big differences between Australia and the USA?
Approach and attitude do have an impact:-
“Angel Flight accidents In 2007 and 2008 the NTSB investigated four accidents that involved flights that were operating as charitable medical transport flights, organised by various Angel Flight agencies. Three of the accidents occurred with patients on-board; one was a positioning flight to collect a patient. The age range of the pilots was from 57 to 81 years old. While the circumstances of the accidents differed, the NTSB was sufficiently concerned that a number of similarities existed between the occurrences that on 9 June 2010, they issued a Safety Recommendation to the Air Care Alliance (ACA). According to their website, the ACA is a nationwide league of humanitarian flying organizations whose volunteer pilot members are dedicated to community service. The three separate Angel Flight charities that had organised the four accident flights in 2007 and 2008 were members of the ACA.”
Safety concern neatly identified, no great theorising or statistical models; just a plain straightforward identification of a ‘problem’ area, followed by an offered solution.
“The NTSB recommended that the ACA: Require voluntary pilot organizations to verify pilot currency before every flight. Require that voluntary pilot organizations inform passengers, at the time of inquiry about a flight, that the charitable medical flight would not be conducted under the same standards that apply to a commercial flight (such as under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 or Part 135). In conjunction with your affiliate organizations and other charitable medical transport organizations, develop, disseminate, and require all voluntary pilot organizations to implement written safety guidance, best practices, and training material for volunteer pilots who operate charitable patient transport flights under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The information should address, at a minimum, aeronautical decision-making; proper pre flight planning; pilot qualification, training, and currency; and self-induced pressure.”
What happened next is an almost perfect example of ‘Operator’, Safety Agency and Regulator making certain that a legitimate safety case was properly and comprehensively dealt with; done right, finished tidy and the tools put away. This did not happen overnight, it took time, effort and probably cost money, from all parties. But it worthy of note that it was a collaborative effort. ACA did the heavy lifting, NTSB assessed and commented on the proposed solutions. When the dust settled, the FAA ran a compliance rule over the proposal and made sure it was all Kosher and issued exemptions which encompassed the areas which fell outside the rules – as writ.
In short; a first class example of how a safety oversight system functions. Today, in the USA there will be ACA members operating public service flights under an improved safety management system, quite legally; and, holding their operation, the NTSB and the FAA in high regard. Win, win for all concerned.
Just over the way, across a puddle known as the Pacific ocean lays Australia; land of Senate committee inquiries into just what part of Hell aviation safety oversight has descended into. The links below may provide a clue or two on ‘how’ ‘professional’ organisations set about resolving a ‘safety case’ - a decade ago.
Operation of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, and in particular its report on the June 2017 crash of a flight conducted on behalf of Angel Flight Australia
The Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee is conducting an inquiry into the operation of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, and in particular its report on the June 2017 crash of a flight conducted on behalf of Angel Flight Australia, under Standing Order 25 (2) (a).
Submissions close on [b]Wednesday, 4 September 2019.[/b]
[b]ref: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus...sport/ATSB[/b]