[Peetwo]

Aviation Safety in Downunda and Godzone - Like Chalk & Cheese??

Reference from Mount NCN:

Reversing through the Swiss Cheese??

Following on from the last under the ICAO Annex 14 minimum standard and recommended practice for RESA it says...

Dimensions of runway end safety areas

3.5.3 A runway end safety area shall extend from the end of a runway strip to a distance of at least 90 m where:
— the code number is 3 or 4; and
— the code number is 1 or 2 and the runway is an instrument one.

If an arresting system is installed, the above length may be reduced, based on the design specification of the system, subject
to acceptance by the State.

Note.— Guidance on arresting systems is given in Attachment A, Section 10. 

3.5.4 Recommendation.— A runway end safety area should, as far as practicable, extend from the end of a runway

strip to a distance of at least:

— 240 m where the code number is 3 or 4; or a reduced length when an arresting system is installed;

— 120 m where the code number is 1 or 2 and the runway is an instrument one; or a reduced length when an arresting

system is installed; and

— 30 m where the code number is 1 or 2 and the runway is a non-instrument one...

And in Australia this is the notified difference (both of which are listed as less protective for those two SARPs:

Australia requires the RESA to be provided at the end of the runway strip and is to extend for the distance of 90m for a code number 3 or 4 runway used by air transport aeroplanes. In all other cases, the minimum length of the RESA is to be 60m for Code 1 or 2 runways.

With that in mind read the following article from two days ago by the Fort Fumble (white hats) at Flight Safety Australia magazine...  

At the sharp end
By staff writers -
May 20, 2019

 
The Swiss cheese in reverse: "....and an airport operator that took its runway safety obligations seriously, had downgraded a tragedy into a hull loss and an anecdote to thrill future generations..."

The ICAO SARPs are generally regarded as the minimum recommended standard that a signatory State should be complying with. How have we got to the point in Australia where we are actively encouraging to set safety risk mitigation standards below even the minimum recommended international practice...  

TICK...TOCK miniscule - whom ever you maybe??  

Meanwhile across the ditch...it is refreshing to see that not only are the Kiwi's unafraid to review and amend their version of the Civil Aviation Act (1990), but also the NZ CAA are actively taking responsibility and making proactive changes, to improve their oversight of helicopter operations, after the damning findings from the tragic 2015 Fox Glacier accident -   

Via TVNZed's One News:

CAA admits safety inspection capability was low at time of fatal 2015 Fox Glacier chopper crash, inspectors were 'too trusting'

REF: https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zeal...o-trusting

MON, MAY 20

1 NEWS

The aviation watchdog has acknowledged that its oversight of the helicopter industry was not up to scratch at the time of the 2015 Fox Glacier crash, which killed seven people.

On November 21, 2015, an AS350 Squirrel helicopter crashed after taking off from the Chancellor Ice Shelf at the top of Fox Glacier, killing the pilot and six international tourists on board.

On Friday, James Patrick Scott and Aviation Manual Development were convicted over health and safety failings in the lead-up to the crash, with Mr Scott receiving a fine of $64,000.

The Transport Accident Investigation Commission (TAIC) has been investigating the cause of the crash, and is due to release its findings on Thursday.

At a media conference today, CAA Chairman Nigel Gould said that, now the court case had been settled, the CAA was able to reveal more about what it had done to improve since 2015.

Mr Gould first said the delay of several years between the crash happening and an investigation being completed was not to his liking, and apologised to family members of the victims.

He went into the process of the CAA's inspection of Scott's business following the crash, saying that initially they had concluded it was safe for them to continue flying, but that as time went by "we became aware that there were discrepancies between what the operator was telling us and what our investigators were unearthing.

"Our formal investigation revealed that the operator had a poor safety culture, with significant shortcomings in its management and systems," Mr Gould said.

"We also discovered that the operator had previously on multiple occasions misled CAA officers about matters that were relevant to its compliance with Civil Aviation Rules.

"Our investigation concluded that JP Scott and AMD did not take all practicable steps to prevent employees and passengers being harmed."

Mr Gould said an internal review on the CAA's response to the accident was then undertaken in 2017, designed to identify shortcomings in their regulatory processes prior to the crash.

"This revealed that the way our inspectors documented their interactions with this helicopter operator were inconsistent," Mr Gould said.

"Non-compliances had not always been formally reported as 'findings' - inspectors were also too trusting and did not verify the information being given to them.

"With the benefit of hindsight we can say that our oversight of JP Scott should have been better - if it was, we would have placed more pressure on the operator to lift their safety performance."

Mr Gould stressed that the Authority has now substantially changed the way it trains inspectors, with a strong focus on rigorously reporting findings and asking for proof of compliance, rather than relying on assurances.

He also said that "the majority of staff who were involved in the oversight of JP Scott's operation have since moved into other employment".

Mr Gould said PricewaterhouseCoopers had been retained to audit all of the CAA's inspections between 2014 and 2018, which had revealed some "inadequate" evidence gathering by inspectors during the early part of that period.

He ended by saying he now has full confidence in the CAA's inspection and regulatory systems, adding that there has been a decline both in scenic helicopter flight accidents since the 2015 crash, and the number of CAA prosecutions brought against non-compliant operators.

"The CAA of 2019 is a considerably more effective regulator than when we conducted the oversight of J P Scott in the years leading up to the 2015 crash."

CAA Deputy Director Steve Moore said the number of CAA inspectors on staff had been quadrupled - from two up to eight - since the 2015 crash, and that all inspectors had been giving addition training in "critical thinking, problem solving and using judgement.

"A requirement has also been introduced for operators to have a formal system for safety management - this squarely puts the onus on operators to identify safety risks unique to their business and then prove to the CAA how they are managing those risks," Mr Moore said.

"This takes them beyond just complying with the rules."

OVER-WORKED INSPECTORS MAY HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE

New Zealand has the highest number of helicopters per capita in the world - about 900 helicopters and 100 operators - and about half of those helicopters operate in the tourism industry.

Mr Moore admitted that the fact there were only two inspectors to check on the compliance of that fleet "might have been a factor in the scrutiny that they were providing on the operators".

He also admitted the inspectors which worked for the CAA prior to the crash had not been fired from the Authority, but had left for other reasons - before Mr Gould interjected and said the CAA could not comment on employment arrangements for privacy reasons.

Mr Gould said that there had been a significant shortage of appropriately skilled inspectors, but that shortage has now been addressed.

"We had a difficulty filling some roles," he said.

"We were aware of the fact that we were having difficulty in maintaining a capability in that area."

Mr Gould said that he had disclosed the level of vacancies in the Authority to "appropriate Parliamentary committees" and through annual reports.

And from NZALPA, via Scoop News:

Civil Aviation Improvements Must Continue
Thursday, 23 May 2019, 6:47 pm
Press Release: New Zealand Airline Pilots' Association

Civil Aviation Improvements Must Continue, Not Just Following Major Accidents – Pilots’ Union
Changes to the way the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) manages safety inspections have been welcomed by the New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association (NZALPA) but pilots are cautioning that these improvements must continue, not just occur in the wake of tragic accidents.

The changes were announced earlier this week by the CAA at the conclusion of a court case resulting from the crash of a helicopter at Fox Glacier in 2015. 

The crash killed the pilot and all six passengers on board the scenic flight.

The helicopter operator and the quality assurance manager’s company were both convicted for health and safety failings in the lead up to the crash.

Today the Transport Accident Investigation Commission (TAIC) released its report on the tragedy, identifying safety issues relating to the operator’s system for training pilots. TAIC also faulted the helicopter operator’s ability to continue operating in spite of acknowledged non-compliances even with its own training system, as well as instances of managerial oversight.

“NZALPA has been very concerned about what emerged during this accident investigation and how it was being inspected. We’d raised our concerns with the CAA, initially with little response. Naturally we are relieved to see that the CAA has acknowledged its own shortfalls and is responding positively to the outcomes of the investigation,” said NZALPA President Tim Robinson.

“Upping their game on the supply and training of aviation inspectors and working with the helicopter industry to improve standards and practices are overdue and badly needed.


“It is a saddening that it took a major accident like this to force change.


“We only hope that the CAA continues with all the changes it needs to make and NZALPA is offering to help in any way we can, including through our involvement in the current review of the Civil Aviation Act.


”It is also crucial that the CAA is properly resourced to do its work upholding standards in a safety-led organisation.


“The safety of pilots and their passengers depends on it,” Tim Robinson said.


ENDS


© Scoop Media 

         
 Compare that to this...

&..

MTF...P2