[Peetwo]

AFAP - Strange dichotomy on CAO48.1??  

The theme for today IMO has to be 'division in the ranks', the following example of this is quite bizarre but (also IMO) extremely amusing..

From Steve Creedy, courtesy the Oz:

CASA ‘caved in’ on new pilot flight rules  

• by: Steve Creedy
  
• From: The Australian
  
• August 28, 2015 12:00AM
  

Aviation Editor
Sydney

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has been accused of caving in to industry pressure by delaying changes to pilot flight and duty time limits.  

The Australian Federation of Air Pilots and the Australian and International Pilots Association have been working with the authority for almost five years to bring about the changes prompted by International Civil Aviation Organisation recommendations.

ICAO recommended the new rules reflected in Civil Aviation Order 48.1 after a series of accidents in which fatigue was deemed a significant factor and legislation introduced in 2013 gave operators until April next year to comply.

But the authority recently announced it was extending deadline to May 2017 after making a series of changes and to “ease the regulatory burden of the new fatigue rules and potentially reduce costs for air operators and flying training organisations’’.

Under the new deadline, which the authority said was the result of feedback from the aviation community, operators now have until October next year to tell CASA when they will make the transition and supply it with proposed operations manual amendments.

However, the pilot organisations were not consulted about the changes and the Australian Federation of Air Pilots has questioned the need for the delay.

AFAP technical director Peter Gardiner said the new limitation were generally more restrictive than the previous regime but gave operators the option of setting up a fatigue risk management scheme (FRMS).

Captain Gardiner said the pilot groups were not completely happy with the new limits but were willing to work with companies to set up an FRMS if they chose that path.

Under the original plan, companies who opted from an FRMS were required to have a trial in place by April this year with implementation due next April.

“We have recently been advised that CASA, for reasons unexplained, has now delayed the implementation for a further 12 months, ’’ Captain Gardiner said.

“This was done without any consultation with either of the pilots groups, who are the individuals who are required to work with the new rules and it raises questions about how serious they are about the whole issue of fatigue generally.

“Industry had three years to comply with these new requirements and it is the job of CASA as the regulator to ensure they do and not be complicit in bending the rules to suit.’’

Captain Gardiner said there were seven appendices available which covered areas such as flying training, airwork and multi-crew operations as well as an FRMS.

He said changes included re-categorising a minimum rest period of eight hours to an eight-hour “sleep opportunity’’, suggesting the minimum rest period could be as much as 12 hours.

The amount of flight time could also be reduced from 12 to 10 hours, depending on a pilots’ start time.

He believed there was an element of CASA not being ready for the changes and not having the people in the field capable of assessing them.

The companies, because they had three years’ leeway, had also not moved on the issue.

“And then obviously there’s been a bit of lobbying from industry again and they now said they’re going to delay it by 12 months,’’ he said.

“So they’ve just really dragged the chain on it.’’

CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the authority had listened to feedback from the aviation community and provided extra time for the transition to the new fatigue rules and made changes to the requirements.

“In making these adjustments CASA has taken into account the need to give CASA and the aviation community adequate time to transition to the new rules, while ensuring appropriate safety standards are maintained,’’ he said.

Mr Gibson pointed to operations manual supplement templates published on the CASA website to assist operators in the transition process.

The website says the proposed fatigue rule changes adjust some of the prescriptive flight and duty time limitations “while remaining in line with scientific principles’’ so as not to unduly disadvantage operators.

“The proposed changes will allow many operators to comply with the prescriptive limitations in the new fatigue rules rather than having to develop and seek approval for a fatigue risk management system,’’ it says.

  
OK all good but this bit from Capt Gardiner perked my interest...

“We have recently been advised that CASA, for reasons unexplained, has now delayed the implementation for a further 12 months, ’’ Captain Gardiner said.


“This was done without any consultation with either of the pilots groups, who are the individuals who are required to work with the new rules and it raises questions about how serious they are about the whole issue of fatigue generally.

“Industry had three years to comply with these new requirements and it is the job of CASA as the regulator to ensure they do and not be complicit in bending the rules to suit.’’

...Why?- Well recently a long time AFAP member sent me some interesting links that suggested the previously CA(s)A-ffienated Feds maybe becoming more professional, industry pilot orientated. 

Ok from those links there was two that the subject matter was CAO48.1. The 1st was correspondence from Captain Gardiner (above) to CASA (SMS & HF, standards division) and was addressing perceived issues that the EMS/MT sector saw with appendix 3 & 4 (in particular 4B) - Submission on CAO 48.1 Appendix 4B.

...Our submission is based on feedback from members working in the emergency medical services field and the views of the Federation’s Technical Committee, made up of working airline and commercial pilots under the direction of the AFAP’s Technical Director.

As a professional association, the members and staff of the Federation are active in promoting flight safety and improving Australian and global aviation standards. The Federation’s diverse pilot membership base places it in a strong position to comment on the proposed changes to Flight Time Limitations.

Owing to the short timeline, our submission should not be regarded as comprehensive. We would welcome the opportunity to further explain and supplement our submission via discussion with all interested parties...

Hmm (tin foil hat donned ) ..okay so maybe (AFAP) Peter G, just maybe CASA SMS & HF, standards division have taken your advice/suggestion (the part in bold) - along with other industry submissions - on-board and have simply decided to delay the rollout of CAO48.1...   

The other (CAsA) PG: ...“In making these adjustments CASA has taken into account the need to give CASA and the aviation community adequate time to transition to the new rules, while ensuring appropriate safety standards are maintained,’’..

I can thoroughly understand (AFAP) PG's cynicism, because quite frankly we've all seen similar delaying/obfuscation tactics before. However it is perhaps a bit rich (in this case) to expect CAsA to react quite so quickly, when less than a week ago DAS Skidmore would have received this correspondence from the AFAP Prez, Capt Booth:

..I am writing to express our concern about the proposed Medical Transport & Emergency
Service Operations Appendix to CAO 48.1, 2013.

The Federation was not involved in the original working group to develop the proposal & it was only through our members that we were made aware of the draft. Following representation to CASA we were invited to attend the most recent working group. As we made clear at the meeting, we have no concern about operators conducting emergency retrieval services, search & rescue, rig & range safety or the myriad other low rate operations, where Crew Members are on standby for extended periods, under the proposed Appendix 4b. These crew members would be rarely if ever subject to cumulative fatigue however, we are very concerned about the crew members who are involved primarily in patient transfer services.

The majority of these patients are not in need of urgent medical attention, they are being transported because the services they require are not available at their local hospital.

These patients are frequently accompanied by family members & it is not appropriate to be unnecessarily exposing these passengers to the elevated fatigue risk associated with Appendix 4b.

The crew members with these operators are averaging 500 to 700 flight hours a year & would typically be rostered between 35 to 45 duty hours a week (5 x 8 hour duty periods). This is on a par with any regional airline operating under Appendix 3 or 4. They are doing this generally single pilot, in complex aircraft, flying multiple sectors in all weather conditions. The majority of these flights are into regional airports with limited facilities primarily outside the protection of controlled airspace.

The proposed Appendix is not suitable for this type of operation; it allows a crew member to be rostered for up to 12 days duty with the only restriction being a maximum of 40 hours flight time or 60 hours duty in 7 days. The standby provisions allow an aeromedical pilot who may have already done 4 or 5 days duty to spend up to 24hours on standby then be called in for an 11 hour duty. Repetitive, long days like these without adequate rest can lead to high cumulative fatigue levels.

In accordance with our original submission we propose that medical transport services(MTS) be conducted under Appendix 3 or 4 , If these crewmembers are then tasked with an Aeromedical evacuation this can be conducted under Appendix 4b if required.

The definitions of these terms are included in our original submission. “Submission on Civil Aviation Order 48.1 Appendix 4b”, dated 9th June 2015. A copy of which is attached.

Yours sincerely,

Captain David Booth

President

  
Just saying..


MTF soon on what it might mean if the FEDS become de-CA(s)Affeinated...P2