CASA Briefing Newsletter - May 2012

Admin · May 29, 2012

May 2012

From the Director of Aviation Safety

John McCormick

Since 2008 a drug and alcohol management regulatory regime for Australian aviation has been in place. The development and implementation of the program was an important initiative to maintain and improve aviation safety by minimising the risks caused by people in safety sensitive positions being affected by alcohol or drugs while engaged in aviation activities. As many people would be aware, the program has two main elements – firstly the requirement for aviation organisations to have a drug and alcohol management plan and secondly a testing regime conducted by CASA. The drug and alcohol management plans are administered by aviation organisations and cover education, testing and rehabilitation where that is appropriate. Testing conducted under the plans includes situations such as pre-employment and after accidents or incidents. CASA has recognised that some of the drug and alcohol management plan requirements are onerous on smaller organisations and we will shortly be issuing an exemption for small organisations with not more than seven safety sensitive aviation activity employees. The exemption will mean these organisations will not need to have a drug and alcohol management plan, provided they formally adopt a special CASA drug and alcohol management program instead. This exemption will not apply to small aviation businesses engaged in or providing services to any regular public transport operation. More information about the exemption will shortly be placed on CASA’s website.

The testing regime conducted by CASA is usually random and may be conducted by CASA at any time. Anyone performing or available to perform a safety-sensitive aviation activity may be tested, including private and commercial pilots, flying instructors, cabin crew, ground and baggage handlers, air traffic controllers and maintenance personnel. In total CASA conducted more than 51,000 alcohol and drug tests between 2008 and March 2012. There were 29,197 alcohol and 22,448 drug tests carried out. During that time 45 people tested positive. While finding even one person affected by alcohol or drugs when operating in a safety sensitive position is concerning, it is heartening that the figures are very low. Clearly the vast majority of people in aviation understand their responsibility to be alcohol and drug free while at work, flying, on an aerodrome or in the workshop. Of those who tested positive, 18 were overturned on a medical review and infringement notices were issued or the matter was referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in the remaining cases. Please remember the alcohol limit is 0.02. Drug limits are in accordance with the Australian standard for oral fluid testing.

Best regards

John F McCormick

Time to speak up on fatigue management

The aviation industry is being urged to comment on a package of proposed changes to the rules covering fatigue management for Australian flight crew and air operators. Under the proposed rules there would be a graduated approach to fatigue regulation so air operators can use the most appropriate set of standards for their type of operations. Some air operators, such as those conducting aerial work, may elect to operate under a basic set of flight and duty time limitations. This would limit flight crew to no more than seven hours flight and eight hours duty in a day. Others engaged in more complex air operations may choose to work under a set of detailed flight and duty time limits that take into account factors such as acclimatisation to time zones, split duty, augmented crew and late night operations. These operators would have the flexibility needed for the demands of daily operations, such as passenger transport, while safely managing fatigue. Other operators such as large airlines would be required to implement an approved fatigue risk management system instead of meeting prescriptive requirements. A fatigue risk management system is a data driven system incorporating scientific principles and knowledge that identifies fatigue hazards and safety risks, as well as providing for continuous monitoring and improvement.

Under the proposed new rules the shared responsibilities of both air operators and flight crew in the management of fatigue risk are clearly defined. Flight crew would be required to use off duty periods to obtain enough sleep, to use in-flight rest appropriately and to disclose anything that may prevent them from meeting applicable fatigue risk management policies and limitations. Operators would be required to provide flight crew members with sufficient time away from work to enable restorative rest and sleep. The proposed standards were developed taking into account the need to improve the current rules, human performance limitations and International Civil Aviation Organization standards. If the proposed rules are adopted they would replace the current fatigue requirements set out in Civil Aviation Order Part 48 and the associated standard industry exemptions.

Comment on the fatigue management notice of proposed rule making, by 29 June 2012.

Tell us what you think about our newsletter

TWe want to hear from you about this newsletter. Attached to this month's edition of the CASA Briefing is a short survey to help us understand what you want from the newsletter. We're asking about how you rate the newsletter overall, how relevant the information is, as well as what you think of the layout, design and the length of articles. There are only five questions, so the survey will take you only a minute to complete. Please take that minute to send in your feedback. It will help us to improve the CASA Briefing to meet your aviation information needs. With more than 11,000 subscribers we know people read our newsletter and we need your views. If you have any comments beyond the scope of the survey please use the feedback link near the top of the right hand side box of this newsletter.

Please complete the CASA Briefing survey now.

Instrument power source warning

A warning has been issued to the operators of all single engine aircraft to check power sources comply with relevant regulatory requirements. CASA issued the warning to operators of single engine aircraft operating to instrument flight rules, as well as to those operating under night visual meteorological conditions. The warning relates to duplicated sources of power and separate and independent sources of power, which are required under the Civil Aviation Orders for particular equipment or aircraft systems. This includes attitude, heading and turn and slip indicators. The airworthiness bulletin says duplicated power sources, or a separate independent power source, in a single engine aircraft is difficult to achieve and demonstrate. Additional engine driven generators or vacuum pumps can be installed to comply with this requirement. An alternate acceptable method of compliance is to provide a separate emergency buss running directly from the battery to the instruments. Another alternative is to fit instruments with an internal battery sufficient to power them in an emergency. This requires additional maintenance to ensure the batteries work when required. CASA says aircraft should be checked to ensure an alternative power source is available and working. Aircraft that do not meet the regulatory requirements should no longer operate under instrument flight rules or night visual meteorological conditions.

Read the airworthiness bulletin in full.

Our best female trainees honoured

Two Queenslanders and a Victorian are officially the nation's top female trainee pilots. The three women pilot trainees were formally recognised at an awards ceremony during this year's Australian Women Pilots’ Association annual conference. The top female trainee is Sara Lang, who passed all seven air transport pilot licence subjects in 2011 with an overall average mark of above 90 per cent. In second place is Kathryn-Anne Gibney, who also passed all seven air transport pilot licence subjects during 2011. Kathryn-Anne achieved an overall average of 89.3 per cent. Third place getter is Kahlie Jensen who in one year commenced her theory exams for a private pilots licence and went on to complete the commercial pilot licence theory, achieving an average of 92 per cent. All three female trainees did not fail any exams. CASA sponsors the Sir Donald Anderson Awards, with $3000 going to the first prize winner, $2000 for second and $1000 for third. CASA's Director of Aviation Safety, John McCormick, presented the awards, saying the results were exceptional. The awards are based on exam results.

Find out more about the Australian Women Pilots' Association.

Closed runway markings under review

Markings used to indicate part of a runway is unserviceable are under review following an incident where a large aircraft attempted to land on a closed section of runway. The investigation into the 2008 incident by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau found the size of the markings used to show part of the runway was closed were inadequate. CASA has set up a project to better align Australia’s unserviceability runway markings with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards. At present Australian standards allow for six metre and 36 metre unserviceability markings, while the ICAO standard is 36 metres. There is no provision for mandatory use of 36 metre markings when works are in progress for less than 30 days. In addition, permanent runway threshold markings are not required to be obscured when a threshold is temporarily displaced for a period of less than five days and less than 450 metres. The project is also looking at total aerodrome unserviceability and restricted operations signals. The main issue under review is the restricted operations (dumb bell) signals, where an aerodrome has an instrument runway and published straight-in approach procedure. For non-instrument approaches pilots can see a dumb bell when doing circuits, however, they are less likely to be visible during a straight-in approach.

Find out more about the runway markings and ground signals project.

Calling all Brisbane and Adelaide aircraft owners

Aircraft owners and maintainers in Brisbane and Adelaide should book a place now at an ageing aircraft seminar. These seminars, which are very important for anyone who owns or operates a general aviation aircraft, are being held in both cities in June 2012. At the seminars you will get details of CASA’s ageing aircraft project. Stage one of the project confirmed Australia does have an ageing aircraft problem, with the main concern being aircraft under 5700 kilograms. The average age of the piston engine fleet is 40 years and rising, with 7000 aircraft over this age. CASA has made it clear it fully supports the continued operation of these aircraft, as long as this can be done safely. In the second stage of the project CASA is implementing a range of actions to assist the owners, operators and maintainers of ageing aircraft to continue to operate their aircraft. This will include targeted education courses and information presentations for industry delegates, licensed engineers and aircraft owners and operators. Education will focus on the consequences of metal fatigue, corrosion damage and wiring issues. There will also be a focus on the safety, legal and financial implications of not addressing ageing aircraft issues.

Book for the 2 June Brisbane and the 16 June Adelaide seminars now.

Mt Isa and Emerald airspace reviews

Airspace studies at Mt Isa and Emerald have been completed. The Mt Isa study covered airspace above and within 20 nautical miles of the aerodrome, finding users are generally satisfied with the current airspace arrangements. Mt Isa airspace is class G from the ground to 18,000 feet, with common traffic advisory frequency requirements in place for the aerodrome. This requires pilots to make broadcasts on the Mt Isa frequency giving details of their operations. There are no air traffic control services or radar coverage. Mt Isa airspace users said there was some concern about frequency congestion at peak times, occasional confusion as to which instrument approach to use when multiple aircraft arrive and concerns that some visual flight rules pilots were not using their aircraft’s transponder. The study recommends addressing these issues, as well as reviewing the current airspace arrangements if total traffic increases by more than ten per cent or medium and heavy instrument flight rules operations increase by more than five per cent.

The Emerald airspace review also covered airspace within 20 nautical miles, which is class G. Pilots are required to make broadcasts on the common traffic advisory frequency. While no significant safety issues were identified, airspace users raised a range of matters. These include an incomplete understanding of position reporting by pilots operating to the visual flight rules, poor radio procedures and frequency congestion. The study found traffic movements at Emerald will continue to increase in frequency and complexity, that radio congestion sometimes occurs at peak times and further education of visual flight rules pilots on instrument approaches will improve situational awareness. It was recommended CASA continue to monitor traffic movements at Emerald every six months and pilot education on correct radio procedures and instrument flight rules issues be conducted.

Read the Mt Isa airspace study.

Read the Emerald airspace study.

Find out how to flight test in safety

Flight testing an experimental, new or modified aircraft presents many challenges for everyone involved. To help the aviation industry meet these challenges CASA has produced a new advisory publication covering flight test safety. The publication is essential reading for everyone involved in flight testing, from test pilots to aviation managers. It should be read in conjunction with the relevant Civil Aviation Safety Regulations. The advisory says flight testing can involve varying levels of risk, from no more than encountered in normal flight to situations where there are significant hazards. It warns some phases on test programs, such as evaluating stall handling or flutter characteristics, must be approached with extra caution. Information in the publication covers areas such as the resources needed for an efficient and safety conscious flight test and evaluation organisation, test planning principles and hazard analysis and risk management. There are also a number of ideas that may help during actual flight test operations. References to other relevant publications and web sites are included. The advisory warns people involved in flight testing not to allow perceived pressures to put safety at risk. It says financial and production deadlines must not interfere with safety.

Read the flight test safety advisory circular.

Pilots, get to a safety seminar near you!

Twelve safety seminars for pilots will be held in four states during June 2012. There will be AvSafety seminars in NSW, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia. The seminars will focus on human factors in aviation and learning about aviation resources on the internet. Locations include major regional centres such as Wollongong, Bundaberg and Mildura, as well as remote locations such as William Creek and Marree. Moorabbin will host a seminar on 13 June 2012. During the session on human factors there will be an explanation of how an understanding of human performance is important to the safety of all aspects of flying. The discussion is specially designed for general aviation pilots and looks at areas such as fatigue, stress, alcohol and other drugs, decision making and airmanship. Pilots will be shown how to apply the knowledge of human factors in a practical way to everyday flying.

Find the AvSafety seminar near you.

skeptic36 · May 29, 2012

Closed runway markings under review
Markings used to indicate part of a runway is unserviceable are under review following an incident where a large aircraft attempted to land on a closed section of runway. The investigation into the 2008 incident by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau found the size of the markings used to show part of the runway was closed were inadequate.

It's hard to imagine how you could fill in four years to arrive at that conclusion.

Perhaps this is how they do it: