Flight Safety Information May 9, 2012 - No. 093 In This Issue 3 Southwest planes searched in bomb scare Pilot onboard United Flight 232 loses battle with cancer FAA seeking sanctions against Colo. Company in Ariz. medical-helicopter crash PRISM CERTIFICATION CONSULTANTS FAA - Air-Safety Response Faulted International pilots' body asks Pakistan to setup safety board Business aviation safety performance over 20 years "A Practical Approach to Safety Management Systems" Course 3 Southwest planes searched in bomb scare Three Southwest Airlines jets were searched for explosives after an unspecified threat was made. SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Authorities searched three different Southwest Airlines jets for explosives late Tuesday evening, but nothing suspicious was found. One jet, Flight 811, returned to the gate at Orange County's John Wayne Airport after officials learned of an unspecified threat around 8:30 p.m. They isolated the plane and a bomb squad then determined the jet was safe. A Spokeswoman for Southwest Airlines told us that one threat was made, but it was non-specific. Southwest Airlines decided to check out three flights that were leaving John Wayne Airport, bound for Phoenix. Flight 1184 was cleared after it landed safely in Phoenix and passengers were allowed to deplane after that flight was cleared. Flight 372 was held at the Phoenix airport after it landed and was later cleared. The FBI is leading the investigation into the threat involving the three flights. A spokeswoman for the FBI released a statement saying, "The Joint Terrorism Task Force in Orange County responded to a threat made to Southwest Airlines Flight 811, which was scheduled to depart John Wayne Airport, destined for Phoenix. As a precaution, the aircraft was isolated and passengers removed and brought to a gate. A bomb squad and canine units from the Orange County Sheriff's Department and Orange County Fire Authority searched and cleared the aircraft. More than one threat to Southwest Airlines aircraft is under investigation, to include a threat involving a separate aircraft located at Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix. Law enforcement in Phoenix has also cleared that aircraft. Investigators in Orange County and Phoenix are investigating whether the threats are linked. Due to the late hour, passengers scheduled to depart on Flight 811 from John Wayne Airport to Phoenix may depart in the morning." http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/national_world&id=8654257 Back to Top Pilot onboard United Flight 232 loses battle with cancer SIOUX CITY, Iowa (KTIV) - One of the pilots credited with getting United Airlines Flight 232 to Sioux City has died of cancer. On July 19th, 1989, Denny Fitch was a United Airlines pilot flying as a passenger aboard Flight 232 when the tail engine exploded, cutting all three of the plane's hydraulic lines. Fitch grabbed the throttles and helped pilot Al Haynes steer the crippled plane to Sioux Gateway airport. Though the plane crashed, the crew was credited with getting the plane to a city, and an airport. 184 of the 296 people on board survived. Fitch learned he had brain cancer in 2010. His wife, Rosa, says Fitch died Sunday night. Fitch's funeral is on Sunday in Saint Charles, Illinois http://www.ktiv.com/story/18236319/pilot-onboard-united-flight-232-loses-battle-with- cancer Back to Top FAA seeking sanctions against Colo. Company in Ariz. medical-helicopter crash PHOENIX (AP) - The Federal Aviation Administration is seeking sanctions against a Colorado company stemming from a deadly 2010 medical-helicopter crash in Arizona that killed the aircraft's three-member crew. FAA spokesman Ian Gregor tells The Associated Press that the federal agency wants to lodge a $50,625 fine against Colorado-based Air Methods, the parent company of LifeNet Arizona and the helicopter's operator. Weigh InCorrections?Recommend Tweet Personal Post .The development comes on the heels of a report by the National Transportation Safety Board that says the July 28, 2010, crash likely was caused by a contract mechanic's mistake and a lack of proper inspection and testing of his work. The helicopter left Marana, Ariz., and was en route to its home base in Douglas when it fell 600 feet in eight seconds, crashed into a backyard fence in Tucson and burst into flames about six minutes after leaving the ground. Back to Top Back to Top FAA - Air-Safety Response Faulted By ANDY PASZTOR (WSJ) The Federal Aviation Administration was slow to respond to serious safety risks highlighted by employees, including air-traffic-control violations and lax airline maintenance, according to a government watchdog. Directing unusually sharp criticism at the FAA and the Department of Transportation, the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday released documents and findings covering several cases that it said highlighted "the recurring nature of the problems" over the years. The conclusions, according to the report, reveal a pattern of "insufficient responses by the FAA" to resolve urgent safety hazards and internal organizational weaknesses. The Special Counsel, among other things, concluded that two years after a pair of FAA inspectors alleged Delta Air Lines Inc. DAL 0.00%had violated certain mandatory fuel- tank-safety requirements, "gaps in oversight" by the agency "allowed the airline's noncompliance to continue." The FAA later took action to rectify the situation and is now considering civil enforcement action against Delta, according to the report. One controller alleged that small aircraft taking off from New Jersey's Teterboro Airport, shown above, routinely were routed dangerously close to large airliners landing at Newark's airport. Delta said the safety of its planes was never affected and that it promptly "worked with the FAA to revise the wording of our maintenance programs." The airline said it is now in full compliance with federal regulations and requirements. In 2009, according to the material released Tuesday, an air-traffic controller at an FAA radar facility responsible for a big chunk of the airspace over the New York metropolitan area alleged that small aircraft taking off from Teterboro, N.J., routinely were routed dangerously close to large airliners landing at nearby Newark Liberty International Airport. One near-collision brought two aircraft within 200 feet of each other vertically and less than three-quarters of a mile apart, according to Tuesday's report. The Special Counsel's office determined that the FAA had failed to act aggressively when the issue was first raised, and it said that the response by the FAA and DOT to its investigation was "not reasonable," because managers "failed to resolve these issues for more than two years." In a number of instances, according to the documents, it took FAA management years to implement fixes-and sometimes required repeat warning from employees-even after the original hazards were substantiated. The Special Counsel is responsible for protecting government employees from retribution after they allege improprieties. FAA employees account for one of the highest rates of Special Counsel cases. In a statement, the DOT said it "takes all whistleblower complaints seriously" and that the FAA years ago "established an office dedicated to making sure whistleblower cases were reviewed and investigated independently." The statement emphasized that "DOT has been working with the Office of Special Counsel on these seven cases" since early 2010 and has sought "to promptly review, investigate and take aggressive action where necessary." DOT also said it remains "committed to continuing to review its policies and practices to implement improvements where necessary." In letters to the White House and congressional leaders, Carolyn Lerner, the head of the office, strongly disagreed. Ms. Lerner issued "a strong recommendation that more rigorous oversight measures" should be adopted "to ensure a higher standard for aviation safety." Tuesday's revelations are likely to ratchet up Capitol Hill scrutiny of the FAA, at a time it has an acting chief and faces escalating airline opposition to major regulatory initiatives. "Preventive measures could be far more effective," Ms. Lerner said in a statement, "if the Department of Transportation listened to its own employees' alarm bells." A spokeswoman for the office said significant questions about FAA and DOT responses to employee complaints stretch back more than five years. In documenting its concerns, the Special Counsel said it received more than 87 safety- related complaints from FAA employees over roughly five years, and half were considered credible enough to be referred for further DOT investigation. In six of the seven specific cases cited Tuesday, however, the counsel's office either faulted the agencies for "unreasonable delays" in resolving safety threats, or determined managers didn't respond appropriately to internal warnings. The FAA chief reports to the transportation secretary. The range of allegations includes details about confusing and inconsistent rules for separating air traffic in bad weather at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. The report also reveals that some New York-area controllers-covering one of the world's busiest air- traffic sectors-repeatedly slept while on duty, violated safety rules by using personal computers or playing videogames and left their shifts early. Some New York-area controllers also risked passenger safety by resorting to "careless and casual language in their communication with pilots," the documents indicate. The FAA took various corrective steps and opted for disciplinary action against three managers at the suburban New York control center, according to the report, which the Special Counsel called "prompt and appropriate action." But even in that case, the report adds, FAA reactions may have been influenced by widespread "media attention in 2011 to some of these issues" at the facility. Back to Top International pilots' body asks Pakistan to setup safety board KARACHI: The International Federation of Airline Pilots' Association (IFALPA) has expressed concerns over aviation safety in Pakistan and asked the president to establish an independent National Transportation Safety Board for thorough, scientific and unbiased investigations into air accidents, a statement said on Tuesday. "There are concerns about the unhealthily close relationship between the Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority and the operators (airlines); the lack of an independent National Transportation Safety Board; sanctions being taken against pilots reporting safety related incidents, poor Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) in some companies; and an overburdened Air Traffic Control system that is not just a concern to pilots within Pakistan, but also to those over flying," said IFALPA in a letter to President Asif Ali Zardari. Captain Don Wykof, President of IFALPA, stressed that the federation was concerned over some aspects relating to aviation safety that had been brought to their attention by the Pakistan Air Line Pilots' Association (PALPA) which is a member association in your country. These concerns stem from the recent incidents and accidents in Pakistan including the Air Blue accident in 2010 and the most recent accident of Bhoja Air, reasoned IFALPA, which represents more than 100,000 professional pilots in more than 100 countries worldwide and is also one of the few organisations that enjoy the status of an 'observer' at the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). Since IFALPA is currently meeting at its annual conference in Paris, President IFALPA said, "this has given us the opportunity to discuss with the PALPA representatives their concerns about situation in Pakistan; these concerns are multifaceted, and seem to stem from the corrective measures identified as being necessary following the Air Blue accident not being fully implemented". Against this background, the IFALPA asked the government of Pakistan to consider implementing some measures that include the establishment, with representation from PALPA and the ATC Guild, of an independent National Transportation Safety Board, responsible for investigating incidents and accidents; and for implementing any corrective action that is necessary. Moreover, CAA Pakistan be made autonomous and financially and administratively independent body, and not staffed in some key positions by people seconded from the airlines; and the Safety Management Systems implemented by the operators in Pakistan should comply with the ICAO recommendations, particularly with regard to non punitive reporting. Also, IFALPA asked the government of Pakistan to encourage the establishment of organised pilot groups in all Pakistani airlines as this will enable the pilots to contribute to the establishment of a robust safety culture in their company helped by the extensive expertise in areas such as CRM they can access through IFALPA. "I am sure that we share a common goal in seeing Pakistan achieving the highest levels of aviation safety; we know that PALPA also share this goal and are fully prepared to engage with the regulator and the operators to move forward in this vital area," IFALPA president said. http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-3-107202-International-pilots%20-body- asks-Pakistan-to-setup-safety-board Back to Top Business aviation safety performance over 20 years There is a long-term favourable trend in business-jet fatal accident rates - and a significant improvement during the past three years which will be remarkable if sustained. That is the judgement of Paul Hayes, senior safety analyst at Flightglobal's data and consultancy division Ascend. During the 1990s, the rate in question was one fatal accident per 600 aircraft, while for the 2000s it has been one per 900 aircraft. On this basis, 2011 was the safest year ever for the class and continues the safety improvement trend that has halved the accident rate in the past 10 years. Last year the rate fell to one per 5,000 aircraft - from one per 3,300 in 2010 - to equal a record set in 2009. This figure is contained in an Ascend report. The fatal accident rate is expressed as risk per airframe/year - rather than per million flights - because of unreliable aircraft movement data in this sector, but Ascend says the high standard of fleet data means variations in risk exposure can still be reliably tracked. DIVERGING FLEETS Business turboprops fared relatively poorly with a fatal accident rate of one per 830 aircraft last year, compared with one per 1,400 aircraft in 2010. But while 2011 was a relatively poor year for business turboprops, this is only in comparison with business jets and the good outcome the class had in 2010. What's more, the overall trend still shows an improving accident rate for business turboprops. For example, the fatal accident rate for turboprops in the 1990s was one per 435 aircraft, while in the 2000s it has been one per 560. However, safety for this fleet is not improving at the same rate as for business jets, so the relative safety performance of the jet and turboprop fleets is diverging. On average, 20 years ago the fatal accident rate for business jets was about twice as good as for business turboprops but, by the end of last year, the rate for business jets had become four times as good. In terms of fatalities in 2011, the worst business aircraft fatal accidents included two turboprop and one jet crash. In February, seven passengers and two crew were killed when a Majuba Aviation Pilatus PC-12 crashed into the sea during a go-around in poor visibility near Plettenberg Bay in South Africa. In the same month, four passengers and three crew were killed when a Sky Lounge Hawker 850XP crashed immediately after take-off from Sulaimaniyah, Iraq. The Air Charter Services Pilatus PC-12, which crashed at Faridabad, India in May while descending inbound to Delhi, resulted in the death of five passengers and two crew. In simple accident numbers rather than rates, business jets suffered a total of four fatal accidents last year, in which 16 people died. By comparison, in 2010, 18 passengers and crew died in five fatal accidents. But as Hayes points out, figures for the past three years show a considerable improvement on earlier years, when some seven or eight fatal accidents might have been expected in any given year. Another indicator of progress is that the fatal accident total in 2011 was about half the annual average for the past decade (7.6) and also of the 1990s (8.1). Onboard casualty figures also show improved accident survivability. In 2011 there were an average of four fatalities per fatal accident. The 2011 result was an improvement on the average of 23.4 fatalities for the 2001-2010 decade and half that for the 1990s (35.4). Business turboprops were involved in 12 fatal accidents in 2011, five more than in 2010 but the same as 2009. As with business jets, the past three years have shown an improvement on earlier years when 15 fatal accidents a year might have been considered typical. The number of fatal accidents in 2011, although worse than the year before, was still down on the annual average for the last decade (15.4) and also the 1990s average (16.7). Turboprop casualty figures show there were 48 passenger and crew deaths in the 12 fatal accidents in 2011, an average of four fatalities per fatal accident. The annual average for the 2000s was 49.5 and for the 1990s it was 57.6. The significant reduction in the number of fatal accidents suffered by business jets during the past three years and, to a lesser extent, the number suffered by business turboprops, shows the first statistically significant change for a long time, says Hayes - more than 20 years in the case of business jets and about 15 years for turboprops. SURVIVABILITY Onboard jet/turboprop fatality rates in 2011, calculated as deaths on board per 1,000 seat-years, has generally followed the established pattern for fatal accident rates, with business jets producing a relatively good result and turboprops being relatively poor. Business jets showed a small improvement from 2010, going from about one death per 11,100 seats, to one per 12,500 seats last year. However, in 2009 the fatality rate was even lower at one per 16,600 seats - the lowest ever. The past three years have all produced results that were much better than average. The average fatality rate for the 2000s showed significant improvement compared with the 1990s, with the respective figures of one fatality per 6,700 seats against one per 2,600 seats. Turboprops last year showed a fatality rate of one death per 2,300 seats, compared with one per 4,500 in 2010. The fatality rate in 2009 was one per 2,000 seats, the same figure as the average for the past decade. The long-term trend is favourable, but again the rate of improvement does not match that for the jet fleet. The turboprop average for the 1990s was one fatality per 1,500 seats. Hayes points out that although the turboprop business aircraft fatality rate during the past 10 years has shown an improvement compared with the 1990s, there has been virtually no improvement in the rate in recent years. AIRFRAME LOSSES The global business jet fleet, according to present assessments, suffered eleven total airframe losses during 2011, half the number lost in 2010 (22) but not as good as 2009 (9). The year also showed a marked improvement over the annual average for the past 10 years (18) and for the 1990s (18.3). However, based on past experience it is likely that a number of 2011's substantial damage accidents currently assessed as "major partial losses" may turn out to be constructive total losses, but Hayes points out that insurers believe it unlikely that the result for the year will worsen significantly. Meanwhile, the longer-term trend shows no improvement in hull loss accident frequency. Expectations, based on present performance projections, would be something between 15 or 20 total losses a year. Business turboprops suffered 34 total losses in 2011. However, this figure included a significant number of non-operational losses which came as a result of the tsunami at Sendai, Japan last March, and also the Bangkok floods last October. As with the jets, there has been no significant reduction in the frequency of turboprop total losses during the past 20 years. The general message is that although risks to life and limb are declining in the business aviation sector, non-fatal hull-loss accidents are not reducing. DATA-DRIVEN HOPES FOR A SAFER SECTOR Read Flightglobal Insight's report on business aviation safety in 2011 The US Federal Aviation Administration is working to bring data-driven safety improvement plans to the general aviation sector in the USA, including the business aviation part of GA. The intention is to reproduce in GA the significant improvements achieved in airline safety during the past 15 years through the Civil Aviation Safety Team (CAST), which analysed accident and incident data to identify the areas of highest risk, and which also developed programmes to address the problems. Data will be gathered via the voluntary aviation safety information analysis and sharing (ASIAS) programme, which the FAA hopes business aviation operators will sign up to. Using these figures, the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA JSC) will develop priorities for action. Tony Fazio, of the FAA's office of accident investigation and prevention, presented on the state of the GA JSC overview at the Flight Safety Foundation/National Business Aircraft Association Corporate Aviation Safety Seminar in San Antonio in mid-April. At the top of the priorities list for action is loss of control; while second is controlled flight into terrain on the basis these are the most frequently occurring fatal accident categories. Fazio set out a series of objectives for improving general aviation safety in all its sectors, including: * Evolve the GA JSC to perform for GA what CAST did for airlines; * Encourage voluntary commitment by operators; * Set up a consensus-based decision-making process; * Set up a team to use information from ASIAS and other safety data sources to create a data-driven risk-management programme; * Oversee the implementation of derived action plans. * Flightglobal Ascend's special report on business aviation safety and losses in 2011 http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-business-aviation-safety- performance-over-20-years-371577/ Back to Top Beyond Risk Management Ltd. in conjunction withCurt Lewis & Associates LLC are pleased to host "A Practical Approach to Safety Management Systems" a course designed for the aviation industry. With the ICAO recommendations and standards for the introduction of Safety Management Systems throughout the world - you can get ahead of the curve and save time and money by learning the potential pitfalls and challenges associated to its implementation. The Canadian large aircraft aviation industry has experienced many of the same challenges likely to be faced by others. To better prepare you and your organization to meet these challenges we are pleased to bring to you the Canadian 705 experience with regulated Safety Management Systems adapted to your needs. Dates - June 18 & 19, 2012 (Monday and Tuesday), SEATS ARE LIMITED - to ensure good discussion and time to question in a workshop environment class size is intentionally intimate. Register now to avoid disappointment. Important Details - This course covers the ICAO standards and the Canadian requirements and experience. The content is global in nature enabling participants from other nations and industries to find the material both useful and beneficial. For Canadian attendees this course fulfills the requirements for CASO training (non 705 operators.) Schedule Day One (Monday) 0730 - 0800 hrs. Registration & continental breakfast 0800 - 1200 hrs. Session #1 1200 - 1245 hrs. Lunch 1245 - 1700 hrs. Session#2 Day Two (Tuesday) 0730 - 0800 hrs. Continental breakfast 0800 - 1200 hrs. Session #3 1200 - 1245 hrs. Lunch 1245 - 1630 hrs. Session #4 1630 - 1700 hrs. Closing remarks and Presentation of certificates Overview - Improve safety performance by applying the fundamentals of SMS within your organization. Get past the barriers of independent departments to an integrated system. This two-day course gives you the comprehensive understanding of SMS and the tools to assist you in preparing for change in your organization. Who should attend - Any individuals who will be actively involved in the organization's Safety Management System (safety program). Individuals with previous experience and those with no knowledge in safety management will find this course useful for the formation or expansion of safety programs within their organizations. What you get - Participants will receive a consolidated reference binder of class material as well as an electronic version of the material which will provide guidance for setting up a system within their organization. Upon successful completion of the course a certificate will be issued. Subjects that will be reviewed are: * Safety and security * What Safety Management Systems is (definitions) * Corporate culture - The push for change (an overview of the proposed FAA Safety Management Systems, current ICAO and Transport Canada requirements) * Risk Assessment techniques * Data collection and processing * Front line involvement and committee process * Incident Reporting * Incident/Accident investigation techniques and process * Trend Analysis * Response to events and emergencies * Safety promotion * Implementing change (and the obstacles to change) * Documentation process. Location & Logistics - Calgary, Alberts, Canada. Tea/coffee/juice/water will be provided in the classroom at all times, continental breakfast and lunch on both days is included. Cost - $1,195.00 per person Canadian Funds SPECIAL OFFER: When you register three people from one organization they may bring a 4th person as our guest to this session! (Save $1,195.00!) for any given session the fourth attendee is our guest! DISCOUNTS: Option 1 - When attending the following CAP - Corrective Action Plan Course (June 20, 2012) and this course there is a special discount - the two courses for $1,600.00 a $345.00 savings! To receive this discount enter the code "CAP2012" when registering for the Safety Management Course, then register for the Corrective Action Plan Course and enter the discount code "SMS2012." Option 2 - When attending the following Quality Assurance and Auditing Course (June 21 & 22, 2012) and this course there is a special discount - the two courses for $2,000.00 a $390.00 savings! To receive this discount enter the code "QA2012" when registering for the Safety Management Course, then register for the Quality Assurance course and enter the discount code "SMS2012." Option 3 - BEST SAVINGS - When attending both the Corrective Action Plan Course & the Quality Assurance and Auditing Course (all three courses, five days) there is a bonus discount - the three courses for $2,500.00 a $540.00 savings! To receive this discount enter the code "ALL2012" when registering for the each of the courses. *all costs shown are exclusive of GST* Hosted by Beyond Risk Management Ltd. -Seating Restricted for better workshop discussion- -Registration is limited - Register now- Register on line at: http://www.regonline.ca/SMSYYCJune2012 For further information or questions: email - Brendan@beyondriskmgmt.com Or call: Brendan Kapuscinski 403-804-9745 Curt Lewis, P.E., CSP, FRAeS, FISASI CURT LEWIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC