1

O N C O M M E R C I A L A V I A T I O N S A F E T Y

ISSUE 42 THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THEUNITED KINGDOM FLIGHT SAFETY COMMITTEE ISSN 1355-1523

SPRING 2001

This issue of focus sponsored by:

The Official Publication ofTHE UNITED KINGDOM FLIGHT SAFETY COMMITTEE

ISSN: 1355-1523 SPRING 2001 ON COMMERCIAL AVIATION SAFETY

contentsEditorial 2

Chairman’s Column 3

Legal Adviser’s Column 4

Powder Keg 6

It’s A Bomb 10

UKFSC Seminar 12

GATCO Seminar 13

Lower Back Pain is a Common complaint, 14But Precautionary Practices Help Pilots CopeStanley R Mohler MD

Quick Guide to the Law – for Pilots 20

Disruptive Passenger Strategy 2000 22

Special Objectives Check on Air Operators’ Fuel 24Planning Policies - Summer 2000Capt. Tim Sindall

Whose job is it? 28

Cabin Operations? 28

Front Cover: Avro RJX

FOCUS on Commercial Aviation Safety ispublished quarterly by The UK Flight SafetyCommittee.

Editorial Office:Ed PaintinThe Graham SuiteFairoaks Airport, Chobham, Woking,Surrey. GU24 8HXTel: 01276-855193 Fax: 855195e-mail: ukfsc@freezone.co.ukWeb Site: www.ukfsc.co.ukOffice Hours: 0900-1630 Monday-Friday

Advertisement Sales Office:Andrew PhillipsAndrew Phillips Partnership39 Hale ReedsFarnham, Surrey. GU9 9BNTel: 01252-712434 Mobile: 0836-677377

Printed by Woking Print and Publicity LtdThe Print Works, St Johns Lye, St Johns,Woking, Surrey GU21 1RSTel: 01483-884884 Fax: 01483-884880ISDN: 01483-598501Email: wokingprint@compuserve.comWeb: www.wokingprint.com

FOCUS on Commercial Aviation Safety iscirculated to commercial pilots, flight engineersand air traffic control officers holding currentlicences. It is also available on subscription toorganisations or individuals at a cost of £12(+p&p) per annum.

FOCUS is produced solely for the purpose ofimproving flight safety and, unless copyright isindicated, articles may be reproduced providingthat the source of material is acknowledged.

Publication of an advertisement, letter orannouncement in FOCUS does notnecessarily imply that the UKFSC endorses anysuch advertisement, letter or announcement.

1

Editorial

2

Staff Recruitment and Training - Future Difficulties

All over in aviation circles theconversation turns to the lack of suitablyqualified staff in the marketplace.

The reasons for this shortage ofpersonnel vary from one area to another.Some believe that young potentialcandidates do not find the industrysufficiently attractive. Others argue thatintelligent school leavers do not see anybenefit in training to be an aircraftengineer compared with being an ITengineer.

After several years training, anaeronautical engineer would have to workoutdoors in the cold and rain at all hoursof the day and night. On the other hand,for the same investment of time, an ITperson would work in a warm, dryenvironment; with better pay; quickerpromotion; a wider choice of employer.Already a number of qualified electronicengineers have left the aviation industry towork in other industries for more moneyand better working conditions. It is likelythat this trend may continue.

Over the last 30 years we have seenmany airlines and maintenanceorganisations discontinue theirapprenticeship training schemes in orderto cut their operating costs. Competitionfor trained staff in all disciplines isincreasing and will continue to do so.

More recently we have seen thedownsizing of the aviation arm of themilitary. This has resulted in the reductionof new technical recruits. The Navy andAir Force has traditionally been a sourceof experienced engineers withmanagement and leadership skills for theaviation industry. Regrettably this sourceno longer exists.

During World War II and for a number ofyears after that, apprentice trainingflourished. However in the 1980s thosewho received this training started to retireand this drained the industry ofexperienced engineers. This drain onexperienced staff coupled with thereluctance by air operators to invest inongoing training, has now reached acritical point.

Few training schemes have beenintroduced to replace these traditionalsources with the result that few youngschool leavers are being drawn into theindustry. Those few that are recruitedsoon compare their pay and conditionswith those of their contemporaries in theIT and other industries. They becomedisenchanted and leave the industry.

With the number of aircraft in operationever increasing and the decreasingnumber of available engineers we seempoorly placed to take advantage of thegrowth opportunity being presented to us.

We could continue to increase our fleetsize with a reducing number of engineersat the risk of jeopardising safety. Or wecould start investing in training toovercome the shortage. Most airoperators will resist the latter in the hopethat someone else will start to do thetraining in an effort to save money.

Perhaps the regulator will step in andspecify the number of qualified and non-qualified staff required per aircraft in thefleet in order to ensure that the aircraft areproperly maintained and that safety is notcompromised. This will force the airoperators to take some action.

Alternatively the airlines could contributeto a central training fund, based on theirfleet size, to ensure that sufficientengineers are trained for the industry. TheRoyal Air Force training facilities couldperhaps be geared up to cope with thistask and to ensure an adequate supply oftrained personnel in the event of a seriousconflict.

Maybe the shortage of skilled engineerswill force up their pay levels so high thatthe air operators will become more willingto invest in skills training. One thing that isbecoming clear is that unless somethingis done soon to remedy the situation theopportunity for air operators to grow inline with the envisaged demand will passthem by.

Chairman’s Column

3

A belated happy new year to one and all.With the New Year it is prudent for us tolook back at the year just gone and seewhat we can learn to enhance safety forthe coming year.

A review of jet accidents of last yearindicates a very slight improvement in thejet Total Loss events (20v21), the samenumber of substantial Damage Accidents(30) and marginally fewer Fatal Accidents(8v10) and all this while hours flownincreased by 8%, sectors by 11 1/2% andfleet size by 7% to 14,723 aircraft.Disappointingly there were three CFITaccidents, compared with one in 1999.

A turboprop review shows there were 20operational Total Losses compared with28 in 1999 and 13 Substantial DamageAccidents. With 12 fatal accidentscompared to 17 last year and fatalitiesreduced from 174 to 124 the newmillennium started well for the turbopropfleet, especially with just four CFITaccidents. The increase in aircraft yearsflown at just .64% and fleet size increasingby just .88% to 5,414 aircraft indicates theimpact on the turboprop operation of thearrival of the Regional Jet aircraft.

On both fleets, jet and turboprop, CargoTotal Loss accidents accounted for 25%of accidents, showing a significantlyincreased exposure. The UK Flight SafetyCommittee, in recognition of this fact, hasset up a Cargo Operations WorkingGroup to identify where improvementsmight be achieved. The Working Group ispresently developing a “best practice”manual which it is hoped to distributewhen completed.

The work of the Committee for the yearahead is to contribute to this

improvement. The work program is setand the seminar arrangements are intrain. The new format of a main meetingevery two months, with an M&F meetingon the day before, appears to be workingwell, but only you can confirm that. Ourtreasurer Tony Ingham, is retiring from theCAA on the 28 February and will be ahuge loss. We wish him well in retirementand look forward to meeting and workingwith his successor.

Thank-you all for your participation in thework of the Committee over the last year.We look forward to the year ahead withanticipation.

SHAIRSPACE 2001 - Norwich

On the 22nd February 2001 theDirectorate of Air Staff organised ameeting of interested parties to try to raisethe awareness and understanding ofaircrews and controllers, both civil andmilitary, operating within Class G Airspace.

More than 60 participants attended themeeting, indicating the level of interest inthis the subject. The meeting was jointlychaired by Air Commodore Chris Moran,Director of Air Staff, MOD and Ed Paintin,Chief Executive UK Flight Safety Committee.

The aims of the meeting were: (a) topromote a safer operating environment forusers of Class G Airspace (b) to provide avehicle for communication betweencivilian and military operators (c) toincrease awareness and understanding ofattendees in a non-confrontationalenvironment.

The meeting took the form of a number ofvery interesting presentations where different airspace users gave an accountof how they use the Glass G Airspace fortheir type of operation. Topics covered

included: Airprox Summary for the Region- Gordon Mc Robbie, Chairman UKAirprox Board; Control in Class GAirspace - Anglia Radar; Air DefenceAircraft Control Procedures - Flt. Lt RodBoundy, RAF Neatishead; Air Defence anF-15 Cockpit View - Lt. Col. Mike MillerUSAF, HQ 3rd Air Force, Mildenhall; TCASOperations - Brian Wilcox, KLM uk;Control in Class G Airspace - Sqn LdrMartin Lackey, Strike Command; GroundAttack a Jaguar Cockpit View - Sqn LdrTom Barrett, RAF Coltishall.

During the Open Forum a large number ofquestions were raised. These led to somevery interesting discussions to theenlightenment of all.

The general consensus at the end of theevening was that the meeting had been agreat success and that the objectives hadbeen met. The organiser, Wg Cdr GuyStockhill, RAF, Directorate of Air Staff is tobe congratulated for putting together amost informative and enjoyable meeting.

Did You Know?by Peter Martin

Legal Adviser’s Column

4

A number of members have expressedan interest in the restrictions on anemployer’s right to interceptcommunications on private telecomssystems. This is an attempt in a fewhundred words to clarify a confusingtopic.

Until very recently, there has been nospecific regulation in this area so that, aslong as employers complied with the DataProtection legislation and the HumanRights Act they could not be found liablefor monitoring communications such asemails, faxes and telephone calls made inthe workplace. But things are now verydifferent. On 24 October 2000 there cameinto force the Regulation ofInvestigatory Powers Act 2000coupled with the Telecommunications(Lawful Business Practice)(Interception of Communications)Regulations 2000.

The Act (“RIPA”) creates a new statutorytort of unlawful interception on a privatetelecoms system; this means, very simply,that unless a business which controls aprivate system has a lawful authority, it willbe liable if it intercepts anycommunication made on or by means ofthat system.

To create a potential liability there mustbe:-1. A “communication” in the form, in our

sort of life, emails, faxes or telephonecalls.

2. A “ private telecoms system” attachedto a public system.

3. The “communication” must beintercepted, which means that thecontents of the communication must

become available to a third party tothe exchange between sender andreceiver. And it must happen in theUK.

4. The interception must be by or with theconsent of the controller of the privatesystem – usually the employer.

5. The interception must occur during thecourse of the transmission.

6. The interception must be made withoutlawful excuse or authority – as towhich more later.

The Regulations permit the monitoring orrecording of communications on privatesystems for a variety of purposes,namely:-A. To establish commercial facts – for

example, has a contract been enteredinto?

B. To ascertain compliance with regula-tions.

C. To prevent or detect crime.

D. To investigate or detect unauthoriseduse of the private system – forexample, to detect private calls or useof the internet and so on.

E. To ensure the effective use of thesystem.

I must here add that the Regulationsallow monitoring ( but not recording) bythe controller of the system withoutconsent where this is done to determinewhether the communications are relevantto the business.It is also important to note here that if abusiness wishes to take advantage of theexceptions set out in the Regulations, itmust make reasonable efforts to inform

potential users that their communicationsmay be intercepted; if this is not done,the protection of the employer may belost.

RIPA and the regulations pose seriousquestions for safety officers who have inthe past and wish to continue in the futureto communicate “privately” with fellowemployees in the context of their function.Since the role of air safety officer is verymuch a role which exists in the interestsof the employer as well as fellowemployees and passengers and the worldat large, it is difficult to see how suchcommunications as the air safety officermay have with third parties do not fallwithin the exceptions in favour ofemployers.

It is thus essential in the absence of anysettled law by way of interpretation of thisvery new regime, that air safety officersnegotiate with employers so as to ensurethat their non-private communications arenot monitored or recorded – or both.Consent to interception must be politelyrefused, if asked for. It must be furtherargued that communications relatedspecifically to air safety issues, whileobviously for the determination of factsrelevant to the business, are of a naturewhich has no or no immediatecommercial impact.

I suggest, but without in any wayadvising, that in any company in whichthe risk or event of interception becomesmanifest, the air safety officer concernedshould open the negotiations for securingprivacy. If risks or events becomecommonplace, UKFSC will provide astandard form letter taking up the matter.

5

However, it is essential that any disputesbe settled by negotiation as the right ofaction in tort is only of any real value ifsome damage is suffered complainant; inthe case of air safety officers, it isprobably not the officer who suffers but only either the employer himself or thethird party employee in communicationwith the air safety officer who may be insome way compromised in hisemployment. It follows that thenegotiations with the employer mustcover not only one side of thecommunication but both – with bothprobably internal.

There are major issues in all this whicharise under the European Convention ofHuman Rights and under the DataProtection Act 1998 – but things will needto get pretty bad before they arise inpractice!

Air Transport Avionics LtdAVIONIC REPAIR OVERHAUL SUPPLY AND EXCHANGE

TCAS EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED, F.D.R. AND C.V.R. REPLAYS8.33 KHz AND FM IMMUNITY MODIFICATIONS FOR ARINC AND GA AIRCRAFT

FROM COMPS TO CALIBRATION, OUR LARGE CAPABILITY LIST IS AVAILABLE ON LINEWWW.AIRTRANSPORT.CO.UK

JAR 145, FAR 145 ISO9002 Approved Workshops next to HeathrowFAA Repair Station CF5Y 777M JAR 145 No. CAA0016

Local Sales Representatives Worldwide

7-9 Willow Rd, Poyle trading Estate, Colnbrook, Berkshire SL3 OBX, England.Tel:- +44 1753 682 654 Fax:- +44 1753 684 166 A.O.G:- +44 603 457 / 67

E-Mail :- sales@airtransport.co.uk

PPoowwddeerr KKeegg

6

Ground-breaking research into drug rape- a new, complex crime which can result ina victim’s death - has been released thisweek. Tina Orr-Munro reports on itsfindings and the myths it dispels.

Drug rape in Britain is becoming moreprevalent than many people believe,claims the author of a Home Office reportcalled Drug assisted sexual assault.

DCI Peter Sturman, who spent two yearsworking on the report, says the generalpolice view of drug rape, is that there isno ‘specific problem’ in this country.However, his findings look set tochallenge that view.

‘Drug rape is not in epidemic proportions,but it is happening and it should be a realconcern. This is a particularly awfuloffence and every case is one too many,’he says.

Recent high-profile convictions for drugrape - the ‘spiking’ of drinks with drugs tosedate and then rape a person - havesparked concerns about the spread ofthis crime and its dangers followingdeaths of victims in some cases.

DCI Sturman of the Metropolitan Police’sserious crime group, believes it is the firsttime research into drug rape has beendone in the UK.He admits that when he started his studyhe had little understanding of theproblem. He says part of the drivingforce behind the research was to‘ascertain the facts and establish the truesituation’.

Myths Exposed

Within weeks of the official launch of theresearch in February, 1998, the ‘truesituation’ began to make itself known.

‘Within three weeks of the press launch,67 alleged victims of drug rape attackshad got in touch. In all I had over 120replies’, says DCI Sturman.

His initial intention was to measure theextent of drug rape in Britain, but. he saysit became apparent that this approachwas not going to work.

‘When you consider only seven per centof rapes are reported and this particularcrime is very difficult to detect, anyestimation would have been no betterthan guesswork. In the end, I decided itwas a fruitlesstask,’ he says.

Instead DCISturmandecided tosend aquestionnaireto those whohad identifiedthemselves asdrug rapevictims.

The accountsthat came back were checked with aclinical psychologist to ensure that theywere accurate.

‘Basically, the clinical psychologist was

able to say they were genuine becausethe details they gave could not have beenimagined,’ says DCI Sturman.Once he was satisfied the accounts wereauthentic, he asked the victims to takepart in a questionnaire. Questions onwhen and where they had been druggedand how the police had dealt with theircomplaint, formed part of thequestionnaire.DCI Sturman says the results allowed himto build what he believes is a moreaccurate picture of drug rape. He foundthat the information that he was receivingcontradicted commonly held beliefs aboutdrug rape.

‘Up until that time, most of the informationprovided on drug rapes came from theinternet, but it became clear to me thatmuch of it was wrong.’ he says.

Date Rape

Much of the misinformation, says DCISturman surrounded the ‘date rape’ drugRohypnol (flunitrazapam).‘For a long time the media identified

7

Rohypnol as the only drug that was beingused in date rapes. So if Rohypnol wasn’tfound then it couldn’t be a drug rape. Butmy research was telling me otherwise. Iknew there was a discrepancy,’ he says.Through his research, DCI Sturmanestablished that Rohypnol was not widelyused in drug rapes despite media reportsto the contrary.

‘The fact is, although it isassociated with drug rapethere is no firm evidencethat Rohypnol is being usedto facilitate rape inEngland,’ he says.Rohypnol, he says, is noweven less likely to be usedas it is manufactured as ablue tablet and gives off ablue dye when mixed withliquid.

‘Although’, says DCISturman, ‘Rohypnol shouldnot be ruled out,investigators ought to beaware of other drugs in use,in particular

GHB(garrimahydroxybutyerate).‘In America, GHB is six times moreprevalent than Rohypnol. There, alcoholand GBH is the most frequently usedcombination.

‘It is available here and has beendetected in at least two drug rape cases.’he says.

Although there are a wide range of drugs

available that can be used in drug rapes,as DCI Sturman says alcohol remains the‘oldest Mickey Finn in the world’.‘Because society tends to view alcoholdifferently than other pharmaceuticaldrugs, it is often ignored.

‘But one way or another alcohol plays asignificant role in drug rape. First, wemust not discount the possibility of

alcohol being slipped into a drink in orderto facilitate rape, but also, 54 per cent ofcomplainants I surveyed were given adrug via alcohol,’ he says.He argues that alcohol is more than just avehicle for administering drugs.

‘Often when a drug is added to alcohol itforms a mixture more potent than the sumof its two parts,’ he says.

As well as dispelling the myth that onlyRohypnol is used in drug rapes, DCISturman’s research also allowed him toinvestigate the problem of retrogressivememory loss.

‘There was a lot of misinformation aboutretrogressive memory loss. The idea thatif you are given the drug at eight o’clockyou can’t remember anything before that

time. But, the fact is, drugsdo not cause retrogressivememory loss.’

He believes this hasconsiderable implicationsfor his investigation.

‘Complainants may thinkthat the drug was put intheir drinks at the timewhen their memory beganto deteriorate. But it maywell have beenadministered in the drinkbefore. This is veryimportant evidentially as itmay point to a differentoffender altogether,’ hesays.

Poor Treatment

As a result of his findings DCI Sturmanissued interim advice to all forces inAugust 1998, just six months after he hadbegan his investigation. He received callsfrom all over the country.

After he had established what drugs werebeing used, DCI Sturman shifted hisfocus to look at how drug rapes were

8

being investigated by the police.

He found that the victims he surveyedwere less than satisfied with the way thepolice responded to their complaints.Over half of those who reported theirattack felt the treatment they receivedfrom the police was either poor or verypoor especially if the complainant wasmale.

‘The majority of police officers take thisoffence very seriously, but sadly somedon’t. We have come a long way ininvestigating sexual assaults, but we haveto move forward,’ says DCI Sturman.

He agrees drug rapes are extremelydifficult to investigate, but that does notmean they should not be investigated.

Part of the problem, he believes, is thatofficers do not feel they can rely on thevictim’s testimony.

‘Victims often appear vague or theiraccounts exaggerated. They may evenremember “consenting” to sex. As aresult there is a view that the complainantis an unreliable witness and that theinvestigation should be based on theassumption that they have no voice andcan offer nothing, but this is entirelywrong,’ says DCI Sturman.

He believes it is essential for officers to‘suspend all judgement’ wheninvestigating this type of crime.No matter how bizarre their story mayseem, it has to be investigated.

He believes the job of the officers is to tryand fill in ‘missing time’ in the witness’sstatement.

‘A victim’s account must be viewed aspieces of a jigsaw. An officer’s task is toidentify as many pieces as possible witha truly open mind.’

DCI Sturman says it is essential that theinitial report receives ‘positive action’ andas much evidence as possible iscollected.

Urine, blood, hair and even vomitsamples need to be taken quickly.

‘Samples must be taken within 96 hoursof the attack, because of the speed drugsleave the system. Drugs like GHB can bebroken down in the body within six hoursof an attack,’ he says.

A side effect of taking GHB is oftenvomiting. As a result, samples of vomitmust also be taken, says DCI Sturman.

‘As GHB occurs naturally in the body it isdifficult to detect through other samples.Vomit may be the only evidence,’ headds.‘In addition,’ says DCI Sturman, a hairsample should also be recovered.

‘There is research going on at themoment that suggests that hair samplescould be analysed to detect which drughas been taken.’

Although still in its infancy, DCI Sturmansays that if the research provessuccessful it could revolutionise the

investigation into drug rape.

‘Instead of the usual race to obtain theevidence, it would be a case of sittingback and letting the hair grow until it isready to be analysed.’Although samples should be taken hewarns that officers should not rely ontoxicology results and should continue toobtain other evidence.

While DCI Sturman hopes his advice willhelp officers investigate drug rapes moreeffectively, he believes that a radicaloverhaul of the way in which this crime istackled is needed.

For him, the real way forward ininvestigating this type of crime is to makethe whole process complaint-driven.

‘Traditionally, complainants have had toreport what has happened to a policestation or a hospital. But the simple fact iscomplainants are not coming forward.’

He believes the answer lies with treatmentcentres where the complainant can‘report what has happened and betreated as a victim.’DCI Sturman says investigations into drugrapes should be carried out by a‘dedicated team of sexual assaultinvestigators.’He admits, ‘This would be a pivotalchange for the police, but rape isconsidered the most serious offence aftermurder. It is important that we send thecorrect message to the complainants andthe offender.

A specialised team would enable the

9

officers, says DCI Sturman, to ‘buildexperience and expertise and developlinks with other experts.’

He knows this approach will have bothtraining and resource implications for theservice and that it is not likely to be ‘wellreceived’ by senior police detectives. But,he says, ‘If we replace the policechaperones with a system of complaintsadvocates, we could offset some of thecost:’

At present rape victims are allocated apolice chaperone. DCI Sturman would liketo replace them with a system ofindependent complaints advocates.

‘The complaints advocates would beindependent but supportive of theprosecution process. They would knowthe system and help them through thetrauma. It is important that the victimdecides what happens and the pace ithappens at,’ he says.

DCI Sturman has made over 70recommendations on how to deal withdrug rapes. 20 of these affect the policeservice.

He knows some of the changes he isproposing are far reaching but, he warns,they should not be ‘ignored or diluted.’

‘If we are going to combat the problem ofdrug rapes, we have to develop a moresympathetic and more appropriateresponse to the type of crime.’

Drug Rape Facts

The following are drug rape facts outlinedin DCI Sturman’s survey:

50 per cent of victims were drugged inclubs or pubsIn 54 per cent of cases drugging wasfacilitated by alcohol

Non-strangers committed 70 per cent ofattacks

20 per cent of victims had no memory ofthe event

60 per cent realised what was happeningbut were helpless

84 per cent realised they had beenattacked within a day

71 per cent of males said treatment bypolice was poor and 50 per cent said itwas hostile.

Main Recommendations

DCI Sturman’s main recommendations forthe police were:

The complainant must always be believedno matter how incredible the account mayappear

Where drugs such as GHB are

suspected, the Medicines Control AgencyEnforcement Branch must be informedThe first possible urine sample must beobtained from the complainant, inaddition to other samples which must betaken within 96 hours of the attack

Everything must be done to fill in lost timeof the complainant

Do not pin all hopes on toxicology results

If the victim has taken drugs voluntarilythis should be seen as supporting thecomplainant’s account as they were notin a fit state to give consent.

Reproduced with acknowledgement toPolice Review.

Mobile Lashing

A SAUDI armycaptain has beensentenced to 70lashes for usinga mobiletelephone on adomestic flight.

IItt’’ss AA BBoommbb!!

10

Being told that the aircraft on which youare flying has a bomb on board, or evenfinding such a device unannounced, mustbe one of the most feared experiences inthe world of flying. The mind instantlyfocuses on the horrors of the Air Indiaflight over the Atlantic in 1985 and PanAm flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988,before going numb.

The horrors are all too apparent, butpreparation in the event of such anoccurrence can help increase thechances of a successful outcome and thesurvival of all on board.

Bomb threats received by airlines, ofwhich there are many, are normallyhandled at the airline’s base by a teamdevoted to such work and the decision ismade there as to whether the threat is aserious one or just a hoax. If, asfortunately rarely happens, the threat isconsidered to be real, the first procedureis to contact the Captain of the aircraftand inform him of the situation. The nextvital step is to find the device, if the crewhave not already done so.

The procedures in a serious bomb threatsituation vary according to the location ofthe aircraft. If the aircraft is on the ground,a controlled evacuation should takeplace. This should entail asking allpassengers to leave the aircraft as quicklyas possible but via the normal route, ie,via the steps or jetty. It is vitally importantthat passengers take all hand luggagewith them when they leave the aircraft insuch a situation. This ensures that whenbomb disposal experts go on-board theaircraft, they will not waste valuable timein searching through, and possiblydetonating, innocent luggage. Bombdisposal teams will start at one end of the

aircraft and work through everything intheir search until they find the offendingdevice. Anything that takes their timeunnecessarily en route is endangeringthemselves, the aircraft and thesurrounding airport area.

Should the aircraft be in the air, then thesituation is obviously more serious. If thisis the case then it is generally decidedwhether the aircraft is within one hourfrom landing or whether it is in excess ofone hour from the nearest airport.

In the event of the flight being within onehour of landing, albeit at a different airportfrom its intended destination, then theCaptain should be advised to declare anemergency and land as quickly aspossible. Following this landing, theaircraft should be swiftly evacuated butagain, this should take place, wherepossible, through normal exits. In thissituation, too, passengers should berequested to take all their hand luggagewith them.

If the aircraft is in flight and is further thanone hour from its nearest airport, thendifferent procedures altogether should befollowed. The first priority is to find thedevice.

Assuming the bomb is in the aircraftpassenger cabin, rather than in the hold,the normal procedure is to ask everyoneon board to identify their hand luggage,thus locating any suspect or unclaimedpackages.

Once the suspect device has beenlocated, it is usual for the ground-basedairline staff to put the Captain of theaircraft directly in touch with a bombdisposal expert on the ground. Thedevice should be studied and describedto this expert.

It is important that the person who findsthe device talks to the bomb disposalexpert. This will almost always be a cabinattendant. Information that goes througha third party can easily be distorted andcauses delays while being transferredfrom one to the other. It is also vital thatcareful study is made of the device and asketch drawn so that the least amount oftime is taken in accurately telling thebomb disposal team what the device isactually comprised of.

As much of the device should be studiedand sketched as possible withoutdisturbing it so that all involved can get aclear picture of the situation.

Once it has been officially confirmed thatthis is a potential explosive device, it isusual for the request to be made for thedevice to be moved. It should beremembered that if it is the sort of devicethat was to be detonated by movement ordisturbance, it would have exploded bythis stage from the action of passengersboarding the aircraft and from themovement of the aircraft itself during taxiand take-off. It can be reasonably

11

assumed that this device is on a timedmechanism and is therefore safe to bemoved.

A crew member will usually be required tomove the device and should do so asgently but as swiftly as possible,removing it, in one operation, to the LeastResistance Bomb Location (LRBL) of theaircraft. This varies among differentaircraft types but is a location in which thedevice will cause the least damage ifdetonated, for example, a weak point inthe structure of the airframe such as adoor. The principle behind this is that thedevice will blow the door, preventingstructural damage to the rest of thefuselage that could threaten the safety ofthe aircraft.

Once the device has been positioned atthe Least Resistance Bomb Location, itshould be attached as firmly as possiblewith anything that can be used for such ajob; sticky tape, straps, elastoplast. Oncesecured, the device should then besurrounded by soft items that will causethe least damage should the deviceexplode.

Again, anything that can be found for thisshould be used, for the depth of thepacking around the suspicious objectshould exceed eight feet in all directions.Pillows, blankets, seat cushions andclothing are all ideal and should bepacked in as tightly as possible. This softpacking should then be contained as wellas possible by surrounding the wholearea with curtains.

Passengers closest to the device should,if at all possible, be moved away and allpassengers should be seated on their

seats with the cushions removed. Apartfrom using the cushions as packing,lowering passengers in the seat will helpprotect them from any flying debris thatcould be caused by a blast.Research has shown that passengersseated only eight rows away from adevice secured in the aircraft’s LeastResistance Bomb Location have felt littleor nothing from the blast.The aircraft should then descend to analtitude whereby it will not suffer adecompression should a hole appear inthe fuselage from an explosion. Anemergency should be declared and theaircraft should divert to the nearest airportwhere an evacuation should take place assoon as possible after landing.

Following simple precautions such asthese (and every airline will have its owndetailed procedures of what to do in sucha case) may not lessen the trauma ofbeing on an aircraft with a bomb onboard but warning of the device givescrew members the greatest chance ofpreventing a disaster that can endangerthe safety of the aircraft and the lives ofall on board.Reproduced with acknowledgement to

Cabin Safety Update Vol.2 n..2 1996

Airstaff Associatesin association with

Nigel Bauer & Associates

QUALITY MANAGEMENT FOR OPERATORS *JAR-OPS Quality Systems, documentation & auditing

5 days - LGW - 19 Mar, 04 Jun, 03 Sep, 19 Nov

SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSSMS course for air & ground operators

2 days - LGW - 03 Apr, 07 Nov

AUDITING IN AN OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT *Air & ground operations auditing

3 days - on request or ‘in-company’

AUDIT IMPROVEMENT WORKSHOPExperience sharing & improvement of audit process

2 days - LGW - 05 Apr, 05 Nov

QUALITY FOR SENIOR MANAGEMENTNew Course - JAR Quality Management Accountability

2 days - ‘in-company’ only

For further details including In-Company courses and consultancyor auditing services please contact:

Airstaff Associates:Tel +44 (0) 1780 721223 e-mail: info@airstaff.co.ukFax +44 (0) 1780 720032 www.airstaff.co.uk

Nigel Bauer & Associates:Tel +44 (0) 1243 778121 e-mail: nigel.bauer@nb-a.demon.co.ukFax +44 (0) 1243 789121 www.nb-a.demon.co.uk

* Incorporating Nigel Bauer & Associates IRCA certificated Internal Auditor Training course

UK FLIGHT SAFETY COMMITTEE

ANNUAL SEMINAR 2001

GEARING UP FOR SAFE GROWTH

10/11th October 2001The Radisson Edwardian Hotel Heathrow

Seminar ObjectiveThis Seminar focuses on evolving safety strategies to meet this forecast growth.Resources like Infrastructure, Facilities and especially Trained Personnel, will need to becommitted to provide continued safe solutions.

Provisional Programme10TH OCTOBER 2001

1530 – 1700 Registration 2000hrs Seminar DinnerThis will take place in the Hotel Foyer with After Dinner Speaker

11TH OCTOBER 2001

0800 – 0845 Registration

Session Chairman - Capt.Steve Solomon, Airtours

0900 – 0910 Opening RemarksChairman UKFSC

0910 – 0920 Keynote SpeechRt.Hon.The Lord Clinton-Davis PC

0920 – 0940 Expansion with Safety

0940 – 1010 Regulation and Legislation -Who has the Plan?Peter Hunt - CAA-SRG

1010 – 1040 Pilot Selection and Training

1040 – 1100 Refreshment Break

1100 – 1140 Engineers - RecruitmentSelection and Training

1140 – 1200 GATCO

1200 – 1245 Discussion

1245 – 1400 Lunch

1400 – 1420 Safety at Airports

1420 – 1450 Outsourced Services

1450 – 1520 SummaryPeter Martin

1520 – 1550 Discussion

1550 Closing RemarksChairman UKFSC

Delegate Fees (including Dinner): UKFSC Members £125 - Non-UKFSC Members £250.

Registration Form and finalised Programme will be published in the June issue of FOCUS or visit our Website at www.ukfsc.co.uk.

12

THE GUILD OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL OFFICERS

This year the GATCO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE and BALPA GATCO FORUM will be heldat the RADISSON EDWARDIAN HOTEL at HEATHROW AIRPORT.

THURSDAY 11TH OCTOBER 20011900-2300

THE ANNUAL BALPA GATCO FORUM‘AIRSPACE CAPACITY and the ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.’

FRIDAY 12TH OCTOBER 20010900-1700

THE GATCO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE‘SAFE, ORDERLY and ADEQUATELY STAFFED?

How to overcome the ATCO shortage and meet capacity demands.’

FOR FURTHER DETAILS AND REGISTRATION INFORMATION:

MRS DEBBIE ORME TEL/FAX: 01753 8532093 MARY’S COTTAGES e-mail conferences@gatco.org DEDWORTH ROADWINDSORBERKSHIRE SL4 4LAUNITED KINGDOM

13

14

Lower Back Pain is a Common complaint, But Precautionary PracticesHelp Pilots Cope Some ailments may be the result of poor posture, stress, lack of exercise or improper design of work space.

Most people experience lower back painsometime during their adult lives. Inindustrialized countries, more than 60percent of the population admits tohaving had back pain.1 In the UnitedStates, problems affecting the lower backare the leading cause of disability forpeople under age 45 2and in England,back pain is the leading cause ofdisability for people of all ages.3

Although data are not available on flightcrewmembers with lower back pain, thenumbers presumably are similar to thosefor the general population, and severalstudies -primarily involving flightcrewmembers on military helicopters -have attempted to gauge the frequency ofback pain among pilots.

The studies have found that:Of 131 Australian military helicopter pilotsresponding to a 69-question survey, 16percent reported regular back painassociated with flying, 28 percentreported “back discomfort,” and 39percent reported “occasional” back pain.Eighty-five percent of those who reportedback pain while flying said that theirailment was related to flying, and almostone-third said that flying was detrimentalto their health:4

Of 7,675 U.S. Navy flight crewmemberson helicopters and airplanes, 2.2 percent,or 171 crewmembers, were diagnosedwith back problems. The most frequentdiagnosis (44.4 percent) wasintervertebral disk disorder, a categorythat includes slipped disks anddegenerated disks. Other commondiagnoses were dorsopathies or backdiseases (25.1 percent), and curvature ofthe spine (15.2 percent). Flight engineerswere more likely than other crewmembers

to have had diagnoses of backproblems;5 and, In-flight back painoccurs in 13 percent of all U.S. Navypilots. The U.S. Naval OperationalMedicine Institute determined thathelicopter pilots report a greaterincidence of back pain than pilots of otherNavy aircraft, probably becausehelicopter pilots are exposed more oftento aircraft vibrations.6

“Back pain is well-known, at least in theWestern world, as being a widespreadproblem in all people,” said Claus Curdt-Christiansen, M.D, chief of theInternational Civil Aviation OrganizationAviation Medicine Section. “Pilots [likeother] ... people who are confined to asitting position [at work] are morevulnerable [to back pain].”7

Don Hudson, M.D, air medical adviser forthe Air Line Pilots Association,International, said that, although back painis a relatively common complaint amongairline pilots, determining the source of thepain is difficult. Back pain could be relatedto any number of factors, including anindividual pilot’s physical condition,posture and stress level, the pain is notnecessarily job-related, Hudson said.8

“It’s hard to say [that a pilot’s back pain]is due to flying, as opposed to [the backpain experienced by] a doctor sitting at adesk,” Hudson said.

Nevertheless, a biomechanical analysis ofthe dimensions of pilot seats in five typesof aircraft (Airbus A310, Boeing 737,Boeing 747-300, Boeing 747-400 [B-747-400] and McDonnell Douglas DC-10) saidthat the seats do not meet basicbiomechanical design criteria.9

by Stanley R Mohler MD

Preventing Lower Back Pain

The following are recommendations foravoiding lower back pain:

Excercise. A reasonable physical-conditioning program, along withflexibility excercises, will help strengthenthe lower back;

Maintain a weight that is inproportion to height;

When lifting an object, keep thespine in a vertical position and squat nearthe object being lifted. Raise the objectslowly, using the power of the legs - notthe back - to accomplish the task. Beforelifting an especially heavy object, stretchand flex the back muscles;

When sitting, keep the spinerelatively straight. Sit in a straight-backedchair that offers firm back support.

When standing, place the feet as farapart as the shoulders. Periodically shiftthe weight from one foot to another;

Sleep on a firm, flat mattress, onyour side, with legs bent, and with a smallpillow between the knees;

When leaning forward, lean from thehips, not the waist, and keep the back andneck straight and,

If pain is experienced during thelifting or some other movement, stop theactivity.

- Stanley R. Mohler, M.D.

15

The analysis involved comparing thedimensions of the measured pilot seatswith biomechanical and anthropometricstandards (standards that involve the waya body moves to accomplish certaintasks and the precise measurement ofvarious body parts). The measurementsfocused largely on the height and depthof seats, the height and depth ofbackrests and the height of lumbarsupports and armrests.

The analysis said that pilot seats generallycould be made more comfortable bymaking portions of the seats flatter, raisinglumbar supports, improving theadjustability of armrests and modifying theangle at which the seats are tilted.

Nevertheless, consideration of thebiomechanical requirements is not theonly factor in establishing criteria forcomfortable seats, said Darcy Hilby, aBoeing engineer in the ergonomics groupfor design of the Boeing 777 (B-777).Hilby said that standards for pilot seatsand observer seats on the B-777 weredeveloped after interviews with pilots whofly transoceanic flights in Boeing 747 -400s. The pilots were asked howcomfortable the B-747 flight-deck seatswere during long flights.10

“The outcome ... was that they thoughtthe B -747-400 seats were prettycomfortable,” Hilby said.

‘As a result, design standards for B-777seats were based on the B-747 seatdesign, also taking into consideration therequirements established by the U.S.Federal Aviation Administration that theseats be capable of withstanding certainforces in an accident,’ she said.

Ipeco Europe, which manufactured thepilot seats for the B -777, said that theseats include lumbar supports that canbe adjusted vertically and horizontally: aseat-back with an adjustable degree ofrecline; adjustable, stowable armrests;adjustable thigh supports; horizontal,vertical and lateral seat adjustments; andadjustable headrests.11

Regardless of the source of lower backpain, a number of precautionarypractices, including proper exercise andproper posture can help crewmembersprevent pain (see “Preventing Lower BackPain”). Most precautions apply to peoplein all professions not just to pilots, saidCurdt-Christiansen and pilots often arelimited in their ability to implement one ofthe most useful methods of fighting lowerback pain - changing position bystanding or by going for a walk.12

Diana Cronan, a spokeswoman for the AirTransport Association of America, saidthat many airlines have taken steps toaddress ergonomic issues, includingrecommending isometrics and otherexercises that pilots can do in their seatsand supplying inflatable cushions toprovide additional lumbar support.13

Some airlines also have hired ergonomicsspecialists to advise pilots and otherairline employees about how to performtheir tasks and adjust their equipment inways that will provide ergonomic benefits.

The back is supported by seven cervicalvertebrae, 12 thoracic vertebrae, fivelumbar vertebrae and five fused sacralvertebrae (Figure 1). At the lower end ofthe vertebral column is the coccyx. ortailbone, a unit of four small, fusedvertebrae.

The lower back, or lumbar region, is thefocus of postural forces when anindividual stands, sits or lifts; therefore,most back problems are associated withthe lower back.Back problems can result from a singleexcessive-force injury or from the gradualaccumulation of small injuries that

coalesce so that their symptoms becomeapparent simultaneously. In manyinstances, the back problems can betraced to improper methods of lifting,sitting, standing or even sleeping.

Improper lifting consists of leaningforward to pick up an object and usingthe back muscles to assert the primarylifting power. This strains the lower back

FFiigguurree 11

and presents the risk of damagingligaments and tendons. The heavier theobject being lifted and the greater theacceleration of the lifting motion, thegreater the force through the back. Theextra force being placed on theabdominal side of the intervertebral diskspresents the risk of disk rupture to therear. Proper lifting involves keeping thespine in a vertical position and squattingnear the object, keeping the object closeto the body and raising it by using thepower of the legs. The possibility of injurycan be minimized by spending a fewminutes stretching, flexing and extendingthe back before lifting a heavy object.

Improper sitting - for example, slouching ina chair - puts bending forces on the frontof the lower spine. Proper sitting involvesmaintaining a posture that assures arelatively straight spine. Proper sitting at aworkstation - or on the flight deck involveshaving aircraft controls, instruments and

the general layout ofthe work area,including the seatingstructure, comfortablyarranged for theindividual operator.

The proper posture forstanding involvesplacing the feet as farapart as the shouldersand periodicallyshifting the weightfrom one foot toanother.

Improper reclining orsleeping positionsplace extra force onthe lower back, andthe problem isaggravated by

sleeping on a mattress that is too hard ortoo soft. The bed should be relatively firmbut should yield somewhat to the body.

Among pilots, back pain typically isexperienced first as a dull ache in thelower back. The pain can increase inintensity if the pilot continues flying, andsometimes pain spreads to the thoracicvertebrae, the shoulders and the neck.

Although in many medical cases thecauses of back pain cannot bedetermined, reports of lower hack painamong New York Airways helicopter pilotswere traced to the arrangement of thecockpit in their Piasecki helicopters.14

The helicopters originally were designedas single-pilot military aircraft and latermodified for civilian use by installing twoseats.

In 1968, six of the 12 pilots who flew thehelicopters filed for medical disabilitybecause of back problems; some of theother six pilots also had experiencedback pain. Observations of their flightsrevealed that anti-torque pedals for thetwo flight crewmembers were offsettoward the midline of the cockpit so thatthe pilots had to turn their bodies tooperate the pedals. The twisting force onthe spine was aggravated by othermovements needed to operate the cyclicand the collective. Additional forces wereimposed by undamped vibrations throughthe cockpit seats.

Because of flight schedules that involvedshuttling airline passengers among thethree airports serving metropolitan NewYork, New York. U.S. amid a New Yorkoffice building owned by Pan AmericanWorld Airways crewmembers typicallyconducted several takeoffs and landingsevery hour, and they had little opportunityduring the workday to leave the cockpit tostretch their back muscles or to exercisein any other meaningful way.

The problems were corrected by theintroduction of new equipment -helicopters with anti-torque pedalscentered in front of each pilot and with adecreased level of seat vibration. Withinweeks, the ailing pilots had stoppedexperiencing back pain.

In recent years airlines have becomeincreasingly responsive to ergonomicissues, said Herbert R Meyer, seniortechnical officer at the InternationalFederation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations(IFALPA).15

IFALPA adopted a policy in 1996recommending that all flight-deck seats

16

be designed “to support the body of thepilot in all ergonomically desirable ways.”

“Seats should be designed so as topermit full freedom of movement, in orderfor the pilot to perform the duties andfunctions in a satisfactory manner” thepolicy said. “Seat materials should bedesigned to ensure the pilot’s health andcomfort, to reduce fatigue and tominimize vibration transmission.”

Besides the 1968 incident of back painexperienced by the New York Airwayshelicopter pilots, a 1994 study of flight-deck seating for Qantas Airways flightcrews cited pilots’ complaints of

discomfort and lower back pain duringmiddle-range flights and long-rangeflights but did not identify the cause of thediscomfort.16

The study compared the areas of painand discomfort identified by the Qantaspilots and said that the problem was aresult of the failure of flight-deck seats tomeet the biomechanical requirements ofthe lower back.

Proper ergonomic design is not, in itself,the answer to all pilot back problems saidCurt Graeber, Boeing’s chief engineer forhuman factors.17

“There are a lot of variables in howpeople sit on flight decks,” Graeber said.

An individual pilot’s posture - and whetherhe or she uses the equipment in themanner intended to receive the benefitsof its ergonomic design - is one of thosevariables, Graeber said.

Other factors that can contribute to lowerback pain include:Lack of physical conditioning - Poormuscle tone: weak ligaments andtendons: and a lack of joint, limb andback flexibility increase the chances ofback injury and of the development ofchronic discomfort:

Obesity - Excessive abdominal fat tendsto place chronic forces on the lower back.Ideally an individual’s weight and bodymass index (a formula that calculates therelationship between a person’s heightand weight) should be within the rangerecommended by standard health charts

Poor nutrition - Insufficient minerals in thediet can result in loss of calcium from thebones and can lead to skeletal injuries:

Chronic cough - Chronic implosivecoughing which sometimes alsocharacterizes smokers, places repeatedsharp stresses on the lower spine thatcan magnify other stresses and lead toback disease;

Alcohol abuse - Ethyl alcohol has adversetoxic effects on muscle and nerve tissues.Decreased coordination, coupled with thetoxic effects on body tissues, can lead tooverstressed back muscles. Alcohol alsois associated with falls, which can lead toback injuries, and with impairedreasoning, which can lead to unwisedecisions to undertake physically stressfullifting;

Variations in leg length - If an individualhas significant asymmetry between theleft leg and right leg, a pelvic side tilt canresult, leading to lower back pain. Use ofa simple, properly sized heel wedge orfoot wedge inside the shoe on the foot ofthe shorter leg often can alleviate backdiscomfort;

Osteoarthritis - Repeated injury tocartilage, the material that lines bone jointsurfaces, gradually fragments thecartilage and results in osteoarthritiswhich causes pain when joints aremoved. Osteoarthritis can he preventedby warm-up and flexibility exercises,which spread lubricating fluid across thejoint cartilage surfaces, minimizing thefriction of movement and subsequentinjury.

FFiigguurree 22

17

18

Rheumatoid spondylitis and ankylosingspondylitis - An inflammation of the jointsbetween the vertebrae or between thespine and the pelvis, most often inherited,eventually causes the affected vertebraeto fuse. Proper treatment helps preventprogression of the disease.

Degenerated vertebral disk - A shock-absorbing material between the diskshelps spread the load that is placed onthe spine and helps absorbbiomechanical shocks. The disks containliving cells, and daily activities pumpnutrients into the disks and wastematerials out of them. Inadequateexercise is unhealthy for the disk materialand may promote degenerative changesin disks, including arthritic changes in thespine. Excessive bending or contortioncan cause dislocation of a disk,producing pain and possibly resulting inthe need for surgery or other treatment.Because the disk material and otherspinal components are not subject tocompression while a person is sleeping,an individual’s height generally is 0.75inch (1.9 centimeters) more in themorning than at night. Daily activities tend

to compress the upright spine, slowlydecreasing an individual’s height: and.

Osteoporosis - Poor nutrition, lack ofexercise, a deficiency of calcium andcertain hormonal factors may lead to aweakening of bone density known asosteoporosis. Pursuing an active, healthylifestyle and obtaining a bone-densityscreening if back pain develops maydetermine if osteoporosis is present andwhether countermeasures are required.

Lower back pain is a common complaint,during some stage of their adult lives, formost people. including pilots.

Nevertheless, precautionary practices canhelp flight crewmembers and others preventpain or reduce its intensity or its frequency.

References and Notes

Andes, I. The Complete Book of Fitness.New York, N.Y., U.S.: Three Rivers Press,1999. 1-4770.

Ribak, J.; Rayman, R.; Froom, P.Occupational Health in Aviation. New York,N.Y., U.S.: Academic Press, 1995. 1-238.

1. Bowden, Timothy. “Back Pain inHelicopter Aircrew: A Literature Review.”Aviation, Space and EnvironmentalMedicine Volume 58 (May 1987): 461-467.

2. Agency for Health Care Policy andResearch, National Institutes of Health.“Clinical Practice Guidelines: Acute LowBack Problems in Adults, ExecutiveSummary.” Washington, D.C., U.S.

3. “BackCare, The National Organisationfor Healthy Backs. “BackFacts: Back PainCan Affect Us All.” Teddington,Middlesex, England.

4, Thomae, M.K.; Porteous, J.E.; Brock,J.R.; Allen, G.D.; Heller. R.F. “Back Pain inAustralian Military Helicopter Pilots: APreliminary Study.” Aviation, Space andEnvironmental Medicine Volume 69 (May1998): 468-473.

5. Simon-Arndt, CM.; Hourani, L.L.“Aircraft Type and Diagnosed BackDisorders in U.S. Navy Pilots andAircrew.” Aviation, Space andEnvironmental Medicine Volume 68(November 1997): 1012-1018.

6. Simon-Arndt et al.

7. Curdt-Christiansen, Claus, M.D.Telephone interview by Werfelman, Linda.Alexandria, Virginia, U.S., May 4, 2000.Flight Safety Foundation, Alexandria,Virginia, U.S.

8. Hudson, Don, M.D. Telephoneinterview by Werfelman, Linda.Alexandria, Virginia, U.S., April 20, 2000.Flight Safety Foundation, Alexandria,Virginia, U.S.

19

9. Goossens, R.H.M.; Snijders, C.J.;Fransen, T. “Biomechanical Analysis ofthe Dimensions of Pilot Seats in CivilAircraft.” Applied Ergonomics Volume 31(2000): 9-14.

10. Hilby, Darcy L. Telephone interviewwith Werfelman, Linda. Alexandria,Virginia, U.S. May 11, 2000. Flight SafetyFoundation, Alexandria, Virginia. U.S.

11. Ipeco Europe. “Products: CommercialJet Transport.” Southend on Sea, Essex,England.

12. Curdt-Christiansen.

13.Cronan, Diana. Telephone interview byWerfelman, Linda. Alexandria, Virginia,U.S. May 12, 2000. Flight SafetyFoundation, Alexandria. Virginia, U.S.

14. The author conducted the analysis ofthe back pain affecting the New YorkAirways helicopter pilots. At the time, theauthor was chief of the U.S. FederalAviation Administration AeromedicalApplications Division.

15. Meyer, Herbert R. Personalcorrespondence and telephone interviewwith Werfelman, Linda. Alexandria,Virginia, U.S. May 11. 2000, and May 15,

2000. Flight Safety Foundation,Alexandria. Virginia, U.S.

16. Lusted, M.; Healy, S.; Mandrjik, J.A.“Evaluation of the Seating of QantasFlight Deck Crew.” Applied ErgonomicsVolume 25 (1994): 275-282. (Cited inGoossens et al., 9.)

17. Graeber, Curt. Telephone interviewwith Werfelman, Linda. Alexandria,Virginia, U.S. May 9. 2000. Flight SafetyFoundation, Alexandria, Virginia, U.S.

About the Author

Stanley R. Mohler, M.D., is a professor,vice chairman and director of aerospacemedicine at Wright State UniversitySchool of Medicine in Dayton, Ohio,U.S.

Mohler, who holds an airline transport pilotcertificate and a flight instructor certificate,was director of the U.S. Federal AviationAgency’s Civil Aviation Medicine ResearchInstitute (now the U.S. Federal AviationAdministration‘s Civil AeromedicalInstitute) for five years and chief of theAeromedical Applications Division, inWashington, D.C., U.S., for 13 years.

Mohler received the 1998 Flight SafetyFoundation Cecil A. Brownlow PublicationAward .for journalism that enhancesaviation safety awareness.

Further Reading From FSF Publications

Dell, Geoff . “Survey of Airline BaggageHandlers Suggests Methods to PreventBack Injuries.” AirportOperations Volume 24 (September-October 1998).

This article is reprinted withacknowledgement to Flight SafetyFoundation’s May-June 2000 issue ofHuman Factors & Aviation Medicine.

NEED TO SUB CHARTER? TAKE OFF WITH BWABWA are able to cover any sub charteror leasing requirement . . .

• LACK OF AVAILABILITY

• LAST MINUTE AOG COVER

• MARKET TESTING

• MAINTENANCE COVER

Our fleet is available, long or short term to support your airline operation worldwide.

Please contact Mike Sessions, Sales Director • VISCOUNT HOUSE • LONDON SOUTHEND AIRPORT • ESSEX SS2 6YL • ENGLAND • www.british-world.com • SITA. SENSCVF/SENOPVF

T E L : + 4 4 ( 0 ) 1 7 0 2 3 5 4 4 3 5 F A X : + 4 4 ( 0 ) 1 7 0 2 3 5 0 1 9 4

B 737-300 148 seat

BAe ATP (QC) 66 / 68 seat Freight 6,600 kgs

BAC (BAe) 1-11 (500) 114 / 119 seat99 seat club class 87 seat business class

Quick Guide to the Law - For Pilots

20

The following “quick guide” advice isprovided for pilots of UK registeredaircraft who have problems with:

Disruptive Passengers

Prevention - the overall aim is toPREVENT disruption. People who aredisorderly and/or drunk when boarding anaircraft are a “risk”. It is your decision howeffectively you manage the risk.

Most airlines have “Disruptive PassengerProtocols” organised with the police. Thefollowing is extracted from such aprotocol.

Inbound Flights

To assist the UK police in providing thecorrect response to an incident, thefollowing information should, wherepossible, be obtained and forwarded tothe police at the time of your first requestfor assistance:

• What is the precise nature of theincident, including any injuries whichmay have been sustained?

• What is the name and seat number ofthe offender(s)?

• What action has been taken by crewmembers, or other assistance given bypassengers?

• What are the details of all crew andpassengers involved?

• Who is the principal witness? (If not

interviewed immediately they shouldbe made available at a later time forthe purpose of obtaining statements ofevidence. In the event of a witness notbeing available for a court case, dueto travelling distance to the court [i.e.they live outside the UK], then provi-sion can be made for the statementmade by that witness to be admissiblein evidence (under Section 23,Criminal Justice Act 1988). You shouldtherefore be aware that a witness doesnot always have to attend court inperson).

• Advise your crew members whowitnessed the incident to make animmediate written record of thecircumstances including wordsthat were said, and what peoplewere seen to do (diagrams canalso be used). Accurate “originalnotes” are very useful for asuccessful prosecution.

Outbound Flights

You can still instigate action against anindividual who is disruptive on a flightoutbound from the UK:

• Get all details as for an inbound flight(see above);

• You have an option to report thematter to the police at the destinationairport, or to send a report later to thepolice at the UK airport from which youdeparted - your decision will be de-pendent upon seriousness of the cir-cumstances, urgency and companypolicy.

• Upon return of the aircraft to the UK,

all details should be passed to the UKpolice who will then make the neces-sary arrangements to meet andinterview the offender(s) upon theirreturn to the UK. This will allow thepolice to obtain statements of evi-dence from crew members involvedwithout adverse disruption to theirschedules.

All the criminal offences which can takeplace on the ground in public places cantake place on your aircraft. These include:

Murder, assault, rape, sexual assault,arson, criminal damage, theft, robbery,and a wide variety of public orderoffences such as affray, threateningand abusive words and behaviour,conduct causing harassment distressand alarm, etc.

Your passengers can be victims of thesecrimes as much as you, your crew, andyour airline. Bear in mind that if you oryour staff do not report the matters listedabove to the police, the passengers whoare victims almost certainly will.

More usually you will be concerned withthe following offences which are for theprotection and safety of you, your crew,your passengers and your aircraft.

The really serious “inflight” offences arefortunately extremely rare - they includehijacking, and damaging or endangeringan aircraft with intent to do so (plus anumber of other offences under theAviation Security Act 1982). “In flight”, under this Act means any period from themoment when all external doors areclosed following embarkation, until themoment when any such doors areopened for disembarkation.

21

The more usual offences include thoseunder the Air Navigation Order 1995. Forthis Act “Inflight” means from themoment when after the embarkation of itscrew for the purpose of tasking off, theaircraft first moves under its own power,until the moment when it comes to restafter landing. The offences include:

• Endangering the safety of anaircraft and persons therein - Aperson shall not recklessly ORnegligently act in a manner likely toendanger an aircraft OR any persontherein, Article 55 Air Navigation Order,1995.

• Drunkenness in aircraft - A personshall not enter any aircraft when drunkOR be drunk in any aircraft. Article57(1) Air Navigation Order, 1995.

• Drunkenness in aircraft by CREW -A person shall not when acting as amember of the crew of any aircraft, ORbeing carried in any aircraft for thepurpose of so acting, be under theinfluence of drink, OR a drug to suchan extent as to impair his capacity soto act. Article 57(2) Air NavigationOrder, 1995.

• Smoking in an aircraft - A personshall not smoke in any compartment ofan aircraft registered in the UK at atime when smoking is prohibited inthat compartment by a notice to thateffect exhibited by or on behalf of thecommander of the aircraft. Article58(2) Air Navigation Order, 1995.

• Duty to obey commands of aircraftcommander - It is an offence for a

person in an aircraft registered in theUK to disobey all lawful commandswhich the commander of that aircraftmay give for the purpose of securingthe safety of the aircraft and ofpersons OR property carried thereinOR the safety, efficiency or regularity ofair navigation. Article 59 Air NavigationOrder, 1995.

• Acting in a disruptive manner - Noperson shall while in an aircraft:

(a) use any threatening , abusive orinsulting words towards a member ofthe crew of the aircraft;

(b) behave in a threatening, abusive,insulting or disorderly manner towardsa member of the crew of the aircraft;

(c) intentionally interfere with theperformance by a member of the crewof the aircraft of his duties. Article 59AAir Navigation Order (5th Amendment),1999.

• Stowaways - A person shall notsecrete himself for the purpose ofbeing carried in an aircraft without theconsent of either the operator ORcommander OR any other personentitled to give consent to his beingcarried in the aircraft. Article 60 AirNavigation Order, 1995.

• Restraint of disruptive passengers- Where the commander of an aircraft“in flight” has reasonable grounds; anyperson on board has done OR isabout to do any act which mayjeopardise the safety of aircraft,

passengers, property, good order,discipline (not political, racial, religiousdiscrimination) he may take reason-able measures including restraint(provided the person is released onlanding AND appropriate authoritiesare notified). Section 94 Civil AviationAct, 1982.

DO NOT FORGET

If you believe it is illegal itprobably is.

Get your crew to gather the evidenceand the police/Crown ProsecutionService will decide the actual offencefor which someone is prosecuted.

What has been done?

What has been said?

Who did and said what?

This reference supplied by the GreaterManchester Police.

22

The Greater Manchester Police strategyfor dealing with disruptive passengers is:

Prevention - which includes all aspectswhich can be tackled within an airportand onboard an aircraft.

Information -- which includes thecollection and analysis of data aboutincidents (not only about those dealt withby the Courts).

Enforcement - which includes actiontaken by airlines, the police, the CivilAviation Authority, airport authorities, andcommercial businesses.

The Greater Manchester Policeemphasise PREVENTION.

Prevention

We have put the following preventativemeasures in place:

1. We seek continued support from staffat all bars and retail outlets.

Advisory notices have been placedwarning customers about theconsequences of being drunk andintending to board an aircraft.

Licensees have been asked to remindtheir staff to use discretion and torecognise that drinking and boisterousbehaviour are for some people a largepart of enjoying a holiday but that thebehaviour can become illegal in certaincircumstances.

Licensees have been asked to informtheir staff that they can contact the policecontrol room on ext 5555 when theybelieve “problems are brewing” - ratherthan waiting for something to actuallyhappen. We will respond with a policepresence.

Licensees have been asked to remind alltheir bar staff of their obligations underthe Licensing Act to refuse to servepeople who are drunk.

Licensees have been asked to informGMP of the dates and times when they

perceive the greatest difficulties so thatwe may arrange a police presence.

2. We seek the support of Airlines andHandling Agents:

Airlines have been asked to inform us ofthe dates, days and/or times of flightswhich are likely to cause some difficulties,so that we may arrange a policepresence.

Airlines have been asked to remind theirstaff - particularly Gate Staff - that theymay contact the police control room onext 5555 to ask for a police presencewhen they need support in dealing with,or advising passengers, who are eitherdrunk or acting in an inappropriatemanner.

Airlines have been asked to remind theirstaff about the Disruptive PassengerProtocol and the obligations of their staffto refuse to carry passengers who aredrunk.

Airlines have been asked to remind theirstaff to exercise appropriate caution inserving people too much intoxicatingdrink inflight.

3. For our part the Greater ManchesterPolice will:

Respond promptly to calls for assistanceand support from service partners.

Provide additional staff when key times,dates, days and locations have beenidentified as potentially difficult.

DDiissrruuppttiivvee PPaasssseennggeerr SSttrraatteeggyy 22000000

23

Use discretion and recognise thatdrinking and boisterous behaviour are forsome people a large part of enjoying aholiday. A balance is struck between whatis appropriate, inappropriate and alsoillegal behaviour.

Target particularly problematicpassengers (and those travelling withthem) to advise them of theconsequences of drunken and disorderlybehaviour - especially inflight. In the firstinstance passengers targeted in this waywill receive a written warning form. If theirbehaviour warrants/attracts further policeattention then their details will be given toGate Staff so they are aware of theidentity of people who may wish to satisfythemselves that the passenger(s) are fit toboard the aircraft.

Record every reported* instance ofdisruptive behaviour landside, airside andinflight to provide information forsubsequent analysis.

Gather data on incidents reported to the

police and analyse the information toprovide a greater insight into the problemand to develop more effective andtargeted police responses.

(*reported to the police).

Information

The GMP gather data on all instances ofdisruptive behaviour landside, airside andinflight, to provide information forsubsequent analysis (see Appendix B).Analysis of the data is made available toservice partners.

Enforcement

The GMP use a variety of methods torespond to disruptive passengers. Themethods include:

• Physical uniform presence in thevicinity

• Verbal advice

• Warning notice

• Final Warning and advice to Gate Staff

• Arrest

All police staff are aware of our prioritiesin respect of this subdivisional objectiveand the contents of the DisruptivePassenger Protocol. All police officers usetheir discretion when deciding upon theappropriate response to reports ofdisruptive passengers.

An award should go to the UnitedAirlines gate agent in Denver forbeing smart and funny, and makingthe point, when confronted by apassenger who probably deserved tofly as cargo.

A crowded United flight wascancelled, and a single agent wasrebooking a long line ofinconvenienced travellers.

Suddenly, an angry passengerpushed his way to the desk. Heslapped his ticket down on thecounter and said, “I HAVE to be on

this flight and it has to be FIRSTCLASS!”

The agent replied “I’m sorry sir, I’ll behappy to try to help you, but I’ve gotto help these folks first, and I’m surewe’ll be able to work something out”.The passenger was unimpressed.He asked loudly, so that thepassengers behind him could hear,“Do you have any idea who I am?”

Without hesitating, the gate agentsmiled and grabbed her publicaddress microphone. “May I have

your attention please?” she began,her voice bellowing throughout theterminal. “We have a passenger hereat the gate WHO DOES NOT KNOWWHO HE IS. If anyone can help himfind his identity, please come to thegate”.

With the folks behind him in linelaughing hysterically, the man glaredat the United agent, gritted his teethand swore **** you! Withoutflinching, she smiled and said, “I’msorry sir, but you’ll have to stand inline for that, too”.

24

Introduction

A Special Objective Check (SOC) on UKair operators’ fuel planning policies wascarried out in the Summer of 2000. Theaim was to determine how operators hadbased their policies upon therequirements prescribed in Joint AviationRequirements - Operations 1 (JAR-OPS1) and how they had presented theinformation in company computer-generated pilot navigation logs. Fourteenoperators’ policies were reviewed andcompared against the same aeroplanetypes. The SOC also asked questionswhich reflected concerns raised in lettersto the Confidential Human FactorsIncident Reporting Programme (CHIRP).

JAR-OPS 1

The text of JAR-OPS 1.255 prescribes thebasic elements of an operator’s fuelplanning policy. Further guidance for useby operators in drafting their policies iscontained in related Acceptable Means ofCompliance (AMC) and Interpretative andExplanatory Material (IEM). Together,these documents reflect the text of ICAOAnnex 6 Part I paragraph 4.3.6.1, which is:

“All aeroplanes. A flight shall not becommenced unless, taking into accountboth the meteorological conditions andany delays that are expected in flight, theaeroplane carries sufficient fuel and oil toensure that it can safely complete theflight. In addition, a reserve shall becarried to provide for contingencies.”

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) expectsoperators to apply JAR-OPS AMC andIEM guidelines unless alternativeprocedures intended to provide anequivalent level of safety are acceptable

to the Authority. This is no different fromwhen Civil Air Publication (CAP) 360 Part1 was used by the Flight OperationsDepartment (FOD) as the standard bywhich all operators’ fuel policies were tobe specified. In practice, very fewoperators have sought to differ fromimplementing first CAP 360 and thenAMC/IEM guidelines in their operationsmanuals.

The basic elements of a fuel planningpolicy published in JAR-OPS 1 for normalflights are:

A Taxy Fuel This is the total amountof fuel expected to be used prior to takeoff. Local conditions at the departureairfield and APU consumption should betaken into account.

B Trip Fuel This should include:Fuel for take-off and climb fromaerodrome elevation to the initial cruisinglevel/altitude, taking into account theexpected departure routing;Fuel from top of climb to top of descent,including any step climb/descent;Fuel from top of descent to the pointwhere the approach is initiated, takinginto account the expected arrivalprocedure; and,Fuel for approach and landing at thedestination aerodrome.

C Reserve Fuel This should include:Contingency Fuel Because at theplanning stage, not all factors whichcould have an influence on the fuelconsumption to the destinationaerodrome can be foreseen, ContingencyFuel is carried to compensate for itemssuch as:Deviations of an individual aeroplane fromthe expected fuel consumption data;

Deviations from forecast meteorologicalconditions; and,Deviations from planned routings and/orcruising levels/altitudes.

Alternate Fuel This should be carriedonly if a destination alternate is required;

Final Reserve Fuel For aeroplanes withturbine power units, fuel to fly for 30minutes at holding speed at 1500 ftabove the aerodrome elevation in normalconditions; and,

Additional Fuel This should be carriedonly if required by the type of operations,(eg ETOPS);

D Extra Fuel This should be carriedonly if required by the aircraftcommander.

ResultsData from the questionnaires was enteredinto four Tables, each of which matched thefour aspects described above. Arrangedvertically, each pair of types surveyed (fourin the case of the B737s) were placedadjacent to one another to facilitate visualinspection of the results. One ‘block’ ofaeroplane types contained the short- andmedium-haul types (B757, A320, B737,and BAe 146), the other the long-haultypes (B747-400, B747-200 and A330).

Special Objective Check on Air Operators’ Fuel Planning Policies -Summer 2000by Captain Tim Sindall

25

AAnnaallyyssiiss

Horizontal and Vertical Climb Profiles, andContingency Fuel Amounts

The results of this SOC showed that allcomputer-generated plogs but one failedto take full account of the actualdeparture and arrival routings in Trip Fuelcalculations. This begs the question asto whether these inaccuracies could besignificant in terms of fuel burn notaccounted for, and whether provision ismade to ensure that corrections to TripFuel amounts will be made before thetotal fuel required is determined.

Unless the computer program eitherreflects which STAR is expected to beused (as three did) or contains a defaultthat assumes that the longest STAR willbe used (as six did), the Trip Fuel may beinaccurate. Where such inaccuracies areknown to be inherent in the computerprogram and no adjustment is made bythe aircraft commander or despatcher toadjust the amount of Trip Fuel required,then Reserve Fuel may - but should not -have to be relied upon to make up for anydeficiency.

However, it is reasonable to expect anaircraft commander or dispatcher to knowat the planning stage which runway andassociated SID are likely to be used ondeparture and - if the computer programdoes not include this in its calculations -he should be at liberty to increase (or,possibly, to reduce) the Trip Fuelaccordingly. (Seven of the plogs reflectedthe expected or ‘longest’ departureroutings, and three reflected the ‘mostused’.)

The significance of failure to makeadequate provision for extended routingscan be illustrated by comparing theamount of Contingency Fuel carried by atypical short-haul operator, based uponthe greater of 5% of Trip Fuel or aspecified minimum, (and which equatesto about 5 minutes), with the additionaltime spent in the cruise followingdeparture from a runway orientated in theopposite direction to that of the flight planrouting (about 4 minutes). Of course,both times can vary considerably, butunless the commander increases the TripFuel required by the equivalent of 4minutes, his aircraft will have burnt 80% ofthe Contingency Fuel by the time itpasses abeam the departure runway onthe SID routing. Reliance should not beplaced upon the use of Contingency Fuelfor this purpose since the additional trackmiles to be flown/time in the air and theassociated fuel burn are almost certainlyforeseeable. Contingency Fuel should becarried only for unforeseencircumstances.

Recommendation 1 Operators shouldreview their fuel policies to ensurethat, if their computer fuel planningprograms do not take proper account

of the runways and their associatedSIDs and STARs which are likely tobe used ‘on the day’, commanders ordispatchers are required to consideradjusting Trip Fuel amounts so as torectify any deficiencies. Preferably,operators should change theircomputer fuel planning programs toremove or to reduce to negligibleproportions all such inaccuracieswhere these might lead to inadequateamounts of Trip Fuel being calculated.

Unusable and Unavailable Fuel, and theDeclaration of an Emergency

In researching the extent to which fuelquantity indicating systems might misleadflight crews by including unusable andunavailable fuel in the amounts displayed,the SOC revealed that for most aeroplanetypes surveyed this concern wasunfounded. These systems displayedeither only the fuel that could be used orfuel that was less than actually remained.‘Unusable’ in this context should be takento mean fuel that cannot reach the enginedue to tank and fuel line design, and‘unavailable’ means that the fuelindicating system over-reads.

26

However, for two B737 operators,unusable fuel amounts of 68 and 72 kgwere recorded, equating to less than twominutes time in the air. This, it issuggested, would not be significant whencompared with the associated fuel levelsat which the aircraft should have landed(Final Reserve Fuel - about 1200 kg)preceded by the declaration of anemergency.

No unavailable fuel amounts weredeclared - for the reasons stated above.

Requests for a Priority Approach,Declaration of an Emergency, and TypicalHolding/Final Reserve Fuel AmountsAll operators except two (B757 and A330)used Final Reserve Fuel (30 minutes at1500 ft) as a value associated with thedeclaration of an emergency. One of thetwo who did not conform with this formulaused a value that equated to about 37minutes and the other a value thatequated to about 25 minutes. Oneoperator of B747-400 and B747-200aeroplanes specified that a PriorityApproach was to be requested when itseemed likely that the aeroplane wouldland with less than Final Reserve Fuelremaining, declare a PAN call when itseemed certain that this would be so, anda MAYDAY when (if) the fuel on boardreduced to 20 minutes-worth.

Eight other operators specified that thecommander should request a PriorityApproach when it appeared likely that theamount remaining on landing would beless than Final Reserve Fuel. Whilst thereis some merit in having a ‘caution’ areabefore entering a ‘warning’ zone, it restswith the operator to specify clearly at whatpoint a Priority Approach should berequested and the manner in which therequest should be made according to theair traffic environment or region in whichthe aerodrome is situated. The UK, forexample, does not recognise the term‘Fuel Emergency’ and notified flight crewsby means of an Aeronautical InformationCircular (AIC 36/1998 (Pink 170) datedthe 24th of March) that air traffic controlcannot give priority to an aircraft with ashortage of fuel unless an emergency isdeclared.

AIC 36/1998 recommends that adequatereserves of fuel should be carried whenintending to land in the UK at certainairfields where delays should be expectedat times when the associated terminalareas will be busy. This AIC had been re-issued because it again becameapparent that too many aeroplanescontinued to arrive in the vicinity of theirplanned destination with little more thanAlternate and Final Reserve Fuelremaining. Concern remains that thismessage has still not been acted upon tothe extent envisaged: in late September2000 one controller dealt with three fuelshortage PAN calls in one shift.

Recommendation 2 Operators shouldreview their fuel policies to ensurethat adequate provision is madeeither through their computerprograms or by adjustments made byaircraft commanders or dispatchers(acting in accordance with guidance

or instructions specified in operationsmanuals) for the Trip Fuel to include,where appropriate, fuel for use inholding prior to commencing theapproach when there is reason tobelieve that this will occur. Anexample of such circumstances canbe found in AIC 36/1998 (Pink 170).

It should be noted, in the contextdescribed above, that having arrivedoverhead his intended (flight plan)destination, there is, according to JAR-OPS 1, no obligation on the commanderto set off for his planned destinationalternate the very moment that the fuelremaining on board his aircraft reduces tothe sum of Alternate Fuel and FinalReserve Fuel. Rather, the commandercan decide - as may be permitted by theoperator’s fuel management policy -either to divert or else to remain overheadhis destination aerodrome. This choiceexists because it may well be preferableto land at the intended destination withless than the sum of Alternate Fuel andFinal Reserve Fuel as opposed to settingcourse for the destination alternate whenupon arrival Final Reserve Fuel could (butnot necessarily will) be all that remains. Ifdeciding not to divert, the commandercan use Alternate Fuel together with anyunused portion of Contingency Fuel toextend the length of time he may berequired to hold before commencing hisapproach at his planned destination.

Miscellaneous Information Displayed onthe PLOG

Most computer-generated plogsdisplayed important parameters such asERA, cruise profiles, etc, used in fuel plancalculations, and where default programswere employed this information was

27

generally to be found also or instead inmanuals available to flight crews (theoperations manual, flight crew orders,aircraft or flight crew operating manual).

Discussion

Adjustments to Computer-Generated FuelPlan Calculations

Because Contingency Fuel is carried forevents that cannot be foreseen, its useshould not be planned before departureto compensate for needs that canreasonably be identified as likely to resultin an increased fuel burn. Thus, forexample, if an operator makes known hisintention to the commander of an aircraftwhose departure is likely to be delayedthat, once airborne, he should adopt ahigh-speed cruise profile, then the propercourse is that the commander shouldadjust the Trip Fuel sufficient to coverwhat can now be foreseen as a change tothe manner in which the aeroplane will beoperated.

In other circumstances where, possibly,fog has resulted in persistent delays toincoming aircraft and it is known thatarriving aircraft are being held, prudencewould suggest that the commanderadjusts the Trip Fuel so that he is assuredof having an excess on arrival sufficient toenable the aircraft to hold prior to itscommencing an approach.

Company Cultures on Fuel Planningand Usage

Company fuel planning policies variedbetween operators but nothing was seenthat did not accord with the requirementsof JAR-OPS 1 and its associatedguidance material. Less easy to measure

was the ‘company culture’, instructions bythe operator on the priorities he expectedhis aircraft commanders to apply such aswhether or not to uplift Extra Fuel, toaccept enforced delays or to make up forlost time, or to accept additional payloadin place of slightly more generouscalculations of Alternate or ContingencyFuel. Some operators were reported tohave in place ‘league tables’ that ‘ranked’commanders according to the amount offuel they took on departure exceedingthat calculated by the computer program.

The effect of keeping a league table asdescribed exerts a form of pressure oneach individual not to be shown up asbeing different from his colleagues in thefleet and vulnerable to attract attentionfrom his fleet manager. Such perceivedpressure is known to have resulted inpilots departing with less than thatcalculated by the computer-generatedfuel plan so that their position in the tablecould be ‘improved’. To depart on apublic transport flight with less than theflight plan fuel calculated in accordancewith a program accepted by theRegulator as sound - and without goodreason - is likely to be in breach of theterms and conditions under which the AirOperator Certificate was granted. Inshort, such practice places thecontinuance of the Certificate at risk.

Although none of the operators whosepolicies were reviewed in the SOC werereported to have specified unreasonableguidelines on the amount of fuel withwhich commanders might depart, thiswas difficult to reconcile with somereports that had been received from flightcrews. It would seem advisable thatsome operators should do more to gaugethe impact their policies have upon theflight crews they employ and that they

should be prepared to address the issueif it appears likely to prejudice safeoperations.

Recommendation 3 Operators shouldreview their fuel policies to ensurethat, as interpreted by fleet managers,training and line pilots, these do notresult in a perception that aircraft maybe permitted to depart with fuelamounts less than must be calculatedin accordance with formulae specifiedin the operations manual (orequivalent document). Where suchformulae are known not to address allcircumstances that can reasonably beforeseen, pragmatic guidance shouldbe specified to ensure thatappropriate adjustments are made.This review might be managedthrough a schedule applied by theOperations Quality Manager so as toensure that company policy endureswith time.

Conclusion

The results of the Special ObjectiveCheck on Fuel Planning showed that alloperators who were surveyed appliedtheir fuel planning policies in generalaccordance with the JAR-OPS 1requirements and associated guidancematerial, and that such variations asexisted between them reflected the natureof their work and the capabilities of theiraircraft. However, there were some issuesto which it appeared all operators couldaddress their attention, comprising:inaccuracies inherent in many computer-generated pilot navigation logs;inadequate account taken of foreseeableevents; and the manner in which flightcrews interpret their company culture onfuel planning.

UK Flight Safety CommitteeThe Graham Suite, Fairoaks Airport,

Chobham, Woking, Surrey. GU 24 8HXTel: 01276-855193 Fax: 855195

email: ukfsc@freezone.co.uk

Name

Job Title

Company Name

Address

Tel/Fax No email:

Nature of Business

Please enter my subscription to FOCUS from the next issue.I enclose a sterling cheque made payable toFlight Safety Committee or invoice me for the annual Subscription Rate of £12.00 for 4 issues.Plus P & P £2.60 for UK - overseas P & P on application.

Signature

FOCUS Subscription Application

28

This is a story about four people namedEverybody, Somebody, Anybody andNobody.

There was an important job to be doneand Everybody was asked to do it.

Everybody was sure Somebody would doit.

Anybody could have done it, but Nobodydid it.

Somebody got angry about that, becauseit was Everybody’s job.

Everybody thought Anybody could do itbut Nobody realised that Everybodywouldn’t do it.

It ended up that Everybody blamedSomebody when Nobody did whatAnybody could have done.

No Smoking

A 26-year old female passenger onboard a transatlantic flight was arrestedon landing for illegally head-butting acabin crewmember.

The crewmember asked her to stopsmoking on the non-smoking flight; thepassenger refused and then head-buttedthe crewmember when she persisted.

Passenger Assault

A B777 enroute from Newark to Londondiverted to Bangor when a 38-year oldMoroccan passenger began causingtrouble on the flight. He allegedlyassaulted not only other passengers, butmembers of the cabin crew as well.

Assault to Child

A male passenger pleaded guilty tocharges of assault onboard a recenttransatlantic flight. The flight was incruise over the Atlantic when thepassenger assaulted a seven-year-oldgirl.

He was sentenced to six months inprison, fined $5,000 with interest and wasrequired to pay $400 in restitution to thegirl’s parents.

Printed with acknowledgement to

TWA PLANE Safe.

Whose Job is It? CABIN OPERATIONS

EMBRAER RJ 145:WELCOME TO THE FUTURE.

Qualiflyer_4fbg_beschn.epsQualiflyer_4fbg_beschn.eps

For information or reservation contact your local travel agent or Crossair at phone +41 848 85 2000 or www.crossair.com

In 2000 Crossair renews its fleet and introduces a totally new aircraft type: the Embraer RJ 145 regional jet. A modern-technology 50-seater.Two high performance jet engines give the RJ 145 the ability to fly at the same altitudes as long-distance aircraft, up above the clouds where the ride is smooth. Added to this are all of the Crossair in-flight services, like luxurious leather seats, spacious hand baggage bins, and an in-flight galley for warm menus.New jet services.

Email: rjx.marketing@baesystems.com www.bae.regional.co.uk.

The choice for a reliable partner is obvious.

BAE SYSTEMS is uniquely capable of offering a full spectrum of services to meet

the dynamic needs of regional airlines.

● An established manufacturer now offering its third-generation regional jet,

the Avro RJX.

● The world’s largest regional aircraft leasing company with a jet and turboprop

portfolio of over 450 aircraft.

● A state-of-the-art customer support organisation that places the tools to

effectively manage your regional aircraft fleet right at your fingertips.

BAE SYSTEMS - A truly global systems, defence and aerospace company.

IN GOOD HANDS