FEATURE ARTICLE

Guidelines to improve human factors investigations worldwide

The team behind what could become an industry best practice to enhance air safety reveal how a private initiative has taken off.

The exchange of experiences and information about aircraft accident investigations enable the causes to be identified and remedied for the benefit of air safety in the future. Of these, human factors (HF) is key.

Flight crew, maintenance technicians, air traffic controllers, airplane system designers and others have been identified as significant contributors to an event 60 to 70 percent of the time. Even in cases where there are failures in airplane systems that precede a tragedy, accident investigations have revealed that HF contributed to degraded system performance.

To “break the chain”, the industry needs to become even better at understanding and addressing issues in HF. A high standard of investigation into the part played by HF in aircraft accidents would contribute substantially to this end.

In response to this, the International Society of Air Safety Investigators (ISASI) International Working Group on Human Factors is preparing guidance modules for release in 2007 and 2008 which will be the tool to start the virtuous cycle of enhancing air safety further.

Current investigation processes
The need for such guidance material became obvious from a detailed survey into the current state of investigating HF issues done by a small research team at Boeing. Eleven organisations and one airline were interviewed on a range of topics.

On the question of expertise, the survey found pockets of solid capability – two agencies had 10 people with HF training – but generally a lack of in-house expertise – five agencies did not have any HF investigators at all. However, those that did have investigators confirmed that their investigators all received some HF-related training.

On the question of guidelines, four agencies had no guidance documents at all for HF investigations. Another four had one or more checklists (typically one) that investigators could use for identifying potentially important issues. The remaining four agencies actually had an accident investigation manual or a general guidance document.

An idea is born
Boeing’s conclusion was that:

  • HF expertise exists primarily within the larger investigation agencies and is not readily acquired from a consistent source when it is needed. Those with training both in accident investigation and HF issues are too rare for today’s needs.

  • HF guidance is either insufficiently detailed or is being developed within the agencies that have the most expertise (and it is not formally shared outside of that agency).

  • There is no shared framework across agencies for understanding and describing HF issues. Without it, the findings from individual accidents cannot be easily compiled and analysed as a set.

It also found that potential sources of guidance, such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) HF Digest (ICAO 1993) and several recent books on the topic, contained little guidance that could be readily adopted by an investigation agency.

Boeing’s response was to begin developing the HF investigation guidance that most agencies are missing. It laid out a plan to develop a set of individual modules on the following specific HF topics:

  • Data-collection techniques (eg. cognitive interview)
  • HF issues (eg. spatial disorientation)
  • Factors that contribute to  HF problems (eg. fatigue, stress)
  • Analysis techniques (eg. speech frequency analysis)
  • Safety-assessment techniques (eg. barrier analysis)

Facilitating buy-in
Boeing soon realised the best guidance would be ineffective without acceptance by all major stakeholders in commercial aviation accident investigation, including:

  • Airplane manufacturers
  • Accident investigation agencies
  • Aviation regulators
  • Those representing the people who may be “blamed” (pilots, air traffic controllers, maintenance technicians etc)
  • Airlines
  • Aviation safety organisations
  • Training organisations

As part of its efforts to develop an industry solution, it formed an International Human Factors Working Group of HF specialists from the industry and governments.

It also approached the ISASI for assistance and endorsement. Recognising the importance of the initiative, ISASI went a step further and assumed sponsorship of the Working Group, which is now known as the ISASI International Working Group on Human Factors (IIWGHF).

Tapping all resources
ISASI appointed Captain Richard B Stone to head the Working Group and today, he, Dr Randall Mumaw, Boeing’s HF specialist and Dr Mike Walker, Senior Transport Safety Investigator of the Australian Transport Safety Board form the Steering Committee of IIWGHF.

The IIWGHF is currently working with senior scientists from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board in the US, the Marine Casualty Investigation Board in France, the Transportation Safety Board in Canada, Airbus, Cranfield University in the UK and the Aviation Safety Council of Taiwan to create guidance modules for use by accident investigators worldwide. 

The modules may be grouped around three areas: HF investigation fundamentals, HF issues and investigation techniques.

To begin with, the topics of these modules will include:

  • Spatial disorientation/perceptual illusions
  • Stress
  • Effect of drugs
  • Workload
  • Situation awareness
  • Fatigue modeling tools
  • Organisational factors
  • Overview of HF issues
  • Event sequence representation
  • HF of the investigator

Once the modules are written up, they are forwarded to a representative group of industry stakeholders for their review. They will then edit and/or advise so as to reach a consensus that can be applied across the industry. In this way, the IIWGHF hopes to be able to implement significant changes to industry practice as required.

ISASI will also review the material before distributing it to key industry stakeholders. All ICAO States will also receive a copy. Publication of a core set of materials on key HF topics is expected to be published in 2008.

Each module will provide a brief background on the issue and then lead on to practical guidance on techniques. As the modules are conceived as quick, easy-to-use reference documents for investigators, they will be short – between 5 and 10 pages long. They will however include references so that investigators who need more information will be able to access it easily.

The IIWGHF hopes that these materials will achieve a good level of acceptance within the industry (and perhaps within other areas of accident investigation) so as to shape how investigations are conducted and reports are written. Ideally, they will enable the establishment of a well-defined set of expectations on the policies and practices of HF investigations in due course. 

These guidance modules are just the start of what the IIWGHF will be doing to advance safety through investigation of HF. The Working Group envisages another role for itself – to put forward position statements that can establish a standard on how HF issues should be investigated. 

There are a number of potential issues to be addressed. For example, it should be standard that the collection of HF data is not seen as implying that human error is a working hypothesis for the investigation.

Initial interviews of operational personnel involved in the accident or incident such as pilots, air traffic controllers and maintenance technicians should be conducted in a way to maximise the retrieval of information about the event. They should not focus on finding fault with the actions taken or decisions made.

Air safety can always be improved and the IIWGHF will continually be on the lookout to see how it can contribute to this worthy cause.

Author’s biographies:

Dr Randall J Mumaw
Dr Randall J Mumaw is a Human Factors Specialist and Associate Technical Fellow in the Aviation Safety group at Boeing Commercial Airplanes. Dr Mumaw focuses on the human aspect of safety as well as flight deck interface design. He has supported a number of accident investigations that involved significant human performance issues. He is also an author on several patents for new auto flight interface designs.

Captain Richard B Stone
Captain Richard B Stone is the past President of ISASI and currently serves as the Executive Advisor to ISASI’s International Council. Capt Stone has extensive experience in the HF field, dating back to the years he served in the Air Line Pilots Associations’ air safety structure. During his 35 years with Delta Airlines, he helped in the investigation of a number of important accidents.

 < back to top



FEATURE ARTICLE

The changing face of human factors

The discipline, which has meant different things at different times, may even change its name.

The discipline of human factors has been with us for some 150 years and is applicable to many organisational sectors. But it is inherently related to aviation since Wright’s first flight, and its importance in this sector has especially expanded with the design and use of safer aircraft during World War II.

Covering a wide range of applications (and thus, definitions), from the specifics of tool design and interface optimisation (ie. ergonomics in European terminology and human factors in American) to the general of human performance in complex systems, its core seems to be the so-called socio-technical systems, of which aircraft navigation and air traffic control are very good examples. Its scope has been broadened by its extensive use in organisational settings to cover a wide spectrum of issues, albeit in a loose manner.

The restricted definition
From a restricted or purist point-of-view, human factors equal ergonomics. In this perspective, Boff (2006) talks of different generations of human factors development which, although running parallel to each other, also represent actual and future developmental achievement in the discipline.

Generation One is concerned with the physical fit between machine and operator and building better work environments. Generation Two grew from the introduction and development of information technology (IT) systems, where cognitive fit, rather than merely physical fit, became a priority. Yet, the focus of Generation Two is also that of building better work environments.

Generation Three jumps into the realm of cybernetics, where humans and machines go beyond mere interaction to integration with each other. Finally, Generation Four goes beyond that, and alters or modifies humans in order to increase their own capabilities.

Aviation, or at least civil aviation, is concerned with human factors applications in Generations One and Two. Furthermore, human factors applications are more focused on the management of safety than of other relevant outputs such as efficiency and the environment (which are dealt more with technical and technological fixes) or security and health (which are left to specialists outside the socio-technical system).

The wider definition
From a wider point-of-view however, the concept of human factors has been expanded beyond human-machine interaction to a systems understanding of both. A good example of this expansion is Reason’s (1990) work on human error.

His work not only helped expand the relevance of human error in complex systems, but also helped provide a systems perspective in the management of safety. On the negative side however, the work further identified the concept of human factors with that of human error. It also continued emphasising the fallibility of humans when compared with technology while making the concept of human factors less purist, and, thus, less precise.

Nowadays, human factors can be found in numerous references to different issues concerning humans in organisational settings beyond the mere interaction of humans with tools or technologies. Crew Resource Management and its emphasis on communication and cooperation in the cockpit is an example of a blurred human factors approach applied to the interaction of humans with other humans in air navigation.

Thus, from the nominal focus of ergonomics on designing adequate tools, human factors have developed ways of incorporating socio-technical concerns in parallel. In future, it may further enhance human performance in even more complex systems. Meanwhile, the term human factors can refer either to a restricted or a wider perspective, or both.

Beliefs underlying human factors
At the base of human factors is the core belief of adapting tools and technological systems to the needs and, ultimately, to the features of human beings using those tools and systems. An ergonomically engineered tool or system provides not just a user-friendly interface but fosters performance, health and safety.

Of course, the other side of the coin is the related belief of screening and selecting the best person for the tool and job in hand (through selection, training etc) when design and technology cannot account for the whole spectrum of human variability.

These beliefs are equally applicable to the interaction of people with each other and to the interaction of people with other elements in the system. Simply put, human factors involves making the environment function in a way that seems natural to people.

The common understanding of human factors in aviation perpetuates the belief in other areas, namely, that humans are inapt at managing the tools and technical systems that they themselves have engineered. To put it differently – humans have become victims of their own designs.

Certainly, many daily examples as well as research show that humans lose out to machines: they tire sooner, perform more poorly, are more prone to error and so on. The role of human factors is then seen as helping humans to cope with the socio-technical system by making that interaction as natural as possible. However, when design and technological advancements allow, the tendency is to remove human involvement as far as practicable. The folly here is to consider humans as part of the machine or dependent on it, rather than the opposite.

The alternative is to view human factors as designing and advancing technology to support and enhance human capabilities. Under this view, the history of human factors has been one of conquering greater realms of knowledge and application parallel to the technical development of systems. Still, technology goes ahead of its human users, but, such seems to be the nature of technological progress.

Battles and wars on human factors
Human factors have also seen a few battles won or lost, but the war seems to be raging still. For example, human factors training was dropped by the Federal Aviation Administration from the curriculum for certifying aircraft maintenance technicians (Part-145) in the US a few years back.

However, it is still part of the same curriculum in Europe. Notwithstanding this, the latest European-funding round, Framework 7th, has minimised the role of human factors as a priority for funding in the aviation sector and it will probably be lost in the next round, Framework 8th.

Meanwhile, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau is using Reason’s model to guide their investigations into systems precursors for aviation accidents.

New IT systems which are available today may also bring back fresh opportunities to fight lost battles in ergonomics in air navigation and air traffic control. For example, the issue of cockpit displays can be revisited as advances in glass-cockpit technology can make different display configurations available, thus allowing operators to select the ones they feel more comfortable with. Such an opportunity may see past ergonomic recommendations, which were disregarded on the basis of cost and tradition, being progressively implemented.

Human factors in complex systems
The situation we face today is that technological advances and other relevant variables are making the aviation system too complex for the current understanding of humans as separated entities within the system. This complex systems era will have to disregard defining human factors only in terms of ergonomics and human limitations and capabilities when compared to machines.

Instead, it has to start considering machines, IT systems, and humans as stakeholders in the same system. Each of them has capabilities and limitations; each interacts with and depends on the others for better performance. Advancing one performer while disregarding the other will not necessarily make the system safer or more efficient. 

A good example of this is, again, IT systems in aviation. Glass-cockpit technology and other technological automations tend to render the system more opaque to the person – be it pilot, controller or mechanic – interacting with them, with potentially disastrous consequences. One striking characteristic of IT systems is that they are becoming more and more automatic, beyond and even despite, the control of the operator.

Furthermore, with the trend towards shorter time-to-market, IT systems are becoming patchy. Most of us are probably familiar with a manufacturer’s approach to software development; a software version is released without exhaustive testing and patches are provided as needed.

This approach, which in itself is not a bad one, can now be seen as the default approach of practically all software developers and it will permeate the software used for aviation purposes such as navigation and air traffic control, posing challenges to safety, efficiency and other outputs.

Sometimes, these challenges can be annoying and time consuming but, with a visible impact on processes and outputs, it is relatively easy to capture (eg. the automatic editing that some word processors do to an already formatted document).

Other times, however, the system may completely alter correct inputs by the operator in a fashion that is random and opaque to the operator and, thus, difficult to capture (eg. the random rewriting of data of a statistics computer programme).

This latter challenge compromises the operation and its outputs, but, as it is not visible, operators will have fewer chances to correct it. The consequences cannot be blamed as an error of the operator, who did not commit any, but is, at least at the time of operation, a truly technological error.

It is true that mistrust of IT systems has been prevalent in some aviation sectors and already studied, as is the case with traffic controllers. However, much of that mistrust has been due to available technology being unreliable, incomprehensible or burdensome (thus, more of an interface, design or coding issue).

The phenomenon of technological errors, however, has more to do with random effects during the operation itself and will certainly bring new waves of mistrust linked to technologies taking decisions despite the human operator.

Furthermore, IT development is just one field in which the role of humans will require a new, less limiting, definition. With the arrival of the A380 aircraft, for example, a lot of pressure will be put on airports to manage a substantially increased number of people while, at the same time, still downsizing the number of personnel to manage such an operation and without technological fixes or substitutes that could alleviate the task.

Similarly, the increase in air traffic in the oncoming decades will create similar challenges for air traffic controllers.  The rising concern with the environment will also require airlines to operate their aircraft in a more ecologically responsible manner, again without an increase in technological or human expenditure.

Ultimately, the focus on the person as a stakeholder in the aviation system (and not just as a human factor) will be in the context of socio-technical systems rather than that of individual technologies or humans. For example, emphasis will be placed on better international cooperation between airlines and air traffic control to reduce emissions, between airlines and airports to increase efficiency and between airports, airlines and passengers to enhance safety. Such cooperation can only be achieved with all elements in the system working in collaboration, rather than on the relative autonomy of each one.

The positive case for human factors
The positive case for human factors (or the human performer within the system) is that humans are going to become more critical to the system, not as a last resort or as an element whose technical counterpart has not yet been engineered, but as a supervisor searching for human and technological errors and as a manager of the system itself.

As such, talking about human performers in aviation will be more advantageous than talking about human factors. Firstly, it eliminates the negative labels attached to human factors as error prone and with limited capabilities. Secondly, it will prevent previous interpretations of human factors from being identified with the new understanding. And thirdly, it allows for a fresh definition of humans as stakeholders in a system that they have designed, or that they have to operate and manage.

Author’s biography:

 Dr Jose Pérezgonzález is a lecturer of Aviation Human Factors and Aviation Psychology at the School of Aviation in Massey University, New Zealand. He has participated in several European-funded research projects in topics such as aviation efficiency and health and safety management in organisational settings. Founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Knowledge Advancement & Integration, he is currently researching aviation management in New Zealand, as well as aviation occurrence management systems in international circles.

 < back to top

EVENTS@SAA

Experts chart future direction of SAA

The Academy’s International Advisory Council offers advice on emerging training needs to bring SAA to new heights of excellence.

For the second time, the International Advisory Council (IAC) met to brainstorm on how SAA can further develop to better serve national and international training needs.

Nine members, all outstanding aviation experts from the international civil aviation community and two observers met on 9 May 2007 under the chairmanship of Singapore’s Minister for Transport and Second Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Raymond Lim.

Taking off from the inaugural meeting, the IAC reviewed the previous recommendations, some of which had been taken up as well as recent initiatives and developments that have expanded the depth and reach of SAA's programmes. 

It went on to discuss emerging training needs in the aviation industry and training strategies in response to these trends.

The Meeting agreed that there were tremendous opportunities for SAA to develop more programmes on issues such as aviation security, aviation safety and air law with the explosive growth of air transportation in the region.

Singapore's Minister for Transport and Second Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Raymond Lim who chaired the Meeting, said, “SAA has grown significantly from its humble beginnings; both the training programmes and the number of trainees have increased substantially. This IAC meeting is timely to help chart the future direction of SAA.”

He also set high goals for SAA, saying, “Through the Academy, Singapore hopes to play its part to contribute through training and sharing of its expertise and experiences with the rest of the world.”

Concluding the meeting, Minister Lim thanked the IAC members for their generous sharing of views and expertise. He said that SAA would study the many useful suggestions made for incorporation as part of SAA”s continuing efforts to better serve the training needs of the international aviation community.

The second day of the event was devoted to touring the Singapore Air Traffic Control Centre and Changi Airport’s new Terminal 3 as well as informal networking.

Summing up the work of the IAC, its secretary Mr Goh Chin Ee, SAA’s Director, said, “The ideas, suggestions and perspectives shared will certainly help SAA better anticipate the challenges ahead to ensure it continues to stay relevant to its customers.”

The IAC was set up in 2004 with a mandate to steer the SAA as a centre of excellence for training and a venue for sharing of ideas needed by the international civil aviation community to meet the many challenges in an increasingly complex environment.

Present at the Meeting were (left to right):

Mr Goh Chin Ee
Director, SAA

Mr Raymond Benjamin
Executive Secretary, European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)

Prof Dr Paul Dempsey
Director, Institute of Air and Space Law, McGill University

Mr Robert J Aaronson
Director-General, Airports Council International

Capt Carlos Limon
President, International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations

Mr Wong Woon Liong
Director-General, Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS)

Prof Brian O’Keeffe
Adjunct Professor, University of Canberra
Mr Raymond Lim
Minister for Transport and Second Minister for Foreign Affairs, Singapore

Mr Eustacio Fabrega Lopez
President, Latin American Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC)

HE Abdul Aziz Mohd Al-Noaimi
President, Arab Civil Aviation Commission

Mr Marco Ospina Yepez
Secretary, LACAC

Mr Lim Kim Choon
Senior Deputy Director-General, CAAS

Mr Michel Wachenheim
President, ECAC


 < back to top

 

 

EVENTS@SAA

Singapore seals MOU with ECAC

At the sidelines of the International Advisory Council (IAC) meeting, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) in the interests of air safety and security.

The agreement with the 42-member European grouping on 8 May 2007 was signed by Mr Michel Wachenheim, President of ECAC and Mr Wong Woon Liong, Director-General of CAAS.

The MOU serves to establish a framework to enhance the cooperative relations and strengthen the long term partnership between ECAC and CAAS as both parties have a common purpose in promoting the safe, orderly and sustainable development of international civil aviation.

Mr Wong said, “The signing of this MOU is yet another milestone in the partnership between ECAC and CAAS. It provides a structured framework to foster closer cooperation between ECAC Member States and CAAS, through greater exchanges of information, more regular consultations and joint training. We look forward to working more closely with ECAC to further develop safety and security in international civil aviation.”

Areas of collaboration will take the form of “exchanging useful information and agreeing on concrete actions in the fields of cooperation.”

The information exchange covers developments in international civil aviation, in particular focusing on safety and security as well as consultation and participation in each others’ conferences.

As for cooperation in training, joint development and organisation of training courses using the resources and experts of both parties and management of mutual training fellowships and funds will be explored.

 < back to top

 

EVENTS@SAA

Laying the groundwork for the opening of Terminal 3

Excitement over the approaching opening of Changi Airport’s Terminal Three (T3) drew over 200 participants from 10 airport agencies and the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) to a two-day workshop on T3’s operational readiness held on 2–3 April 2007.

The workshop was attended by heads of the different agencies involved in airport operations, from the Operations Commander of the Central Narcotics Bureau and the Head of Operations and Training of the Airport Police Division to CAAS Technical Officers.

“T3 is indeed a very large terminal with many complex systems and sub-systems. Extensive preparations, comprehensive testing and close coordination among all agencies are necessary to ensure its smooth operations,” said Mr Lim Kim Choon, CAAS Senior Deputy Director-General in his welcome address.

He went on to share that “as early as September 2006, a T3 Live Steering Committee was formed to oversee the operational readiness programme for T3. The Steering Committee took a collaborative approach and involved multiple agencies, stakeholders and organisations to ensure that all parties are well aligned and integrated in their preparations.

“The run up to the operations of T3 has been kept on schedule, thanks to the close cooperation of all agencies involved,” he added.

The Munich Airport International Team, renowned for its Operational Readiness Airport Transfer (ORAT) Programme, facilitated the workshop and shared international best practices from their experience in many parts of the world. The team covered topics such as an overview of the organisation and its history of operational readiness and terminal transfer, its approach to ORAT and its Terminal 2 experience.

Speakers from CAAS provided an overview of T3’s concept, design, layout and operations, while speakers from various airport agencies updated participants on the preparation work for T3’s operational readiness.

 

 < back to top



EVENTS@SAA

First on-site training in Latin America

More than 70 aviation regulators, airport operators and airline personnel attended SAA’s Strategic Airport Management Programme held at the National Air and Space Museum in Santiago, Chile on 9–13 April 2007.

This first on-site training in Latin America was opened by Señor José M. Huepe, Director General of Civil Aviation for Chile and jointly organised with the Latin American Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC). The Programme was conducted in English with simultaneous Spanish translation.

The result of a new Memorandum of Understanding between the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) and the LACAC signed in November 2006, the programme gave a strategic perspective of how the various components of the civil aviation industry integrate and interface, with particular focus on the overall approach to managing a modern multi-faceted airport.

Updates on the latest developments in airport management, operations, infrastructure, air transport, air law, airport regulations, aviation security and other issues were also covered to help the participants, who came from 11 LACAC Member States and the International Air Transport Association, to formulate strategies to deal with future challenges.

The two instructors from CAAS, Ms Tan Siew Huay, Head of Legal, and Ms Eileen Poh, Assistant Director (ICAO), shared Changi Airport’s experience as well as international best practices in a structured combination of lectures, group discussions and case studies that was much appreciated. The programme also included a tour of the Santiago International Airport to give participants a better feel of how the theories discussed in the classroom could be applied in an operating environment. 

"Both speakers were very knowledgeable and made this seminar fun. It will be of great assistance to my work," said Mr Mauricio Guerrero Inostroza, Head of Aerodrome La Florida, General Directorate of Civil Aeronautics, Chile.

Mr Mark Rade, Airside Assistant, Airport Authority of Guayaquil, Ecuador was impressed by the speakers’ familiarity with many topics, which he felt was important for these types of seminars. He was glad they were not the kind of specialists who could only speak about their specific field of expertise.

Mr Jaime Altamirano Oyarzún, Head of Tobalaba Aerodrome, General Directorate of Civil Aeronautics, Chile, found the course “an interesting experience.” He said, “I want to learn from business ideas that are better than ours. Through this management programme, I am able to find out more about what other countries are doing,” he said.

 < back to top




EVENTS@SAA

Aeronautical English for testers and practitioners

With the deadline of March 2008 for ICAO’s new standards for language proficiency fast approaching, SAA has geared up its training to meet the different needs of the stakeholders.

SAA has always included Aeronautical English training as part of its programmes as clear communications between air traffic controllers and pilots is essential for safety. However, this has taken on added urgency in view of ICAO’s latest requirement for both controllers and pilots to demonstrate at least a Level 4 language competency based on ICAO’s Rating Scale for Language Proficiency Requirements.

           
Following a Seminar on New Aviation English Proficiency Requirements in January 2004 and a Conference on Aeronautical English in July 2006, SAA has developed two Aeronautical English courses back-to-back. A three-week course on Meeting New ICAO Requirements took place on 5 - 23 March 2007. It was followed by a five-day Train-the-Testers Workshop on 26 - 30 March 2007.

The former comprised two weeks of Aviation English training at the Regional English Language Centre (RELC) and one week of classroom and practical training at SAA. At the end of the course, RELC and SAA conducted a joint assessment to grade each participant according to the ICAO Rating Scale for Language Proficiency Requirements.
           
In addition to focusing on the use of English and common radiotelephony phraseologies, the course gave an overview of ICAO’s manual on implementation and its rating scale and holistic descriptors.

The two courses attracted 28 participants from 12 countries – Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lesotho, Malaysia, Nepal, Romania, Singapore, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand and Timor Leste. Most were trainers or supervisors of air traffic controllers and they all found the content and length of the course just right.

The workshop centred around the skills and tools required to build a suitable test method based on ICAO’s guidance material. This was precisely what the participants found most helpful.

“This workshop has given me ideas on how to conduct the testing of my students in Aviation English, a subject which will be included in our Diploma of Aviation Science,” said Mr Mohd Najib bin Saad, a flying instructor with the Royal Malaysian Air Force.

His compatriot, Mr Loo Chin Oon, Assistant Director of the Civil Aviation College of Malaysia, said he completed the course with a better understanding of the testing methodology.

Meanwhile, Brunei’s Acting Chief Air Traffic Control Officer, Mr Ampuan Hj Hamdzah Bin Ampuan enthused, “This course will undoubtedly assist us in developing our English proficiency test tool kit.”

Other side benefits were also apparent.

Mrs Violeta Aldea, English Language Expert with the Romanian Air Traffic Services Administration said, “It is only during this course that I realised what Level 6 sounds like!” She explained that in Romania, English is learnt as a foreign language.

The second run of the Aeronautical English ‘Meeting New ICAO Requirements’ course and ‘Train-the-Testers Workshop’ will take place on 13–31 August 2007 and 3– 7 September 2007 respectively.

 < back to top




EVENTS@SAA

A hub for international meetings and workshop

SAA hosted three experts’ meetings in different fields of international cooperation in addition to being selected as the venue for am ASEAN-Japan workshop.

ICAO First Meeting of the Western Pacific/South China Sea RVSM Scrutiny Working Group, 29 January–2 February 2007

The newly established Western Pacific/South China Sea Reduced Vertical Separation Minima (RVSM) Scrutiny Working Group met for the first time this year.

Hosted by Singapore, the meeting brought together 30 experts in air traffic management and safety analysis/assessment from China, Indonesia, Japan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Singapore and the US together with representatives of industry associations to discuss Large Height Deviation (LHD) issues with a view to improving safety and efficiency on RVSM operations in the region.

Set up by the Asia Pacific Air Navigation Planning and Implementation Regional Group, the Singapore meeting concluded with a clearer understanding on LHD problems encountered in the region.

Although the scrutiny working group agreed that LHD problems have nothing to do with the current single-alternate modified Flight Level Orientation Scheme (FLOS), the working group will review the current FLOS to address some concerns faced by a State. However, the revised FLOS should not impact safety, reduce capacity and efficiency. This will be one of the items on the agenda at the next meeting scheduled for June 2007.

Informal Aviation Security Technical Experts Group Meeting, 5–6 February 2007

In view of the current developments on the carriage of liquids, aerosols and gels (LAGs) by airline passengers, Singapore convened an informal aviation security technical experts group meeting to discuss some common issues facing all countries on the carriage of LAGS onboard aircraft.  

Held at SAA, the aim was to develop a common approach or harmonized security measures which could be considered by ICAO for universal adoption by all States. The meeting was updated on developments on restrictions on carriage of LAGs as well as developments at ICAO. Issues such as the use of tamper-evident bags were also discussed.

Ten aviation security experts from Asia Pacific – China, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia and Brunei – together with local organisations including CAAS, the Airport Police and the Ministry of Home Affairs, met under the chairmanship of Singapore’s Ministry of Transport.

ASEAN-Japan Aviation Security Workshop, 26–27 February 2007

Singapore was the venue for the first aviation security workshop organised by Japan’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport for ASEAN. Held at SAA, the workshop benefited some 50 participants, including aviation security directors, from all 10 ASEAN Member States.
           
In his opening address, Mr Goh Chin Ee, Director of SAA, touched on the latest challenge to security – liquid explosives. “There is still much controversy and confusion over the new control measures for items carried onboard aircraft in the light of this new threat,” he said.

Discussions on this and a wide spectrum of other aviation security issues formed the core of the workshop. Other topics included air cargo security, protection of passengers, bags and aircraft, quality control and ICAO’s Annex 17 amendments. 

Delegates also visited Changi Airport to observe first-hand the security measures adopted there. 

Supplementary Compensation Mechanism Task Force Meeting, 7–11 May 2007

Singapore, Vice Chair of the ICAO Council Special Group on the Modernisation of the Rome Convention of 1952 (SGMR), hosted the first meeting of its Supplementary Compensation Mechanism (SCM) Task Force at SAA.

The SGMR has made good progress on the text of the Draft Convention including the scope of the Convention, the option for application to domestic accidents, the carriers’ liability, the principles of compensation and procedural matters and the organisation of the SCM for providing additional compensation to victims.

The SCM Task Force discussed and further developed the supporting material primarily to assist the Legal Committee and eventually the Diplomatic Conference on the Draft Convention on Compensation for Damage caused by Aircraft to Third Parties, in case of Unlawful Interference.

The meeting was attended by 17 members of the Task Force.

 < back to top

HIGHLIGHTS@SAA

Chief Aircraft Accident Investigators Programme
22–24 August 2007

OBJECTIVES

To provide a platform for Chiefs of Aircraft Accident Investigation and Inspectors to exchange knowledge on key issues and developments in aircraft accident investigation. It also serves to promote cooperation through resource sharing and better understanding between stakeholders.  

OUTLINE
Establishment of Independent Aircraft Accident Investigation Agencies

  • Legislation and tasks of the National Transportation Safety Board
  • Overview of the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) – UK and the establishment of a Memorandum of Understanding with other agencies

Aircraft Manufacturers as a Resource in Accident Investigation         

  • Role of Boeing and Airbus in major investigations
  • Challenge of disseminating information to all operators during an investigation
  • Role of the State of Manufacture

Regional Cooperation – Sharing Resources and Training

  • Regional cooperation, resource sharing and support from other countries
  • Partnerships and cooperation in an environment of resource constraints and security imperatives   

Protection of Confidential Information, Liability and the Litigious Environment                                    

  • Access to and protection of confidential data
  • Handling of confidential data and safety findings in the real world
  • Industry response to litigations

ICAO Audits and Remedial Actions

  • An overview of the results of theICAO Audits – Annex 13

The Future

  • Roles of an accident investigation unit within a regulatory agency 
  • Cabin safety – An integral part of the investigation
  • Safety trends in airline operations
  • Evolution of safety in the next 100 years
  • Future challenges to investigations

Prominent accident investigation experts from international organisations such as Airbus, Boeing, the IFALPA, ISASI and the Flight Safety Foundation as well as speakers from States such as Australia, Botswana, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Ireland, Norway, Singapore, The Netherlands, UK and US will be sharing their expertise and knowledge in the programme.

WHO SHOULD ATTEND
Chief investigators and senior personnel involved in aircraft accident investigations, investigation and regulatory agencies, inspectors of aircraft accident investigations and personnel responsible for air safety.

For the latest information on speakers and programme, visit www.saa.com.sg/saa/en/CAAIP.html.

38th Annual ISASI Seminar
27–30 August 2007 
Swissotel the Stamford, Singapore

Hosted by AAIB, Singapore

This programme is organised in conjunction with ISASI’s 38th Annual International Seminar, themed “International Cooperation: From Investigation Site to ICAO”.

This seminar will address current safety and investigation issues including recent air safety occurrences and investigations, with particular emphasis on international cooperation efforts demonstrated during the various investigative endeavours. For more information, visit www.isasi07.org.

 < back to top



HIGHLIGHTS@SAA

Workshop on Human Factors in Aviation, 3–7 September 2007

OBJECTIVES
To provide an overview of the concept of Human Factors (HF) and how safety can be managed through the understanding and application of HF. The workshop also addresses various causes of human error, ways to overcome these errors, the current and future role of HF in an operational environment as well as the integration of HF and Safety Management Systems (SMS) across different sectors in the aviation industry.  

OUTLINE
Human Factors: Past and Present

  • Origin of aviation psychology and HF
  • Military accident rates – World War I
  • The birth of HF – World War II
  • Post-war civil and military aerospace developments in HF
  • The role of HF in contemporary aviation

Human Factors and Systems Safety: Fundamental Concepts

  • The Reason model
  • The SHEL model
  • Practical applications to safety management
  • Error tolerant systems

Human Factors and Risk Management

  • Fundamental concepts of risk management
  • Hazard identification
  • Methods of risk management
  • Risk matrices
  • Introduction to Bow Tie Analysis

Understanding and Managing Human Error

  • Principles of human error                                                                                        
  • Errors and violations
  • Do errors “cause” accidents?
  • Error-producing conditions

Human Performance: Capabilities and Limitations

  • Basic characteristics of human information processing
  • Perception and decision making

Human Factors Across the Industry

  • Application of HF knowledge to maintenance, repair and overhaul organisations (MROs)
  • Integrating HF and safety management in the airline industry
  • Managing HF in the aircraft manufacturing industry
  • HF in air safety investigation
  • HF in flight crew licensing and crew resource management
  • HF and SMS

Role of Aviation Medicine in Human Factors

  • Physiological issues
  • Human visual system
  • Hypoxia
  • Spatial disorientation                                                                                                
  • Physical stressors
  • Emotional stress

Safety and Culture

  • Influence of culture
  • National, organisational and professional cultures
  • Role of culture in safety performance

Syndicate discussions and safety case studies will supplement the classroom lectures.

WHO SHOULD ATTEND
Supervisors, senior executives and managerial personnel who are responsible for quality and safety from civil aviation authorities, airport authorities, airlines and MROs. The course would also benefit designated medical examiners, aircraft accident investigators, aviation psychologists and aircraft manufacturers.

 < back to top


HIGHLIGHTS@SAA

ICAO Safety Management Systems Course, 10–14 September 2007

OBJECTIVES

To enhance participants’ knowledge of safety management concepts and ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) on safety management in Annexes 6 (Operation of Aircraft), Annex 11 (Air Traffic Services) and Annex 14 (Aerodromes), and related guidance material. The course will also develop participants’ knowledge and skills to certify and oversee key components of a basic safety management system (SMS) in compliance with ICAO SARPs and national regulations. 

Outline
  • Basic Safety Concepts
  • Introduction to Safety Management
  • Hazard Identification and Management
  • Fundementals of Risk Management
  • SMS Regulation
  • Introduction to SMS
  • SMS Planning
  • SMS Operation Requirement
  • Phased Approach to SMS Implementation

PRE-REQUISITES
It is recommended that participants have basic technical aeronautical knowledge and a minimum of two years experience in flight, air traffic control or aerodrome operations in a civil aviation administration or the aviation industry.

INSTRUCTORS
Capt Jorge A P Gelso is an Aviation Consultant in aviation safety procedures, assessments and audits. He is also involved in the development of policies, regulations and standardised operational procedures to ensure safe and efficient aircraft operations such as the ICAO Safety Oversight Documents 9734 Part B and 9735.    

Capt Daniel Maurino is Coordinator for the Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme for ICAO. He is responsible for the development, implementation and management of this programme which is aimed at increasing awareness of the importance of Human Factors in the safety and efficiency of the aviation systems and proposing solutions to deal with human error. 

WHO SHOULD ATTEND

Personnel from civil aviation authorities or industry responsible for the implementation of safety programmes and oversight of SMS in the areas of aircraft operations, air traffic services, maintenance of aircraft and aerodrome operations.

 < back to top


HIGHLIGHTS@SAA

Aviation (Asia) Fire Conference

Co-organised with the International Aviation Fire Protection Association
16–18 October 2007
Venue: Marina Mandarin and Singapore Aviation Academy

OBJECTIVES
The Conference aims to promote a greater understanding of fire protection issues in aircraft rescue and fire-fighting (ARFF) and airport facilities. With business continuity increasingly coming into focus as a vital component of an airport’s crisis management plan, the response from mutual aid agencies and their roles in the mitigation of any incident will be one of the key aspects of this Conference.

The Conference will also enhance understanding and cooperation between various mutual aid agencies such as the municipal fire services, the state police, hospitals and other related organisations. It will also serve as a platform for participants to leverage on the networking opportunities for the development of training partnerships.

OUTLINE
Aircraft Rescue and Fire-fighting Management

  • ARFF tactical operations and considerations
  • Change programme – BAA Heathrow and airport fire service
  • Airport fire service safety management systems

Advancements in ARFF Technology

  • Highs and lows of fire safety engineering
  • Use of simulation for ARFF crash truck driving and operation
  • Harnessing IT for enhancement of AES (Singapore) operations

Case Studies

  • Equipped? Trained? When is Near Enough? Good Enough?
  • Review of the London bombings and current aviation terrorist threats

           
Human Factors

  • Evidence-based trauma care – Improving medical response after an aircraft crash
  • Human behaviours in fires in an airport environment
  • Understanding psychological reactions during major incidents
  • Impact of war on firefighters

Developments in International Standards

  • Report on International Standards
  • The New British Standard for Fire Strategies (PAS 911)

Implications of Aircraft Construction to ARFF Operations

  • Aircraft design for fire safety – Are we really risk assessing?
  • B787 - Challenges posed by composite materials to firefighters
  • A380 and its impact on ARFF operations
  • Update on the development of the A380 – ARFF perspective

Fire-fighting Training Facilities
The Conference includes a tour and briefing of SAA’s specially customised facilities used to support its training of fire-fighting and rescue professionals:

  • Fire Training Ground used for live fire-fighting training
  • Controlled-environment Breathing Apparatus Simulator
  • Specially designed aircraft simulator for aircraft fire-fighting training
  • Multi-level Chemical Process plant simulator for training in various stages of industrial fire situations

Singapore’s Airport Emergency Service will also be showcasing its Emergency Airstairs at the SAA.

SPEAKERS
The Conference will bring together leading experts from Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Israel, Singapore, UK and US. Industry players such as Boeing and Airbus will also be sharing their knowledge and experience at the Conference.

For the latest information on speakers and programme, visit www.saa.com.sg/saa/en/fireconference2007.html.

 

 < back to top

HIGHLIGHTS@SAA

Fundamentals of AIS: Concepts and Applications, 15–31 Oct 2007

OBJECTIVES

To equip participants with the knowledge and skills required to manage aeronautical information and data in conformance with ICAO’s Standards and Recommended Practices. Participants will have a better understanding of the purpose, scope and use of the different types of information handled by aeronautical information services (AIS) and the processes involved in providing timely and quality AIS. It also covers the latest developments of AIS and AIS management best practices, and includes a site visit to the AIS unit.

Outline

Introduction to AIS

  • Responsibilities, functions and objectives of AIS
  • ICAO documents and Integrated aeronautical information package
  • Origin of aeronautical information and modes of communication
  • Exchange of aeronautical information and telecommunication requirements

Notices to Airmen (NOTAM)

  • Format, specification and Pre-determined distribution system
  • Value and duration, and information to be promulgated by NOTAM
  • NOTAMs on snow and volcanic activities (SNOWTAM and ASHTAM)

Aeronautical Publications

  • Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP)
  • AIP amendments and supplements
  • Aeronautical Information Circular
  • Trigger NOTAM
  • Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control

Briefings

  • Pre-flight information and bulletins
  • Post-flight information

Portrayal of Aeronautical Information

  • Earth’s spherical coordinate system
  • Chart scale
  • Reading geographical coordinates and plotting positions on a chart

Flight Plans

  • Filed and Repetitive Flight Plans

AIS Management

  • New concepts in scope, quality, content, integration, presentation, delivery and provision of flight data
  • Definition of supporting components, including information exchange models
  • Technology in enabling areas such as communication and graphics
  • Use of AIS in the cockpit
  • Implementation strategies
  • Collaborative decision making

Developments in AIS

  • Electronic terrain and obstacle data
  • WGS-84 – Accuracy, resolution and integrity of aeronautical data
  • Electronic AIP
  • Aeronautical charts
  • AIS quality control
  • CNS/ATM overview
  • Overview of human factors
  • Aeronautical English
KEY INSTRUCTOR

Mr Aleksandar Pavlovic has 34 years of experience in civil aviation, the last 18 years of which he served ICAO as Chief of Aeronautical Information and Charts Section. Mr Pavlovic was one of the principal authors that developed user requirements for electronic terrain, obstacles and aerodrome mapping data and associated interchange standards based on the ISO 19100 series of standards which resulted in new Annex 15 provisions and associated guidance material.

 < back to top

HIGHLIGHTS@SAA

Introduction to Maintenance Management and Aviation Engineering, 5–8 November 2007

INTRODUCTION

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) was established in 2002 to put in place a community system of air safety and environmental regulation. The EASA system became operational in September 2003, and hopes to achieve a harmonised standard that is implemented at an international level, ensuring safety and environmental sustainability in civil aviation. To support the EASA safety requirements, it is pertinent that processes in maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) organisations conform to these standardised best practices.

OBJECTIVES
This course will provide participants with an understanding of the fundamental principles of processes within maintenance management and aviation engineering organisations. Areas such as planning, performance and support maintenance activities within an MRO organisation will be covered. It will also provide participants with a better understanding of the consequential benefits of these activities such as assurance of safety and maintenance standards for continued airworthiness according to EASA Part-145 requirements, increase of productivity and quality as well as reduction of maintenance costs.

OUTLINE

Introduction to Aviation Legisla­tion

  • EASA Part-145, Part-66 and Part-M require­ments

Quality Management System

Maintenance Planning

  • Maintenance programme
  • Types of maintenance
  • Production, planning and control
  • Work package preparation
  • Layover planning
  • Resource planning

Production Scheduling

  • Layover forecast
  • Production forecast

Production Control

  • Control of manpower, tools, facilities and material
  • Continuous improvement

Maintenance Support

  • Non-routine maintenance
  • Preventive measures
    • Aircraft condition monitoring
    • Repetitive items tracking

WHO SHOULD ATTEND
Managers, executives, aviation engineers and personnel from MROs or those involved in production, planning and control. To fully benefit from this course, prior knowledge of maintenance processes is recommended.

 

 < back to top

 


PEOPLE@SAA

Mr Colin Ian Chang-Tave
Airport Manager (Airside Operations)
Seychelles Civil Aviation Authority

International Air Law is not just a subject of personal and professional interest to Mr Colin Ian Chang-Tave; it is also a stepping stone to higher things.

The 32-year-old Airport Manager of Seychelles International Airport says, “I am taking the International Air Law Programme as an elective course to obtain SAA’s Diploma in Civil Aviation Management.

“I chose it because of my in-depth interest in the subject. I also sit on the Seychelles Civil Aviation Authority’s legislation steering committee, which is charged with reviewing the aviation legislation.

“This course will greatly enhance my ability to better understand the concepts of aviation law and I hope that I can use it to benefit my country.”
           
A man on the move, Colin now heads a newly formed Airside Operations Section where he oversees most airside operations and infrastructure.
           
“I am presently organising it so as to deliver a level of service, comfort and convenience that meet the expectations of passengers and airlines.
           
“It is a lot of hard work but it is a challenge that I am enjoying. I have just written the Airside Driving Manual and am presently working on the ‘Birds and Wildlife Management Programme Manual.’ I find the job very gratifying.” he says.
           
Even as a child, Colin always knew that he would make aviation his career. Although initially he dreamt of working for the national carrier Air Seychelles, he decided to be an air traffic controller instead, which he described as a “vastly satisfying profession.” He remained in that field for eight years before moving to airport management three years ago.
           
Colin enjoys meeting people from all over the world. “I have made many friends while at course at SAA and the friendships are still going strong. This gives me a unique opportunity to exchange ideas with people half way across the world,” he says.

However, his biggest pleasure in life remains spending time with his adorable four-year- old son, Kamran. As Colin puts it, “Being with him is the best possible therapy after a hard day’s work.” 
 < back to top




PEOPLE@SAA

Mr John Wycliffe Havea
Senior Air Traffic Control Officer
Ministry of Civil Aviation, Tonga

In addition to his operational duties as an air traffic control officer (ATCO), Mr John Wycliffe Havea has been responsible for investigating incidents and accidents since 2000.

This is one of his more onerous duties as Tonga’s Senior ATCO and the reason for his attending SAA’s Air Traffic Services Safety Management and Investigation Programme.

“I know that after completing it, I will be equipped with knowledge, skills and experiences, which I will share with my colleagues, to enhance and promote safety within my organisation,” says John.

“In Tonga, resources are very limited. Networking with fellow participants as well as instructors on the SAA course will allow me to tap on the expertise of others, should the need arise.

“The bottom line is that safety must not be compromised and the challenge is to find ways round the constraints.”

Originally a Flight Service Officer and then a pilot – he holds an Australian Commercial Pilots Licence – John has held the post of Senior ATCO since the implementation of ATC services in Tonga.

Such was the confidence of the Ministry of Civil Aviation that he was appointed to that position before he obtained his ICAO Air Traffic Control licence in 2001.

As a senior personnel in ATC services, he supervises a staff of eight controllers and six flight service officers. The unique twist to this situation is that one of the controllers is his wife and mother of their five children, the youngest of whom is just 18 months old.

A doting husband and father, John tries his best to spend his free time with his family despite his busy schedule. Not surprisingly, he says, “Quality time with my family is very important for me. My wife and five beautiful children love going for picnics and swimming.”

 < back to top




PEOPLE@SAA

FROM KENYA
15 February 2007

The Kenyan delegation was in town for air services consultation and took time off their busy schedule to visit SAA. The delegation was led by Mr Gerrishon K Ikiara, Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Transport.

FROM IRAQ
5 March 2007

The Director General of Iraq’s Civil Aviation Authority, Mr Ali Saleh, toured SAA with other senior members of his team and US officials as part of a study visit to learn about Singapore’s aviation infrastructure and explore technical assistance.

FROM BOTSWANA
20 March 2007

As part of a study visit to Changi Airport, the Directors of the Botswana Department of Civil Aviation, headed by its Chairman, Mrs Kelebone Damascina Skelemani, were given a tour of SAA.

FROM ABU DHABI
23 March 2007

Mr Khalifa Mohamed Al Mazrouei, Chairman of Abu Dhabi Airport Company (ADAC) and Mr Ibrahim Jassem Al Mansoor, Acting Chief Operating Officer of ADAC were given a tour of SAA as part of their visit to Singapore.

FROM MACAU
27 March 2007

Five members of the Macau Fire Service led by Commissioner Ma Io Weng called on SAA while in Singapore to find out more about its training programmes and facilities.

FROM BELGIUM
16 May 2007

Mr Jules Kneepkens, Director General of the Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport Civil Aviation Authority of Belgium, received a comprehensive briefing on the types of training offered by SAA. Mr Kneepkens was in town for air services consultations.   

 < back to top




Inbox@SAA

Relevant courses

As always, December 2006 issue of the SAA Review contains very informative topics such as the new ICAO requirements for Aeronautical English. I was also very happy to find the course on COSPAS-SARSAT system as I am in charge of our Aeronautical Search and Rescue.

Mr Ibrahim Thoha
Senior ATC Officer
Maldives Airports Company Limited

Interesting articles

I read with interest the article on the ICAO-Singapore Developing Country Training Programme MOU in the December 2006 issue of the SAA Review. I hope Fiji may be able to benefit from it. The new ICAO requirement on language skills for pilots and air traffic controllers is another interesting topic well covered in the Review. Thank you and I look forward to receiving future copies of the Review.

Mr Jone Koroitamana
Chief Executive Officer
Airports Fiji Limited

Warm hospitality

I enjoyed the World Civil Aviation Chief Executives Forum and learnt a lot from the presentations. The hospitality shown by everybody I came in contact with was most appreciated.

Mr Douglas Litchfield
Director of Civil Aviation
Ministry of Public Works and Transport, Swaziland

 

Good Instructors

The speakers (for the Airport Ramp Operations course) are excellent! The course has provided me with many new ideas on problem-solving and has helped me to improve my knowledge in aviation.

Mr Nguyen Ngoc Son
Deputy Chief
Northern Airports Authority, Vietnam

Hands-on approach

The highlight of my training in Singapore (for the Aeronautical English Train-the-Testers Workshop) was listening to the recordings that we made and comparing the differences between what we did and what ICAO recommends. I learnt a lot about the different aspects of language from that exercise.

Ms Wang Shu Chuan
Air Traffic Controller
Civil Aeronautics Administration, Taiwan


 < back to top