AAPA : Working Together With COSCAP-SEA and NA · PDF fileFLIGHT OPS & SAFETY WORKING GROUP ... –Training outfits like Jeppessen ... –Assist in guidance principles –Invitation

AAPA : Working Together With

COSCAP-SEA and NA

Joint COSCAP SEA & NA Meeting

31 August 2005, BKK

by

Martin ERAN-TASKER

Technical Director

• Introduction to AAPA

• Safety drivers, issues and response

• Regional stakeholder engagement

• Working together with COSCAP

• Discussion

Presentation outline

Background : AAPA

• Leading regional trade association representing 17 major international airlines based in Asia Pacific

• Committed to promoting sustainable growth of the aviation industry serving both passenger and freight needs

• Work with member airlines, governments, regulators and industry partners on issues of common concern

• Permanent Secretariat headquartered in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Beijing

Fuzhou

Chengdu Shanghai

Harbin

Haikou

Hangzhou

Nanjing

Shenyang

Changchun

Kunming Guangzhou

Jinan

Changsha Chongqing

Wuhan

Xian

Ningbo

Yanji

Tianjin

Qingdao

Shenzhen

Guilin

Yantai

Dalian

Xiamen

Sanya

Urumqi

AAPA: Mainland China destinations

AAPA members serve a total of 28

Mainland Chinese cities

Flights/Week

1. Shanghai 280

2. Beijing 168

3. Xiamen 47

4. Guangzhou 44

5. Qingdao 39

6. Hangzhou 36

7. Kunming 24

8. Dalian 23

9. Chengdu 22

10. Tianjin 17

Over 800 flights per week

AAPA fleet and experience

Source: Airclaims’ world air fleet (as at 10 May 2005) - AAPA

• 1,300 aircraft

• 73% of the fleet is widebody

– Operating 25% of world’s widebody passenger fleet

– Operating 50% of world’s B744 fleet

– Operating 37% of world’s B777 fleet

– Operating 35% of world’s A330 fleet

• 46% of all new widebody orders for 2004

• 359 aircraft on order for delivery over the next 5 years (16 June

2005) Total order book value USD 51 billion

– 25% of A380 orders (USD 11.4b)

– 43% of B787 orders (USD 12.5b)

• Combined experience of 774 years, or a median of 46 years per

airline, skew of 0.02

Technical Affairs

Operations

Safety

Security Environment

AAPA Work Structure

ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP

(EWG)

PUBLIC RELATIONS MGR

WORKING GROUP

SECURITY COMMITTEE

(SC)

ENGINEERING & MAINTENANCE

WORKING GROUP (EMWG)

FLIGHT OPS & SAFETY

WORKING GROUP (FOSWG)

MATERIALS MANAGEMENT

WORKING GROUP (MMWG)

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

(TC)

MANAGEMENT INFORMATION

WORKING GROUP

FRAUD PREVENTION

WORKING GROUP

DISTRIBUTION

WORKING GROUP

CARGO

WORKING GROUP

FACILITATION

WORKING GROUP

EMERGENCY RESPONSE

PLANNING WORKING GROUP

NORTH AMERICA

WORKING GROUP

AIRLINE SERVICES COMMITTEE

GATS TASK FORCE

AEROPOLITICAL COMMITTEE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

ASSEMBLY OF PRESIDENTS

The Safety Drive

FSF and Boeing.com

The Safety Drive

• In 2004,

– USD35 billion accumulated losses since 2001

– Global traffic increased 15%

– Industry-wide hull loss rate declined by 10% to 0.78 hull losses per

million sectors flown

– 28 fatal accidents recorded

– 1.8 billion passengers carried, 428 fatalities

– 1 passenger fatality per 4.20m carried

• ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program (USOAP)

• United States – Data driven programs

• Europe – Established EASA

IATA - Western Built Aircraft

ICAO Conclusions

• The lesson from USOAP

– Audit results show a positive trend globally but still give reasons for

concern

– Many States have been unable to improve despite their best efforts

– Some States are acting beyond their oversight capabilities and some

operators are taking advantage of this situation

– Mutual trust and recognition incomplete

• The end result

– A wide variation in the level of accidents worldwide

Source : Lamy (2005) ICAO

Regional Accident Rates Western-built Transport Hull Loss Accident by Airline Domicile from 1994-2004

Accidents per

million departures

United States

and Canada

0.4

Latin America

and Caribbean

2.5

Europe

0.7

China

0.5

Middle East

2.41

Africa

11.7

Asia

1.7

Oceania

0.0

(Excluding

China)

JAA - 0.6

Non JAA – 1.2

C.I.S.1

World

0.73

1Insufficient fleet experience to generate reliable rate.


1995-2004 Fatal Accidents –

By Region of Occurrence


Average Accident Rate by Region of Operator

Scheduled ops, Fatal accidents per 1 000 000 Departures

by Region of the Operator

3.6

2.6

0.8

2.4

0.5

0.7

1.3

5.0

1.0

0.6

1.7

1.8

0.4

0.8

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

Africa

Asia/Pacific

Europe

LatinAmerica/Caribbean

Middle East

North America

World Average

1995-1999 2000-2004


2004 Hull Loss Rates by Region

1.3

5.2

5.3

0.94

Hull losses per million

departures by region of

operator, Western-built

Jets 2004

0.52 0.29

Source IATA

World Average 0.78 per million sectors

0.00

0.40

0.80

1.20

1.60

2.00

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

5 year running average

Cooperative efforts are bringing accident rate

down

Hull Loss Accident Rate Worldwide Commercial Jets (>60,000 lbs, non-CIS) Through 31 December 2002

FSF

CFIT/ALAR

Industry effort

starts CAST/JSSI

begins PAAST

begins

Ra

te p

er

mil

lio

n d

ep

art

ure

s

COSCAP safety teams

(SARAST, SEARAST

And NARAST)

Working Together

Asia-Pacific

• Highly diverse: multiple governments and regulators

• Need for regional co-operation on multilateral basis

• Address common concerns

• Importance of cost-benefit analysis

• Harmonisation: share best practices

Working together model

AAPA

Manufacturers

Regulators

Aviation

Associations

Stakeholder Engagement

• Manufacturers

– Airframe and Engine OEMs

– Training outfits like Jeppessen

– Safety system managers like Du Pont

• Aviation Associations

– AEA, ATA, IATA, FSF, IFALPA

• Regulators

– ICAO Asia Pacific Council Representatives (7 States)

– FAA, JAA, EASA

– CAST

– Asia Pacific CAAs

– ICAO COSCAP – a vital link for the AAPA to the region’s CAAs

Regional Safety Stakeholders

COSCAP SEA

(TG) Thailand

(MH) Malaysia

(SQ) Singapore

(VN) Vietnam

(GA) Indonesia

(PR) Philippines

(CX/KA) Hong Kong SAR

Macau SAR

COSCAP NA

(KE/OZ) South Korea

PR China

Mongolia

DPR Korea

AAPA

QF (Australia)

NZ (New Zealand)

JL/NH (Japan)

BI (Brunei)

Non-AAPA

AAPA RTL

Myanmar (MH/TG)

Lao PDR (TG)

Cambodia (MH/TG)

Working together with COSCAP

• Information sharing

• TCAS-RA

• Human Factors

• Bird Strike

• GAP

Top 5 Events Per 1000 Departures Reported by AAPA members in Jul-Dec 2004

Bir

d H

aza

rd

Lig

htn

ing

Str

ike

TC

AS

(R

A)

Turb

ule

nce

Du

e to

Gro

un

d

Eq

uip

me

nt

Pe

r 1

000

0 D

ep

art

ure

s

Working Together – Information Exchange

• AAPA Action Plan :

– Safety Information Exchange

– Regional position and

formulate action strategy

– FSF CFIT/ALAR Tool kit

– AAPA regional team leaders

(PR, GA, MH, TG)

– Exchange of LOSA type

experience

– Exchange of airport/ATC

hazard information

– Regional position in response

to proposed regulatory

rulemaking

– AAPA Aviation Safety Seminar

Q2 2006

• Working together plans:

– Periodically update COSCAP on information exchange output and strategy formulation

– Extend strategy catchment to include non-AAPA members and regulators

– AAPA jointly coordinates working seminars in each target country on “road show” basis

– Availability of safety consultants, virtual or physical

– Assist in guidance principles

– Invitation to regional seminars (no fees) and email information

High TCAS-RA Rate June-Dec 2004 Reported by AAPA Members

AIRPORTS WITH HIGH TCAS RA RATE

19.23

15.15

12.66

12.30

10.75

10.00

9.52

6.76

6.73

6.45

6.13

6.06

4.49

4.42

4.13

4.00

3.74

3.17

3.08

2.44

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00

MAD (Madrid)

NOU (Nourrea)

JED (Jeddah)

SFO (San Francisco)

EWR (Newark)

SEA (Seattle)

IST (Istanbul)

NYC (New York)

SYD (Sydney)

CGQ (Changchun)

BNA (Nashville)

DFW (Dallas)

LAX (Los Angeles)

CMB (Colombo)

JFK (New York)

NKG (Nanking)

KUL (Kuala Lumpur)

FRA (Frankfurt)

CDG (Paris)

LHR (London Heathrow)

Rate (1000 Departures)

High TCAS-RA Rate June-Dec 2004 Reported by >4 AAPA Members

5 Airports with highest TCAS RA Rate

(Reported by more than 4 airlines)

12.30

4.49

2.44

0.53

0.46

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00

SFO (San Francisco)

LAX (Los Angeles)

LHR (London Heathrow)

SIN (Singapore)

TPE (Taipei)


Working Together – TCAS-RA




– Work with other regional

associations to exchange

findings and to formulate

strategy

– Engage ATC and airports

– Look into airline practices at

TCAS-RA prone airports


– Periodically update COSCAP

on information exchange

output and strategy

formulation

– Extend strategy catchment to

include non-AAPA members

and regulators

– Inputs to COSCAP

intervention plans on TCAS-

RA events

– Assist in guidance principles

Source : Johnson (2005), FAA

Working Together – Human Factors




– Structured HF initiatives in

both cockpit and maintenance.

– Human Factors Workshop for

Engineering and Maintenance,

28-29 November in Kuala

Lumpur (Confirmed) and 30 –

1 December Beijing (TBC)

• Check website

www.AAPAirlines.org

• Working together with

COSCAP :

– AAPA jointly coordinates

working seminars in each

target country on “road show”

basis

– Availability of HF consultants,

virtual or physical

http://www.aapairlines.org/

Bird Strike (without Damage) rate Jul-Dec 2004 Reported by AAPA Members

Bird Strike RateIncidents not causing damage

7.13

5.53

3.57

3.26

2.84

2.59

2.59

2.24

1.02

0.86

0.83

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00

SGN

PEK

AMS

CGK

BKK

LAX

LHR

FUK

HKG

KUL

TPE


Bird Strike (with Damage) rate Jul-Dec 2004 Reported by AAPA Members

Bird Strike RateIncidents causing damage

1.19

0.60

0.40

0.34

0.10

0.09

0.07

0.04

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40

AMS

TWU

DUD

KHH

HND

NRT

CHC

AKL


Working Together – Bird Hazard



– Determine position and

formulate action strategy on

airport to airport basis

– Engage airports

– Carry out surveys

– Provide bird hazard

management proposals

– Seek government/community

assistance

– Organise bird hazard

management training

– In progress : CGK

– Future : SGN and BJS




output and strategy

formulation



and regulators




basis

– Availability of bird hazard

management consultants,

virtual or physical

Va

lue

Pro

po

sit

ion

FSF Ground Accident Prevention

Proactive Reactive

Safety Excellence Enhances Airline Cost Structure &

Customer / Public Recognition

Customer Focus

Contractor Integration

Functional Integration Management System

and Engaged Leadership

One industry Focus &

Uniform Standards

Compliance Focused

Reactionary

Crisis Management &

Emergency Response

• Leadership Accountability

• Embedded in Culture

• Line Management Ownership

• Best in Class Metrics

• Relentless Execution

Current Industry Focus

Integration at Airports

????????????

Working Together - GAP



formulate strategy


– Collaborate with FSF on GAP

– With FSF, coordinate with

AAPA regional team leaders

– A potential ground accident

prevention programme

workshop




output and strategy

formulation



and regulators




basis

– Invitation to regional seminars

(no fees) and email

information

Working together

• AAPA is committed to working together with other industry stakeholders

• Committed to improving regional & global harmonization in both technical and non-technical regulatory policies

• Good working relationships with ICAO, FAA, EASA, DGCAs, other trade associations, governments and regulators

• Keen to engage in constructive dialogue and promote strategic partnerships

Discussion

• Which of the proposals would COSCAP see value in pursuing with

the AAPA?

– Information exchange

– Human factors – engineering and operations

– Bird Hazard

– High Rate TCAS-RA

– Ground Accidents Prevention

• How could AAPA better support the role and function of COSCAP?

• What deliverables are likely in the short and medium term from

collaboration between AAPA and COSCAP?

But never forget: this is a great industry !

• 100 years ago the Wright brothers made their first flight

• 50 years ago: 9 million passengers

• Today: 1,800 million people flew safely last year

• Fares per seat mile are cheaper than driving a car

• Modern jet aircraft are as fuel efficient as compact cars

• Air cargo delivers 35% of global trade by value

We collectively own the world safety record and it is important that we all have a coherent

multilateral approach to safety Lamy (2005) ICAO

Martin ERAN-TASKER, Technical Director

ASSOCIATION OF ASIA PACIFIC AIRLINES

[email protected]

www.aapairlines.org

Documents

AAPA : Working Together With COSCAP-SEA and NA · PDF fileFLIGHT OPS & SAFETY WORKING GROUP ... –Training outfits like Jeppessen ... –Assist in guidance principles –Invitation