EASA Safety Conference: Staying in Control Loss of Control (LoC) Prevention and Recovery 4 5 October 2011, Cologne

Ladies and Gentlemen, good afternoon, What I would like to share with you, are some reflections on how emerging safety issues, like the predominance of Loss of Control events, can be addressed and possibly anticipated, from the Rulemaking perspective. Therefore I will not focus in particular on the LoC issue itself (the experts will speak in a moment) but on the Agency general approach to Rulemaking and the possible vehicles that can be used in the context of such emerging safety issues. I would like in particular to focus on three following aspects: The role of RM in the context of the European Aviation Safety Programme The fact that improving safety cannot rely anymore on mere compliance with prescriptive requirements and, How both the reactive and the proactive dimensions can be further improved in the Rulemaking approach. 1- The EASP From the outset, I think it is important to place rulemaking activities in the context of the European Aviation Safety Programme (the EASP). Obviously, there is no Rulemaking Safety Policy per se. But Rulemaking is one of the actors of an overarching safety policy: a) EASP and the three pillars of safety management The EASP identifies three pillars in safety management: Rulemaking, Oversight and Safety Promotion. Rulemaking may indeed not necessarily be a solution, or the only solution, to address a safety issue (the temptation of over-regulating should carefully be avoided). Under the EASP, the need for focussed Oversight and dedicated Safety Promotion actions are also systematically assessed. b) An example: LoC in General Aviation LoC in the context of General Aviation is a good example of the complimentary role of Safety Promotion and Rulemaking LoC, but also Controlled Flight into Terrain, in IMC are known as the two major causes of fatal accident in the aeroplane GA world In April of this year EGAST, the European General Aviation Safety Team, issued a safety promotion leaflet on Decision Making for GA pilots. It aims at
www.easa.europa.eu Page 1 of 4

EASA Safety Conference: Staying in Control Loss of Control (LoC) Prevention and Recovery 4 5 October 2011, Cologne

helping pilots without an Instrument Rating (IR) to take the right go/no go decision when facing unsuitable weather conditions More recently, in September, the Agency issued an Notice of Proposed Amendment on an En-route Instrument Rating and a simplified full Instrument Rating for non-commercial pilots. The En-route Instrument Rating will allow holders of an aeroplane license to gain familiarity with instrument flight rules procedures and cope with unforeseen deteriorating weather conditions in the en-route phase of a flight. In addition, the new and more accessible full instrument rating for holders of private pilot licenses is intended to reverse the current trend of less and less private pilots holding an Instrument Rating Both initiatives were praised by the GA world and will surely contribute to further improve safety in this area. They also show how, safety improvement can be better considered and coordinated under the EASP holistic approach. 2- The time of mere compliance is over We all know this, its a fact of life, compliance with prescriptive rules is not enough to ensure an acceptable level of safety: this is the second aspect I would like to highlight. I would say that in term of safety, the time of mere compliance is over. Besides the hardware -the prescriptive rules-, which still remains the foundation of our system, Rulemaking efforts in the past decades have focussed on the software aspects. Human Factors, Safety Management and Risk Based Oversight are three typical examples, but not the only ones, of this soft approach: a) Human Factors On Human Factors, Rulemaking initiatives have focussed on how to make the aviation system more resistant to Human Errors, by addressing both the prevention of Human errors and protection against Human errors, as errors will always occur. Significant achievements have been made in all technical domains. Among other things (not all can be cited): In Operations, by introducing Crew Resource Management requirements In Flight Crew Licences, by introducing threat and error management in pilot training In Maintenance by requiring Human Factors training to maintenance personnel, and more recently,

www.easa.europa.eu

Page 2 of 4

EASA Safety Conference: Staying in Control Loss of Control (LoC) Prevention and Recovery 4 5 October 2011, Cologne

In Certification, by introducing, in the aircraft type certification specifications, the requirement to imbed Human Factors in the design of flight deck controls and equipment Besides these achievements, the Agency pursues is efforts on other soft aspects: b) SMS Everything has been said on Safety Management Systems and its expected benefits no need to expand on that. The future Implementing Rules on Air Operations, will require Operators in Commercial Transportation to start implementing SMS as of 8 April 2012 c) Risk Based Oversight I also mentioned a moment ago Oversight as one of the three pillars of Safety Management. The same new OPS implementing rules will require the National Aviation Authorities to start implementing, as from 8 April 2012, a Risk Based Oversight approach. The risk based approach will allow the NAA to determine safety oversight priorities and build their oversight programme in accordance with these priorities and in particular, to focus on emerging safety issues. In this area as well, merely checking compliance is not enough. 3- Reactivity vs Proactivity The third aspect is the articulation between reactivity and proactivity in Rulemaking. Historically, rules have been built in reaction to known safety problems mainly accidents. But as we know, accidents are generally the result of an unprecedented sequence of events, which, taken in isolation, would not necessarily have had catastrophic consequences. This is the main challenge of a proactive approach: preventing sequences of events that may not have happened before a) Proactivity Proactivity is at the core of the EASP. Other initiatives, such as the IGPT, the Internal Group on Personnel Training, elaborating the Agency pilot training policy, and the IORS, the Internal Occurrence Reporting System, fostering a more data driven approach to safety analysis will also further increase the proactive dimension of Rulemaking. b) Reactivity

www.easa.europa.eu

Page 3 of 4

EASA Safety Conference: Staying in Control Loss of Control (LoC) Prevention and Recovery 4 5 October 2011, Cologne

But still, the reactive dimension of the system remains a corner stone. Two examples can illustrate the Agency efforts to further improve its reactivity to known safety issues: Risk Based Rulemaking, and the OSD: Operational Safety Data. i) Risk Based Programming Rulemaking is working towards a more Risk Based Rulemaking approach, where every potential rulemaking task, arising e.g. from Accident Investigation Board recommendations, are thoroughly evaluated in term of their potential safety benefit, in order to give them the right priority in the Agency Rulemaking Programme. This will allow to reinforce the link between Rulemaking priorities and safety significance. ii) The OSD Finally: the OSD. By requiring the Manufacturers to provide Pilot Type Training Data as part of the aircraft certification process, the OSD will enforce the coupling between Design and Pilot Training. Also this tool will enable the Agency to react to a pilot training issue identified on a specific aircraft type by issuing an Airworthiness Directive requiring pilot type training enhancement. 4- Conclusion I hope that these few reflections will shed some light on the Agency general approach to Rulemaking. Further integrating the EASP holistic approach, embracing the hard and the soft aspects of rulemaking and being more proactive while improving reactivity, will help us, in the general case, to better address emerging safety issues. As concerns the specific case of LoC, I also expect a lot, like you, from this conference Thank you

www.easa.europa.eu

Page 4 of 4