CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE WORKSHOP 19th MAY 2016 AIRWORTHINESS CAR - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

AIRWORTHINESS CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE WORKSHOP

19th MAY 2016

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145 PRESENTATION

2

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

CONTENT:

• THE MORC SCHEME - UPDATE
• ONE OFF AUTHORISATION
• PILOT LIMITED AUTHORISATION

19 May 2016

3

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

19 May 2016

MORC SCHEME - Update:

• Regulations – Published in Part B of CAR Part V Chapter 3 – Approved

Maintenance Organization

• Preparation for Implementation – Target July 2016

 Procedure – AWP-73 published.  Form AWF-MORC-001 ( Maintenance Organization Review Certificate) + NDA  Form AWF-MORC-002 (Maintenance Organization Review Certificate- Statement)  E-Services – PH – MORC AS Application  Q-Pulse – Creation of Sub-Group for MORC-AS personnel

• Training by GCAA to qualify/authorized MORC-AS by the end of May.

4

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• Responsibility of Owner/Operator at a Line Station:
• Accomplish Pre – Flight Inspection - by Pilot In Command or Qualified Staff

(CAR M 201)

• Certification of any maintenance at Line Station by:

 ‘Flying Engineer  Limited Authorized Pilot issued by CAR 145 AMO (Regulation CAR 145.30(j)(4)  GCAA CAR 145 AMO - Manned Station or Contracted AMO  AMO accepted under organisation Quality system (Sub-Contractor)

19 May 2016

5

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• Regulations:
• CAR 145.30(J)(5)
• AMC 145.30(J)(5)

19 May 2016

6

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• AMC 145.30(j)(5):
• (1) Unforeseen means that the aircraft grounding could not reasonably have been

predicted by the operator because the defect was unexpected due to being part of a hitherto reliable system.

• Occasions:
• AOG aircraft - yes
• Diversion - yes
• Aircraft defect - yes/no
• schedule maintenance (Out-of-phase task / Daily Check) – No
• RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ORGANISATION:
• Define control process & procedure in the MOE.
• Only QA can issued One Off Authorization
• Notify GCAA within 7 days

19 May 2016

7

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• One Off Authorization process:

Before Issuing the Authorization:

• Defect must be clearly communicated in detail & understood by AMO (by Pilot to the
• perators' supporting maintenance organization)
• AMO will need to do Risk assessment of the situation:

 Exercise sound judgement that the maintenance task can be undertaken under “One-Off” and Airworthiness of the aircraft is not compromised  Complexity of the task  Availability of tools/equipment  Level of knowledge/experience of the Authorised Staff  (QA will do verification of the full qualification of the Certifying staff detail at the location)

• Result of Risk Assessment is positive

19 May 2016

8

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• One Off Authorization process:
• Verification of the nominated Certifying staff by QA:
• a. Certifying Staff having a type authorization or type of similar technology,

construction & system, or

• b. Any person who:

 Not less than 5 years maintenance experience  Holding valid ICAO maintenance license rated for the aircraft type.  The contracted maintenance organization has no AMO rating,

 The contracted maintenance organization hold evidence of license/experience of

this person.

19 May 2016

9

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• One Off Authorisation process: (AMC 145.30(j)(5)(1) Para 2):
• Granting the One-Off- Authorization - to CS without type rated authorisation:

 The CS hold Authorization of equivalent level & scope on ac type of similar technology, construction, & system,  Full detail of the maintenance task to be carried out has been established & passed to the Certifying staff  The person issued with the One Off Authorization has been given the necessary information & guidance to access the maintenance data or any

• ther special instructions associated with the task to be undertaken,

 Clear step by step Work-sheet has been defined by the organization & communicated to the One Off Authorized holder

19 May 2016

10

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

ONE OFF AUTHORISATION:

• One Off Authorization process:
• After completion of the task by the One-Off Authorization Holder:

 The organization visually verified that the Once Off Authorization holder has completed & signed the step by step worksheet,  The organization verified by visual examination and/or normal system operation upon the aircraft return to the approved CAR 145 maintenance facility.  If the maintenance task involved flight safety the system is rechecked by an approved MO  All such cases as specified in this subparagraph shall be reported to the GCAA within seven days of the issue of such certification authorization.

19 May 2016

11

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

PILOT LIMITED AUTHORISATION:

• Regulation: CAR 145.30(j)(4)
• APPLICABILITY - In the case of aircraft operating away from a supported location (Out-station)
• HOW :

 By AMO  Detailed procedure in the MOE on the issuance of Limited Certification Authorisation to the type rated commander and/or the flight engineer

• REQUIREMENTS: Received sufficient:

 Type Rated Pilot/Flight Engineer training i.a,w GCAA Regulations  Training – Airworthiness Regulation

 Practical training – Task training of sufficient duration (Refer Scope)  Complete procedure training per CAR 145 (including HF, Continuation training)

• SCOPE OF AUTHORISATION: (PILOT) Minor maintenance & simple checks, included in the following list:

(a) Replacement of internal lights, filaments and flash tubes. (b) Closing of cowlings and re-fitment of quick access inspection panels. (c) Role changes e.g. stretcher fit, dual controls, FLIR, doors, photographic equipment etc. (d) Inspection for and removal of de-icing/anti-icing fluid residues, including removal/closure of panels, cowls or covers that are easily accessible but not requiring the use of special tools. (e) Any check/replacement involving simple techniques consistent with this AMC and as agreed by the GCAA.

19 May 2016

12

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

19 May 2016

Organizations' Responsibility:

• MOE – Procedures on organization process & control of:

 One-Off Authorization  Pilot Limited Authorization

• Auditing the One-Off Authorization process and procedure
• Check the One-Off files
• Pilot Limited Authorization – continuation training & validity of Authorization

(12 months)

13

AIRWORTHINESS CAR 145

Any Question?????

19 May 2016

14

15

CAR 21 & Rule Making Enhancement WG Presentation

15th Airworthiness Consultative Committee Meeting Presentation by: Zahid Munawar, Manager Engineering Safety & Rule Enhancement Working Group

Date: Thursday, 19th May 2016

Welcome to 15th ACC Meeting – the CAR 21 Section presentation comprises of two parts: ☼ This presentation is about the activities of CAR 21 Section, and of “Airworthiness Working Group – Rule Making enhancements” ☼ Another presentation on “Manufacturing Organization Approval - MOA” will follow

17

Introduction

Design Organization Approvals, Production Organization Approvals and Design Change Approvals are business as usual ☼ For Type Acceptance, 6 Models have been Type Accepted since last ACC Meeting:

• Textron (Cessna) 208
• Textron (Cessna) 208B
• Extra Aircraft Germany EA300LT
• Embraer EMB-500
• Pilatus PC12/47E
• Finmeccanica (old AgustaWestland) AW169

18

Update on CAR 21 Activities

☼ Work is in progress for the following applications for Type Acceptance, namely

• Gulfstream Model GVI (G650) and Model GIV
• Bell Model 429 and Model 407
• Boeing 737-8 Max
• Bombardier BD-700-1A10
• Airbus Model A320-251n and Model A380-842

☼ The GCAA list of Type Accepted models now comprises 97 models in total.

19

Update on CAR 21 Activities (continued)

☼ Brainchild and outcome of 14th ACC Meeting - started in Dec 2015. ☼ GCAA-Industry collaboration aimed at enhancing safety, and will result in clearer GCAA policies.

 Chaired by Zahid Munawar [GCAA Manager Engineering Safety] with Obaid Soomro [GCAA Senior Inspector Engineering] as the Deputy Chair / Secretary and assisted by Nasser Jamea.  Emirates – Youssef Bahsoun [Manager ETS / Head of OoA]  Fly Dubai – Safian Baharome [Manager QA]  Jet Aviation – Wajahat Khan [Director Quality]  Etihad – Clifford (Rally) [Head of Quality Assurance] and Dilek Senay Yazici [Senior Manager, Etihad Design Organisation]  Empire Aviation – Ashwani Gupta [Manager – Safety Management Systems]  Unique Air – Drasko Garcevic [Director – Quality]  Subject Matter Specialists on as required basis

20

AW Working Group – Rule Making Enhancements

☼ Keen interest shown by the industry ☼ It is an open ended forum, the composition of which may change over time ☼ Covers all areas of Airworthiness – not limited to CAR 21 ☼ Three meetings have been convened:

☼ 14th Jan 2016 (GCAA – Dubai), ☼ 29th Feb 2016 (GCAA – Dubai), and ☼ 21st Apr 2016 (Emirates – Dubai). ☼ Next meeting Planned at Etihad facilities in Abu Dhabi.

21

AW WG – Rule Making Enhancements (continued)

☼ Initiated by Clifford Ralston De Vaz of Etihad ☼ Issue is the ambiguity about the permissible life limits of the pressure vessels. The life limit on ground is different as compared to when the vessel is installed on aircraft ☼ The GCAA to standardize the interpretation of the requirements by the AWIs ☼ Long and constructive discussion sessions between the members of the working group, GCAA SME and Emirates SME ☼ The WG is looking at possible resolutions

22

Work in Progress – Life of Pressure Vessels

☼ Initiated by Clifford Ralston De Vaz of Etihad ☼ Issue is the use of commercial parts during repair of galley carts and releasing the carts thus repaired with the document “Certificate of Conformity”. Should it be Form 1

• r equivalent or is C of C an acceptable document? GCAA to provide guidance on

what paperwork should an operator ask for ☼ The quest for solution is in its infancy, being researched upon.

23

Work in Progress – Repair of Galley Carts

☼ Initiated by Youssef Bahsoun of Emirates ☼ Issue is the use of commercially available parts on assemblies eventually used on aircraft and associated release documents ☼ Similar to the issue of galley carts but has wider range of parts to cover ☼ The WG is looking at possible resolutions

24

Work in Progress – Use of Commercial Parts

☼ A topic of interest for many participants ☼ The GCAA to provide guidance on FAA PMA parts, including what types of FAA PMA parts are permitted for installation and the associated documentation requirements ☼ The topic has been discussed at length in all meetings ☼ Mr. Pieter Ruitenberg – Who has represented EASA on FAA PMA topic, also provided his point of view as a guest speaker during last (3rd) meeting ☼ EASA accepts certain categories of FAA PMA parts under EASA – FAA bilateral & TIP agreements

25

Work in Progress – FAA PMA Parts

☼ To date, the WG has been able to develop the following position:

• FAA PMA Parts included in IPC by the TC Holder – are acceptable
• FAA PMA Parts supplied by the STC Holder approved by the GCAA – are acceptable
• FAA PMA Parts – for FAA / EASA TC aircraft – under further consideration by WG study
• Availability of GCAA legal framework – under further study

26

Work in Progress – FAA PMA Parts (continued)

27

Organization Risk Scope ORS

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Agenda

• Introduction
• Objective
• Method
• Risk Calculation
• Implementation of ORS
• Interfacing

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Risk Based Oversight:-

Risk-based Oversight (RBO) is a way of performing oversight, where planning is driven by the risk profile and execution, besides ensuring compliance, focuses on the management of operational risks.

Introduction

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Introduction

Organization Risk Profiling Organization Risk Scope

Risk Based Oversight

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Introduction

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

Organization Risk Profiling Organization Risk Scope

• Review & Update ALL Org.

Profile

• Classify ALL Org. and

determine audit frequency

• Execute audit as per frequency
• Aggregate all data from all sources
• Calculate the RI for Each Scope

item

• Analyze the RI and

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

ORS is a tool to identify risk in the aviation industry through data evaluation and apply a focused approach to eliminate / control risks.

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

Organization Risk Scope

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

• Support State Safety Program.
• Identify the weak compliance area in the UAE Aviation Industry, using

audit finding data.

• Strengthen the Safety and Airworthiness Standards through enhanced

monitoring.

• Contribute to measure effectiveness of the SMS.

Objective:

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

• Define a model of ORS that will identify

– specific risky areas of an Organization – Systemic issues for an Organization – Systemic issues in the UAE total aviation Industry

• Draw a threshold level for each organization to classify the risk level.
• Strengthen monitoring of the identified high risk area

Methodology

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organisation Risk Scope - ORS

RI

V3 V2 V1

Findings Multiplication Factor

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

Risk Severity factoring:

• To moderate effect of different level of finding on risk calculation,

each finding is biased by a multiplication factor (MF) based on finding level.

• MF for Level 1 finding = X
• MF for Level 2 finding =Y
• MF for Level 3 finding = Z

Risk Severity

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

V1=

𝑶𝒗𝒏𝒄𝒇𝒔 𝒑𝒈 𝒈𝒃𝒅𝒖𝒑𝒔𝒇𝒆 𝒈𝒋𝒐𝒆𝒋𝒐𝒉𝒕 𝒋𝒐 𝑩𝒔𝒇𝒃 𝑭𝒉. 𝑫𝑩𝑺 𝟐𝟓𝟔.𝟒𝟏 𝒈𝒑𝒔 𝑷𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒋𝒕𝒃𝒖𝒋𝒑𝒐 𝑯𝒔𝒃𝒐𝒆 𝑼𝒑𝒖𝒃𝒎 𝒑𝒈 𝒈𝒃𝒅𝒖𝒑𝒔𝒇𝒆 𝒈𝒋𝒐𝒆𝒋𝒐𝒉𝒕 𝒋𝒐 𝑩𝒔𝒇𝒃 𝒈𝒑𝒔 𝒃𝒎𝒎 𝒑𝒔𝒉𝒃𝒐𝒋𝒕𝒃𝒖𝒋𝒑𝒐𝒕

V2=

𝐎𝐯𝐧𝐜𝐟𝐬 𝐩𝐠 𝒈𝒃𝒅𝒖𝒑𝒔𝒇𝒆 𝐠𝐣𝐨𝐞𝐣𝐨𝐡𝐭 𝐣𝐨 𝐁𝐬𝐟𝐛 𝑭𝒉.𝑫𝑩𝑺 𝑩𝟐𝟓𝟔𝟏.𝟒𝟏 𝐠𝐩𝐬 𝒃𝒎𝒎 𝐏𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐣𝐭𝐛𝐮𝐣𝐩𝐨𝐭 𝑯𝒔𝒃𝒐𝒆 𝑼𝒑𝒖𝒃𝒎 𝒑𝒈 𝒃𝒎𝒎 𝒈𝒃𝒅𝒖𝒑𝒔𝒇𝒆 𝒈𝒋𝒐𝒆𝒋𝒐𝒉𝒕 𝒋𝒐 𝒃𝒎𝒎 𝑩𝒔𝒇𝒃 𝒃𝒎𝒎 𝒑𝒔𝒉𝒃𝒐𝒋𝒕𝒃𝒖𝒋𝒑𝒐𝒕

V3 =

𝑶𝒗𝒏𝒄𝒇𝒔 𝒑𝒈 𝑷𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒋𝒕𝒃𝒖𝒋𝒑𝒐𝒕 𝒊𝒃𝒘𝒋𝒐𝒉 𝒃 𝒈𝒋𝒐𝒆𝒋𝒐𝒉 𝒋𝒐 𝒖𝒊𝒇 𝑩𝒔𝒇𝒃 𝑭𝒉.𝑫𝑩𝑺 𝑩𝟐𝟓𝟔𝟏.𝟒𝟏 𝑶𝒗𝒏𝒄𝒇𝒔 𝒑𝒈 𝒃𝒎𝒎 𝒑𝒔𝒉𝒃𝒐𝒋𝒕𝒃𝒖𝒋𝒑𝒐𝒕

V? = takes the value of 1/ 0 depending on the % calculated is above or below the defined threshold

Method

Specific lobal Global

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

• RISK INDEX (RI)

RI = 𝑊1x4 + 𝑊2x2 + 𝑊3x1

• This method ensure that “Specific” and “Global” variable do not contribute

to the same level by an weightage for risk calculation Risk Calculation

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

Risk Calculation

RI Description V1=0, Area which is not specific to the Org.; V2=0, Area which consumed less than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=0, Area which is affecting less than 15% of ALL Org. 1 V1=0, Area which is not specific to the Org.; V2=0, Area which consumed less than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=1, Area which is affecting more than 15% of ALL Org. 2 V1=0, Area which is not specific to the Org.; V2=1, Area which consumed more than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=0, Area which is affecting less than 15% of ALL Org. 3 V1=0, Area which is not specific to the Org.; V2=1, Area which consumed more than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=1, Area which is affecting more than 15% of ALL Org. 4 V1=1, Area which is specific to the Org.; V2=0, Area which consumed less than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=0, Area which is affecting less than 15% of ALL Org. 5 V1=1, Area which is specific to the Org.; V2=0, Area which consumed less than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=1, Area which is affecting more than 15% of ALL Org. 6 V1=1, Area which is specific to the Org.; V2=1, Area which consumed more than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=0, Area which is affecting less than 15% of ALL Org. 7 V1=1, Area which is specific to the Org.; V2=1, Area which consumed more than 8% of the GCAA's manpower; V3=1, Area which is affecting more than 15% of ALL Org.

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

• ORS(2016Rev1).xlsm

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

• Map risk index of Org . using Q-Pulse audit data.
• Define the threshold and identified high risk area in each
• rganization.
• Strengthen monitoring of high risk area through emphasize during

regular audit, to capture effectiveness of corrective action. Implementation

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

Internal actions Enhanced audit based on RI Inspector Training to enhance standardization Regulations External actions Airline proactive action Safety promotion events

Organization with identified Risk Area

Immediate Long-term

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

• The conventional compliance audit will continue as per the ORP audit program.
• However, when high risk area identified (RI ≥ ?):

– PI to share the identified risk concerns with the operator/Organization in order to initiate appropriate actions – PI to ensure follow-up on actions taken the operator/Organization. – For the next GCAA audit, PI to schedule at least 1 day addition to focus on the risk area and state in Q Pulse that the concerned areas have been covered in detail.

Follow up Action

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Yes by:

• ROSI
• VORSY
• Internal audits
• External audits
• Creating an new audit scope item and then classifying and

categorizing each similar event accordingly (e.g. Fatigue issue may be categorized under a new audit scope item)

Organization Risk Scope Program- ORS

Can this ORS methodology be fed with

• ther source of data than audit data?

Thank You

Xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

Hazard ID, SPI & SPT

ANDREW LAWSON – May 2016

EASA Significant 7

 1. Loss of Control  2. Runway Excursion  3. Controlled Flight into Terrain  4. Runway Incursion  5. Airborne Conflict  6. Ground Handling  7. Fire

 No consideration of Airworthiness & Safe

Maintenance Practices.

 A safe Flight starts with an Airworthy Aircraft.  First we had to do Hazard Identification.  DAW have adapted the Shell Aviation SMS

concept of ‘Hazardous Event’ categories associated to different phases of Aircraft Operation.

 Hazardous Events - HE1 thru HE 28  Now we are expected to determine SPI’s & SPT’s.

VERY DISAPPOINTING NOT TO INCLUDE AIRWORTHINESS

FIXED WING HAZARD LOCATIONS

15,00 0 ft

Helicopters

Tiltrotors

Hazardous Event vs Location

• A. Aircraft on Ground

Stationary

Hazardous Event vs Location

• C. Aircraft in Motion – On the

Ground

Hazardous Event vs Location

• E. Aircraft in Motion -

Airborne

Hazardous Event vs Location

• F. Aircraft Undergoing

Maintenance

Location / Phase

Maintenance & Engineering Significant 13

 HE 15 Release of an unairworthy aircraft to service  HE1 Loss of containment of Fuel / Oil  HE4 Uncontrolled GSE to an aircraft  HE8 Exceedance of an aircraft limitation  HE10 People in proximity to running engine /

propeller

 HE14 Flammable material in proximity to a source

• f ignition

 HE16 Static out of balance situation cause by

incorrect weight distribution

Maintenance & Engineering Significant 13

 HE17 Unplanned release of a suspended load

during maintenance

 HE5 Health, Safety, Environment  HE25 Actions or implications of people & their inter

face with work environment

 HE26 Actions or in-actions of management at the

appropriate time

 HE27 Lack of awareness  HE28 Damage to aircraft or injury to person whilst

working on aircraft

INDICATORS - CAR 145 Boeing MEDA

• Installation error
• Servicing error
• Repair error
• Maintenance/Test error
• Foreign Object Damage error
• Airplane / Equipment damage error
• Personal injury error
• Engine ground run error
• Certification (CRS) error
• Inadequate Data error
• Tech Log data entry error
• GSE Maintenance error
• Human Factors – loss of spatial awareness
• Maintenance overrun error

INDICATORS - CAMO

• Overdue / non-compliance of AD error
• Aircraft Maintenance Program (AMP) compliance

error

• Overrun of maintenance / LLP error
• Maintenance Data error
• Airworthiness Review error
• Aircraft Certificates / Documents error
• Certificate of Release to Service by contracted

145 MRO error

• Aircraft Technical Log data error
• Unapproved Modification error
• Deferred Defect error

Finding the Applicable Measuring Criteria

 Airline - Per 100,000 Flight Hours  Private Operator, Low Utilization – number of Work

Orders issued

 Light Aircraft, Pre-flights, servicing tasks – number

• f flights.

 Helicopters – number of Work Orders issued  Percentage of errors that could have/should

have been prevented

Only Events Count

 Only Events within your control count – If there is

something that could have been done – it’s something that should have been done

 145 Errors & CAMO Errors – Your errors  Outside of your control but can track!

 Bird Strikes – report to Authority  Errors / Damage to aircraft at/by MRO  Errors / Damage by Ground Handling Agent  Design Fault

What if’s – Permutations of 28 HE and 54 Threats = 5.7 x 10⁴⁴ Maint – 1.7 x 10³⁸ 5 Why’s = Root Cause Now is History

Extract from DAW Newsletter

 63 maintenance related reports submitted last

year

 32 were ‘Potential Hazards’ 30 were ‘Events, 1

Quality issue.

 Of the 30 Events 21 were out of our control

(component failure, damage from Bird Strike etc)

 9 Events were considered to be preventable by

DAW

 Of those 9, 2 of them (7%)were CAMO errors  7 of them were CAR 145 errors

Of those 9, 2 events (7%) were DAW CAMO errors

 Maintenance Overrun – A6-GGP portable ELT

battery not entered into RAL correctly. HE15,

• Planning. Indicator: Maintenance Overrun error.

 Maintenance Overrun – A6-HRS CVR ULB battery

not entered into RAL correctly. HE15, Planning. Indicator: Maintenance Overrun error.

The other 7 events (23%) were DAW 145 errors



A6-RJ2 #2 Engine outboard fire bottle squib wiring cross connected. HE15, Aircraft at MRO, ROSI. Indicator: Installation error.



A6-RJ2 Fixed ELT not programmed after maintenance task. HE15, Aircraft at MRO. Indicator: Maintenance error.



A6-HEH flown with overdue maintenance task. HE15, Aircraft Operational away from base. Indicator: Maintenance Overrun error.



Personal injury – cut head. HE5, DAW Ramp/Apron. Indicator: personal injury error.



A6-RJ1 inadvertent slide deployment. HE3, DAW Ramp/Apron. Indicator: Human Factors – loss of spatial awareness.



Stores personnel crashed buggy into roll-up door – no injury, just door

• damage. HE5, Stores. Indicator: Human Factors – loos of spatial

awareness.



A6-HRS maintenance overrun – Mag plug inspection. HE15, Aircraft Operational away from base. Indicator: Maintenance Overrun error.

Target – Encourage more reporting

 Report more Potential Hazards & Events  Target is to reduce the percentage of DAW errors  Educate / Encourage our MRO’s to do the same.

What do you think?

 What are your Indicators?  What measuring criteria is applicable to your

• peration?

 How & What are you tracking?

ANDREW LAWSON lawson@daw.ae

General Civil Aviation Authority of UAE CAR M Presentation Airworthiness Consultative Committee 19 May 2016

Hatem Dibian-Manager CAMO and Air Operators & Henry Angel -Senior Inspector CAMO & Air operators

Objectives

• An Overview of the ICAO State Letter and the

new proposals

• To give an overall view of current and

proposed changes

• Overview of the up and coming changes in the

ROSI structure

• SMS update
• CAR M update

ICAO State Letter AN7/1.3.105-15/78 27 NOV 2015

• Title: Proposals For The amendment of Annex

10, Volume IV Regarding Surveillance And Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems

• Response from the member states was

required by 29 Feb 2016

New ICAO Requirements

• ICAO has developed new requirements with regards to :
• ADS-B ( Automatic Dependent Surveillance -Broadcast )

the implementation date is November 2018

• SSR ( Secondary Surveillance Radar)
• ACAS ( Airborne Collision Avoidance System)
• Operators are advised that this has a financial impact on

their operation and are required to communicate with the GCAA in order to decide on an acceptable implementation date

ICAO State Letter AN7/1.3.105-15/78 27 NOV 2015

• UAE will implement the new Transponder

requirements (ADS-B ) OUT by 2020

• (ADS –B) OUT for surface vehicles will not be

mandated in UAE

CAR OPS-1.830 Extended Overwater Flights

• The title of this rule was “ Life Rafts And Survival

ELTs For Extended Overwater Flights”

• Applicability “ All Airplanes of a MTOM over

27,000Kgs involved in Commercial Operations”

• The requirement is : “ Life Rafts Shall be equipped

with a securely attached ULD operating at a Frequency 8.8 KHz”

CAR OPS-1.830 Extended Overwater Flights

• Exceptions:
• “ Unless the Airplane is operated over routes on

which it is not at a distance of more than 180 NM from the shore OR

• The Airplane is equipped with automatic means

to determine the location of the point of end of flight within 6 NM accuracy (following an accident where the A/C is severely damaged) ” .

CAR OPS-1.830 Extended Overwater Flights

• AMC to CAR-OPS 1.830 ( d )
• “ULD performance requirements should be

equivalent to SAE AS6254 Minimum Performance Standard for Low Frequency Underwater Locating Devices (Self powered),

• r equivalent documents. This automatically

activated underwater device should operate for a minimum of 30 days and shall not be installed in wings OR empennage”

CAR –OPS 1.605 GENERAL

• An Operator must establish the mass and the

center of gravity of any aeroplane by actual weighing prior to initial entry into service and thereafter at intervals of 4 years if individual aeroplane masses are used and 9 years if fleet masses can be used. The accumulated effects of modifications and repairs on the M&B must be accounted for and properly documented. Furthermore aeroplanes must be reweighed if the effect of modifications on the M&B is not accurately known.

Proposed ROSI Restructuring

• Safety Occurrence Management Team will be

formed with the main functions to:

• Classify the occurrences and,
• Develop reports periodically for SSP analysis

purposes,

• Events in CAAP 22 will be classified into two

categories “ CAT 1 & CAT 2”

Proposed ROSI Restructuring

• CAT 1 Are reportable incidents which are

deemed to be critical and required to be reported to the GCAA and routed to the concerned department Inspector and the Safety Occurrence Management Team within 72 Hours ,

• CAT 2 incidents are to be reported to the GCAA

within15 days from the date of occurrence with an initial investigation report as necessary.

Proposed ROSI Restructuring

• Examples of CAT 1 Events are:
• Loss of any part of A/C in flight,
• IFSD
• Examples of Cat 2 Events are:
• Failure or defects of passenger address system

resulting in loss or inaudible announcements

Proposed ROSI Restructuring

• In CAT 2 events:
• Inspector will not be notified,
• Reporting requirement to GCAA within 15

days from occurrence,

• Event will be handled by the Safety

Occurrence Management Team,

• The Team will analyze the event and decide if

further investigation is required.

SMS audit standardization

• SMS audits will be standardized throughout the UAE
• Focal Inspectors from the GCAA will be appointed to

conduct these audits thus providing a uniform and standard process across the board.

• Check lists and procedures are being developed to

accommodate the above

• An SMS Enhancement working group was established

after the last ACC Meeting in order to improve the understanding of SMS and instill best practice amongst UAE organizations.

SMS Implementation

• A new check list is being developed to provide
• versight on the effective implementation of

SMS

• The check list will provide a standardized

approach and insight on the operators understanding and implementation of SMS

SMS Reporting

• The GCAA will issue a new IB in order to define the Safety

Performance Reporting of organizations’ SPIs.

• Quarterly Report submissions dates will be required.
• A report template will be published with this IB , where

airworthiness and flight operations SPIs are included

• If the organization wishes to use a different format then it

should be acceptable to the relevant inspectors.

Subpart I Privileges

• The requirement for all operators to hold subpart

I privileges is expected by the end of 2016

• FTOs are expected to have the subpart I privilege

by June 2017

• In general all organizations are required to be

prepared for this introduction and to either have the privilege themselves or subcontract the function to an approved CAMO

CAMO - FEES

• The GCAA intends to begin charging a fee for

CAMO organizations

• IB 14/2006 makes reference to the above.
• The fee structure follows a similar logic used

in the charges for CAR 145 organizations .

• The fee structure is based on the number of

aircraft types operated by an organization.

IB 11/2016 ARC Review Staff Training /Workshop

• The GCAA has become aware that different
• rganizations are employing varying standards

in the process of ARC renewals. The GCAA intends to conduct a mandatory workshop to all ARC review staff instilling best practice procedures and processes required to be followed prior to the issuance of an ARC.

Your time is greatly appreciated. We look forward to working with you. @GCAA_UA E FACEBOOK.COM/GCAAUAE GCAA.GOV.UAE GCAA_UAE

Thank you

THE UAE AIRCRAFT REGISTRY

94 19 May 2016

AMENDMENTS TO CAR PART V, CHAPTER I

Amended provisions:  Clarification on which provisions of CAR Part V Chapter I are applicable to Light Sport Aircraft – it makes reference to CAR Part II Chapter X on Light Sport Aircraft Regulation.  Clarification that IDERA letter can also be issued in favor for the aircraft owner (IDERA letter to be a requirement to register/amend COR when registered owner and operator are not the same party)  Registration plate for balloons shall mention: registration mark, aircraft model and name of aircraft owner & operator.

95 19 May 2016

AMENDMENTS TO CAR PART V, CHAPTER I

Amended provisions:  Back side wording of the COR will be removed. Reason:

• To avoid delay in the process
• Duplication of the same requirement

Note: Back side of the COR shall be completed when required  The is no need of notarization of no objection letter or any other letter if:

• The signatory is the person who has power to sign (e.g. the person mentioned in POA)
• The original letter is filed with the GCAA for records

96 19 May 2016

AMENDMENTS TO CAR PART V, CHAPTER I

New provisions:  The registered operator shall ensure that any agreement recorded with the AR is valid for the whole period the aircraft is being operated.  Requirements to be met when aircraft owner is a Trust.  Rules for registration mark and mode s code: a year validity period, cancellation of mode s code, changing mode s code.

97 19 May 2016

AMENDMENTS TO CAR PART V, CHAPTER I

New provisions:  A reserved registration mark and mode s code can not be used unless the aircraft is registered being granted with a COR.  The aircraft registration mark and plate shall be replaced and removed it. NO need for

• proof. Reason:
• To avoid delay on the process
• It will be responsibility of the aircraft owner/operator to ensure that the registration

mark and plate are removed.

98 19 May 2016

AMENDMENTS TO CAR PART V, CHAPTER I

New provisions:  Affidavit: a letter stating that the owner (applicant) can not produce a required document. Requirements:

• Original and signed by the owner or his authorized representative
• Notarized

 New AW Form AWF-ATC-001 Replacement of Certificate (no e-services). This form is to be completed to replace (re-issue) any aircraft certificate. Requirements:

• Complete Form AWF-ATC-001
• 500 AED fee: to be paid at the front desk.

99 19 May 2016

AMENDMENTS TO CAR PART V, CHAPTER I

Upcoming amendments:  AW forms are being updated.

100 19 May 2016

Cape Town Convention Academic Project (CTC-AP)

A. Legislative history, implementation materials, cases, administrative action, academic writing, practitioner materials, registry materials now available

• n website

B.

• Yearly. Cutting edge/multi-

discipline C. Academic conferences

• D. (i) For use in range of courses,

e.g., TCL, IBT, comparative/international law, and secured transactions; (ii) detailed Cape Town materials

• E. With Business School and/or

Economics Department

• F. Iterative reporting to provide incentives

to governments and information to financiers and investors

• G. Authorized annotations to address

developments and issues NB: All open source, electronic, and free Journal Database Law & economics Teaching materials Conferences A B C D E

Joint Auspices

Founding Sponsor Cooperation

ICAO Advisory Board Others Academic Project UW Oxford UNIDROIT AWG OTIF

Annotations of ‘OC’ Compliance Reporting F G

101 19 May 2016

CTC – Reporting on Administrative and

• ther Non-Judicial Activity (RANJA) System
• The CTC and aircraft protocol are intended to reduce the cost and

increase the availability of financing for aircraft.

• To achieve this benefit, there must be a presumption that

contracting states will comply with their treaty obligations, accurately applying and enforcing it.

• Although CTC Academic Project research indicates that states

generally comply with their international obligations, the international financial community requires actual data showing that states are complying with the CTC.

102 19 May 2016

Reporting on Administrative and other Non-Judicial Activity (RANJA) System

• Legal proceedings involving the CTC are often administrative in

nature (e.g., de-registration), which in many states means there is no published record data from which to derive information on compliance.

• To address this, the CTC Academic Project created a database that

allows any party or government agency involved with the action to file a report on such action.

103 19 May 2016

Civil Aviation Authority Reports

• Civil aviation authorities are a critical source of information that can

demonstrate compliance with the CTC.

• To facilitate civil aviation authority participation in the RANJA

system, a simplified version of the reporting form is available which

• nly asks for information the civil aviation authority is likely to have.
• Civil aviation authority participation will facilitate access to

information about CTC compliance and encourage participation by private parties. That, in turn, will promote greater reliance on the CTC treaty, producing greater economic benefits, thereby strengthening the air transport sector and international civil aviation.

104 19 May 2016

Civil Aviation Authority Reports

Item Factual Information

• 1. Date of the transaction
• 2. Creditor
• 3. Debtor
• 4. Date of aircraft registration
• 5. Date of recordation of IDERA (if any)
• 6. Date of commencement of the exercise of de-registration by

Creditor

• 7. Date of completion of the exercise of de-registration of the aircraft

by Creditor

• 8. List the relevant parties and their contact details

105 19 May 2016

Civil Aviation Authority Reports

Item Factual Information

• 1. Date of the transaction
• 2. Creditor
• 3. State of Creditor
• 4. Debtor
• 5. State of Debtor
• 6. State and date of aircraft registration
• 7. Summary of transaction structure
• 8. Recordation of IDERA
• 9. Registrations with International Registry
• 10. Date of commencement by Creditor of the exercise of CTC remedies:

a) to obtain possession of the aircraft object b) to deregister the aircraft c) to export the aircraft object

• 11. Date of completion of the exercise of CTC remedies by Creditor:

a) possession of the aircraft object b) de-registration of the aircraft c) export of the aircraft object

• 12. Nature of governmental action sought and taken, including by which authority and where and when
• 13. Related court order, if any, and timing therefor
• 14. Other CTC related technical information pertinent to the replies to Questions 8 – 13 above
• 15. List and description of attachments, being official government documents
• 16. List the relevant parties and their contact details

106 19 May 2016

THANK YOU

107 19 May 2016

Duty Time Limitation Working Group Presentation James Graham-Inspector Airworthiness

Background

• Final report of AAIS case AIFN/0016/2012
• Maintenance error related incident
• Report identifies a number of Contributing Factors
• Makes Safety Recommendations

Relevant contributing factors

• The effect of fatigue on the engineer’s decision

making process due to his shift pattern of working an average of 8.5 hours a day for 32 days continuously.

• Lack of guidance provided by the GCAA and the
• perator, on the effect of shift duty times and the

management of risk associated with fatigue.

Safety recommendations GCAA should;

• Issue guidance to the industry regarding man-hour

methodology, duty times, including maximum days

• n duty, working hours, shift patterns, working

beyond normal duty times, minimum rest between shifts and rest days.

• Issue guidance to the industry for workers involved

with safety sensitive jobs regarding fatigue risk management.

Current regulatory provision.

CAR 145.47(b) Production planning. The planning of maintenance tasks, and the organising of shifts, shall take into account human performance limitations. AMC CAR 145.47(b) Limitations of human performance, in the context of planning safety related tasks, refers to the upper and lower limits, and variations, of certain aspects of human performance (Circadian rhythm/24 hours body cycle) which personnel should be aware of when planning work and shifts.

Possible amended regulatory provision.

AMC(1) 145.47(b) Production planning. FATIGUE RISK MANAGEMENT

• In order to manage the fatigue related risk of personnel, the
• rganisation should;

(1) as part of its safety policy develop and maintain a policy for the management of fatigue related risk and define the related procedures. (2) define and use a work schedule scheme with maximum work and minimum rest hours not exceeding the limitations laid down in the (refer to) UK CAA Working hours paper 2002/06.

• by derogation from point (2) above, when the organisation does not

apply the maximum work and minimum rest hours laid down in the recommendations extracted from the (refer to) UK CAA Working hours paper 2002/06, it should establish, as part of its Safety Management System, a Fatigue Risk Management Scheme in accordance with CAR X, acceptable to the GCAA.

UK CAA Working Hours Paper 2002/06 Recommendations

• Shifts longer than 12 hours should be considered undesirable.
• Shifts should not be extended by overtime to longer than 13 hours.
• A minimum rest period of 11 hours between shifts should not be

compromised by overtime.

• When designing shift schedules the number of days off between shifts

must be considered. After more than 2-3 days on night shift , several days of rest time may be required to recuperate/alleviate sleep debt and fatigue.

• Engineers should be given at least 28 days notice of schedule.

• Absolute maximum of seven successive work days before a break of at

least two rest days.

• (7 successive 12 hour days may not be acceptable, 7 successive 7/8

hour days may be).

• Absolute maximum of 60 accumulated hours before a break of at least

two rest days.

• Absolute minimum of two successive rest days between spans of work

days involving 16 or more hours work.

Why UK CAA Working hours paper 2002/06?

• Document forms part of Appendix P of UK CAA CAP 716 (Aviation

Maintenance Human Factors).

• CAP 716 published in 2003 contains a detailed study of the effect of

working hours on human performance and limitations.

• Used as a benchmark for other authorities in adopting a standard for

shift work and working hours.

• Prepared by Dr Simon Folkard, Body Rhythms and Shiftwork Centre,

University of Wales, after extensive review of published academic literature with respect to the impact of various aspects of work hours

• n health, sleep, fatigue and safety.

Thank you for your attention. Questions?

Manufacturing Organization Approval

15th Airworthiness Consultative Committee Meeting

19th May 2016

Andek Heshamuddin – Engineering Safety Inspector

Vision for MOA

Stimulate growth of UAE’s aviation supply chain through:

119

• Catalyzes the setting up of new organization that starts with

manufacturing non critical components with no airworthiness impacts

• Segregation of critical and non-critical component manufacturing

approvals that encourages focus for business operations

• Expansion of business opportunities through supports of not only specific
• rganization, but also for other organization through subcontract

manufacturing

• MOA is a new evolving concept

MOA Scope

• Component for UAE-registered aircraft only
• Non-critical Component with no airworthiness impacts

– Examples: small plastic components, seat covers, carpets, side panels – Expansion of the list shall be considered on case to case basis

Organization:

120

• Organization within the physical boundaries of UAE

Component Manufactured:

Scopes

121

CAR 145 CAR Part 21 Subpart G CAR Part V Chapter 6 (MOA)

Maintenance Organization Approval

Maintenance of aircraft and components for UAE registered aircraft, with varying categories plus limited fabrication for aircraft maintained

Production Organization Approval

Production organization showing conformity of products, parts and appliances with applicable design data

Manufacturing Organization Approval

Simple non-critical component manufacturing for UAE registered aircraft

• nly

MOA Eligibility

• Any person or organization is eligible for applying for manufacturing under

MOA regulation (Part V Chapter 6)

122

• Application shall be made in a form and manner established by the GCAA and

shall include; the Exposition Manual, Scope of Approvals applied and the payment of applicable fee

MOA Quality Management System

A Quality System is required:

123

• Shall be formally documented:

– Has established and able to maintain a quality system to ensure conformity to applicable design data and is in condition for safe operation

• Formal documentation for outlining control procedures for:

– Organizational changes – Processes compliance and control – Materials and products conformity to approved data

• An independent quality assurance function to monitor

compliance, and adequacy of the documented procedures

MOA Exposition Manual

• Organizational capabilities and scope of approval
• Details of quality system and procedures
• Description of products and processes control
• Amendment procedures for organizational and process changes

Organization Setup:

124

• Management commitment
• Organization chart showing chain of responsibilities
• Certifying personnel
• Facility setup

Process Setup:

MOA Form 299

125

MOA – Airworthiness Release Form 299

• Organizational data
• Released component information
• Endorsement and certification details

126

• Certification of conformity to the approved design data and for condition
• f safe operation

Contents: Completion Instruction:

• Provided in MOA regulations

Comparison - CAR 21 Subpart G & MOA

• Existing facilities can be used
• Existing manpower can be used
• It is easy to set up MOA Organization as compared to CAR 21 Subpart G

MOA focus on manufacturing of:

127

• Non-critical items
• No airworthiness impact

MOA Approval is therefore simpler due to:

MOA Certification Implementation (1/2)

• Expected implementation by end of the year
• Already receiving applications, three applications being processed

Potential organizations:

128

• New organizations
• Part 145 Approval Holders

Expected Timeframe:

MOA Certification Implementation (2/2)

• Fabricate within scope of CAR 145 is only permitted
• Any fabrication beyond the provision of CAR 145 will be considered for

transfer to MOA

• Identifying CAR 145 approved organizations carrying out manufacturing

beyond CAR 145 provisions

• Discussion with CAR 145 organizations for moving to MOA
• Agreeing on time frame to move such CAR 145 organizations to MOA on

case by case basis

129

Existing Fabrication under CAR 145:

Questions / Discussion

130