A Report on the North Star Practices

A report on the North Star Practices

Several years ago, the FOA began to draft a safety document that would surpass current operating standards now in place. With the interest and support from the British Columbia Forest Safety Council (BCFSC) and by reassessing the CARs, consulting with industry stake-holders and Operators, FOA created the North Star Practices or NSP.

 The FOA has recently disbanded and the membership has been encouraged to join The Northern Air Transport Association so that we can continue to promote safety and the industry in general. NATA welcomes those previous FOA members and any one who wishes to promote safety in the float plane industry. 

  Since the change with the FOA to NATA the North Star Practices has evolved into a comprehensive safety program. The NSP has within it, recognizable practices and disciplines that when respected and applied, could turn the page on old habits and elevate the industry to a new level of practices that will diminish the potential for accidents.

  The FOA and now NATA along with the Air Carriers Safety Working Group and representatives from the forest industry who readily utilize both float-equipped aircraft and rotor-wing aircraft to conduct their business, were involved with fine-tuning the NSP, to make it a viable and usable program.

  Some of the features included in the North Star Practices address wind limits, visibility limits, decision-making as well as how a dialogue with operators and their clients should be initiated.

  There is to be an audit portion to the NSP that is in place to ensure that all participants to the NSP have an equal opportunity to demonstrate that they are performing within the NSP practices-as the NSP is to be a recognizable program.

  In all, the NSP is a comprehensive program that will involve everyone who relies on or utilizes air transport.  All parties have a responsibility with helping to improve safety and are therefore, provided (where applicable), with practices of their own. 

   Stay current with the latest news on our progress with the NSP right here on our website. We will post updates as we move ahead with this innovative safety program. 

Complacency-A Topic for Best Practices

Complacency- A topic for Best Practices

by Jim Hartwell

There’s an old saying that states-familiarity breeds contempt. We would be amiss by not adding to this old sage that familiarity also breeds complacency. To us, complacency is an issue we all should be concerned about, as it affects the very safety of everyone in aviation. We have added this section to the page therefore, for the purpose of taking in and sharing any and all ideas and techniques that would address this issue. By posting on this page, we hope to allow everyone with concerns and/or ideas to anonymously contribute to this dialogue, to help diminish and/or better understand complacency. As our mission is based on Best Practices, we are seeking techniques and methods that will create a culture within the industry that allows for a safety first foundation. We ask for your contributions and the sharing of ideas.

Identifying and explaining Complacency

   Of the key elements with complacency, environment and the interaction between people in the workplace appear to have the greatest affect with causing or preventing mishaps. Through a typical day at one’s place of work for example, elements of complacency can create an environment that can and does create mishaps, as does the interaction between one’s fellow workers, parlous actions that can affect the safety aspects of one’s operation/airline. When one is operating their aircraft for example, whether the situation is tense and stressful or uneventful and relaxing, the pilot can be tripped up or lulled into a state of complacency. When a pilot is complacent resulting from too much routine, indifference or fatigue for example, then a dangerous environment can be the consequence. As for the interaction between people, the consensus appears to be that a state of complacency can easily take hold of an entire organization when the people working in, on or with aircraft have migrated to a disposition (caused by several factors) that encourages heedless and neglectful practices. Examples of these practices are carelessness, laxness, alacrity and indifference. All route causes that can and do lead to complacency. In the following summation, we will examine several factors that lead to this subject and hope with future suggestions and recommendations show how an operator can address and correct many of these elements that allow one to fall into a complacent frame of mind.

Stress and tense situations for example, can lend to missed thoughts and/or lost steps that trace back to one not instilling in their regimen the necessary practices or preparation for (in this case aviation) a demanding flight, where as a relaxing flight on the other hand, can and does very often lull one into a state of complacency. It has been recognized, that the stressors of a flight may very well put a pilot in a more heightened state of awareness, yet also lead to distractions and with a lack of preparedness can and does lead one to catastrophic circumstances. Mundane and routine flights though well the opposite of flights in inclement weather for example, have been known to lead or lull one into a malaise of complacency and leave one to miss and ignore key and critical safety procedures and steps. It might be added that a sequential series of actions with a stressful flight at the beginning or during a flight followed by an improvement in weather on the final portion of a flight for example, can take a pilot from a state of stress and a related complacent disposition due to distractions into a complacent situation resulting from the sense of relief and therefore, the consequent letting of one’s guard-down. This could for example, have the pilot forget to check a pre-landing checklist resulting in a gear-down (for water landing) approach to final/landing. The result? Disastrous. The cause? Complacency.  This is a workload element, whether that workload is too much to handle or whether it is little or relatively non-existent. The results are similar and originate from the same route origin-complacency.

Another element that can lead to complacency is fatigue. Fatigue causes us to miscue functions and steps that when operating aircraft can have an effect that though preventable, is seldom reversible. Fatigue can stem from several factors such as lack of sleep (long duty hours for the pilot), problems with one’s home life, finances, distractions etc. All of these or a combination there of, can cause fatigue and a worrisome predisposition for the pilot. The signs of fatigue manifest themselves in many ways, but the key signs are, a lack of attention to the task at hand, indifference toward the work required to fulfill one’s tasks, or acknowledging the spoken word-but, instead, hearing what they believe is being said. Other signs are those of one being easily dissuaded, disrupted or distracted from what one is doing. Critical signs of a pilot suffering from a fatigue induced and therefore complacent mind-set.

If you have ever had a conversation with someone that goes like this then you’ll understand this element of complacency exactly. “Oh, didn’t you check that? I thought you checked that”. A co-dependency on your co-workers or even you equipment is a path that can lead to an unsafe flight.  A tendency to become co-dependent on someone else who may have more experience with the aircraft being flown or the area being flown in, can easily allow for a pilot to rely too much on someone else. To not question and actively partake in the management of the flight and one’s responsibilities, has been known for example, to have a pilot fall back into a complacent role, even though this crew member who though very well may be properly qualified to partake in the flight duties, lulls into a complacent standing while flying with a more experienced captain. Co-workers from the ground up, have a role to play in the safe operation of a flight, yet the dynamics of a flight from the loading of freight to the active involvement of the dispatcher brings into play all sorts of interaction with one’s peers and questions one’s role and resulting actions to be taken.  Interdependence, making assumptions and not questioning authority for example, can lead to a complacent environment that can consequently lead to failure.

Managing, overseeing and detecting complacency begins with the individual but the responsibility with taking a hold of and instituting better Practices in aviation is and should be shared with the managerial structure/hierarchy of any operation. Management that lets things go-as it were, unchecked are basically condoning complacent acts. Management has a responsibility when addressing complacency to actively involve themselves with seeing to it that those taking the easiest way of doing things or those that break the rules need to be brought into line, ensuring that safety is kept at the forefront.

How to address complacency and instill practices that curtail complacent acts.

To address this portion of the discussion we need to single out each of the recognizable complacent elements by 1. Identifying the element/action 2. Explaining the dynamics of this complacent issue. 3. Suggesting and recommending what actions to take to diminish or eliminate the complacent act.

Let’s start with Fatigue. The duty hours for pilots are found to contribute greatly to a pilot’s performance level. Fatigue as we all know can originate from someone performing their tasks on long summer days for example and not be allowed the time to rest and compensate for these long days with sufficient rest. Caused by such things as a disruptive family life, financial problems or a young child crying all night in the pilot’s home. Add to that the stressors of high frequency rotations/legs, vibration, tasking, time restraints and noise and you have a tired/fatigued and stressed pilot.  Accumulated over time, fatigue cannot be addressed and corrected by a pilot taking a few more hours of sleep in a single night. As with fatigue which builds over time, rest takes time to retrieve and recover and therefore, must be something accumulated to keep the fatigue factor- in check. In order to keep fatigue in check and therefore, allow the pilot the necessary balance to perform their duties safely, as with most people, individuals/pilots must know what their limits and abilities are as they play into this balance of fatigue and being well rested. Some individuals are able to function with less rest/sleep than are others and therefore, the individual/pilot, the management hierarchy and the team as a whole need to be cognizant of this factor when observing and interacting with the pilot and each other. This can best be instilled in any operation through education (with all employees) such as human factors training- for example.

As mentioned previously, an organization has a key role to play with complacency. Workers, dock-hands, dispatchers, pilots and management alike, all have a part to play in this element of any operation. By instilling a pro-active and involved mind-set with an airlines’ employees an operator is ensuring that complacency is kept in check and taken out of the day to day operation of an airline. By not instituting a policy of accountability and by not putting in place a set of standards and rules and by accepting mediocre performance or allowing for the cutting of corners for example, an operator and/or its team are condoning complacency and leading to potential mishaps.

It must be added, that with so many elements involved with complacency, one can easily miss the co-dependency element as a prime example of how one can fall back into an indifferent or complacent stance while on duty and/or flying. To have a new trainee in flight with a more experienced pilot for example, the roles of diligence and dependence can and does fall on the more experienced pilot’s shoulders. This is not an assumption so much as a fact, as human nature as it is, proves time and time again that we tend to not question those among us with the longer and/or greater lineage of experience. To question authority for example in an environment such as flying, one would best be taught to question decisions and participate in cock-pit management for example instead of taking a more submissive role. Management again, should instill in their employees and operations a culture of participants as opposed to followers and rule- breakers.

There’s a funny old saying that’s been going around in the aviation community for years that states; In the future, there will be three things in a cock-pit.  A pilot, a computer and a Dog. The computer will be there to fly the plane while the dog is there to bite the pilot if he touches anything. Well, that old joke is getting closer to the truth, in that technology though racing ahead and providing the pilot with great support in navigation, system controls, weather sourcing etc. can lead the pilot to be too dependent on technology and complacent in ensuring that the very systems and technology that are enhancing the flight deck not become something that leads the pilot into someone who follows the lead and relies solely on something that can put him/her in a compromised scenario. A GPS Navigation system for example, is a marvelous tool, but if the power goes out, a complacent individual could be ill prepared for the consequences. Reliance is a trustful dependence on someone or something yet for someone flying an aircraft, taking ownership of these contemporary advances in technology and therefore, not falling into the role of the reliant and consequently complacent- is something required to ensure safety. To accept technology as something that is infallible and without flaws is to recognize a human element that has and does continue to put one in a compromised position. Dependency and falling back on technology can lend one to put themselves into a very dangerous scenario.

Cockpit management is another element that invites complacency. With routine and repetitive actions a pilot can become an indifferent and apathetic individual leading to a predilection that allows him or her to become complacent. Cutting corners on check-lists or taking chances with techniques and practices that save time for example can allay one’s imperative duties to ensure a safe and uneventful flight. We hope to address these key elements of complacency on the flight deck by discussing in future editions in more detail, how we can identify, address and through suggested techniques correct many of the key issues that cause complacency in flight.

Reference source for this article was granted with permission from the copy write holder- Grey Owl Aviation Consultants Inc. 204-848-7353

Feature post on Pro-Aviation

Professional Training for Professionals

By: Jim Hartwell

 

The FOA has had as members since its conception, a host of very dedicated and earnest participants. Dedicated in providing safety programs and initiatives that are and have provided the industry and the people we fly with, programs that enhance safety. In an earnest approach to applying their training techniques, Pro Aviation has stepped up to the plate with providing to anyone, programs that effectively provide training methods for egressing-from compromised aircraft.

How does Pro Aviation apply these techniques to the traveller? Well, the program offered by Pro Aviation is firstly, founded on a great deal of knowledge attained by its founders and staff. Knowledge, that was attained then enhanced upon from years of training and experience secured from the Canadian military and civil aviation. A plethora of experience that addresses all aspects of over water flying orientation. Experience that goes to the key elements of what it is that a student in one of Pro Aviation’s courses are provided with. Experience that is in place and readily availed to the student from Pro Aviation’s helpful staff. From instructors with thousands of hours of flight time, certified Scuba credentials, backgrounds with Transport Canada, as company Aviation Safety Officers, Coast Guard flying backgrounds to aircraft training in sea survival with the Canadian Navy. These, along with ditching at sea, on land and artic survival training as well as PADI (Professional Association of Dive Instructors) and lifeguard training makes for a well prepared graduate. Dedicated to providing the best and most contemporary training available, Pro Aviation can take anyone who wishes to learn the skill-set necessary to learn how to egress from an aircraft and give that person the knowledge and the confidence to extricate themselves quickly and safely from an egress situation. The techniques learned at Pro Aviation are tried and true and with any safety program of this nature, Pro Aviation is constantly looking for and upgrading to the latest, in safety techniques. It’s a hands-on course with the knowledgeable staff, keeping a close and learned eye on their clients, as the students graduate through the necessary steps needed to learn the techniques involved with orienting and egressing themselves from all possible scenarios.

The training available at Pro Aviation doesn’t stop here, however. Pro Aviation is a company that is at the forefront with many other training programs. Pro Aviation provides courses in HUET (Helicopter Underwater Egress Training) which includes ditching scenarios, ditching procedures, survival equipment (aircraft and personal), sea survival and hypothermia techniques. Pro Aviation also provides courses in Crew Resource Management and Passenger Safety. Because Pro Aviation has diving qualifications/certifications and instructors on staff, Pro Aviation also provides EBS (Emergency Breathing Systems) training, for those that use this type of equipment.

Questions from FOA – April 2, 2014

 

1. If you were to describe your mission statement, what would that be?

 

We are committed to providing quality interactive safety training to increase and promote awareness of aviation safety. This is why we are called Pro Aviation Safety Training.

 

2. How many people do you think you have helped with your training programs?

 

We hope that we have helped all of the almost 5000 people that we have trained since 1998, to one extent or another, to promote aviation safety.

 

3. How many cases of lives saved do you think, are a result of your training?

 

We have been accredited with at least 5 people surviving an accident as a direct result of the training we have provided them with.

 

Although we find this somewhat satisfying, we would rather not have people involved in these types of accidents. Whether you are a pilot or passenger, we promote and train pro-active accident prevention. Although we understand there is always a risk of being involved in an underwater egress situation, we prefer that participants use our training to prevent the accident from occurring in the first place. In fact, the practical underwater egress training is a real eye opener for most and acts as a good motivator not to be involved in these types of accidents.

 

In this case, it would be difficult to determine how many accidents were avoided as a result of our training, but from the feedback we have been receiving, we know there has been a positive impact on increasing aviation safety and awareness.

 

4. Where and to what extent do you think the trends in egress training are going? Do you think that this is something that will be legislated in the foreseeable future?

 

Underwater egress training has been mandatory in the offshore helicopter industry and the military for many years as a proven way of saving lives. The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) has made several recommendations in past reports and studies to make underwater egress training mandatory for floatplane pilots. In a recent fatal accident involving a DHC-2 that crashed into a lake in May 2012, the TSB stated in its accident report, its concern that pilots who have not received training in underwater egress may not be able to exit the aircraft and subsequently help passengers to safety. It also recommended that the Department of Transport require underwater egress training for all flight crews engaged in commercial seaplane operations.

 

In recent years, Transport Canada and the specialized underwater-egress training industry have made considerable efforts in educating pilots and operators on the importance of underwater egress procedures and training. Through pamphlets, newsletter articles, posters, videos and brochures, the aviation industry has received the bulk of the information and awareness materials.

 

However, those education efforts have succeeded only partially; while crews and operators are aware, a very important segment of our industry, the passengers, has not benefited to the same extent from this awareness drive.

 

The reality is that the majority of passengers will not seek specialized underwater egress training, and therein lies the challenge. How best to reach them? The aforementioned awareness materials are indeed available on-line for most of us who know how to find them. But then again, how many passengers will seek that specialized information? It is therefore the commercial operators-and their flight crews who are in the best position to transfer this knowledge to the paying passengers. Other than the formal underwater ‎egress training program, the most effective and traditional way of accomplishing this knowledge transfer is to provide the best, most comprehensive pre-flight briefing possible supported by a pre-flight video and reading material, such as a brochure or pamphlet.

 

In June 2011, as a result of the fatal DHC-2 Beaver accident in Lyall Harbour, Transport Canada issued a Civil Aviation Safety Alert encouraging all commercial and private floatplane operators to adopt several floatplane safety best industry practices, one of which being “emergency egress training for flight crew”.

 

In a report to the Chief Coroner of British Columbia as a result of this and three other fatal aviation accidents, the coronial death review panel had emphasized the value of underwater egress training. It said that “Such training should be mandatory for seaplane flight crews, and strongly recommended for passengers who frequently fly over water, such as workers commuting to remote coastal work places; likewise, the panel recognized that the infrequent flyers that make up a large percentage of passengers on seaplane flights would benefit from enhanced pre-flight safety briefings that contain instructions on underwater egress”.

 

Transport Canada is currently drafting a proposed regulation that will introduce mandatory emergency underwater egress training for flight crews of commercially operated fixed wing seaplanes. The proposed regulation makes egress training mandatory for initial training, with recurrent training required every three years thereafter on an ongoing basis. The proposed regulation is anticipated to be pre-published in the Canada Gazette Part 1 in summer 2014.

 

In the meantime, there are already some companies who have implemented a policy requiring their employees (passengers) take underwater egress training.

 

 

5. Do you foresee this type of training becoming the norm for everyone traveling on floatplanes or aircraft in general?

 

It may not be the norm for everyone, but for pilots and passengers who frequently fly in small floatplanes and helicopters over water, this type of training has already become a “norm”.

 

Given that, we are finding that the importance of underwater egress training is becoming more mainstream with the general public each year. The natural progression is that passengers are accepting these training benefits to help mitigate the barriers to a safe egress whether participating voluntarily or by company policy.

 

6. You must feel very gratified in knowing that you are potentially helping to save someone’s life. Can you describe an occasion where you knew of one of your students applying the techniques learned from your program that contributed in saving their life?

 

In addition to many other unsolicited testimonials, here are three examples that coincidentally all occurred in 2005:

 

Bella Bella CCG (TSB Report A05P0103) – A Canadian Coast Guard pilot who was involved in an accident during slinging operations survived an underwater egress and said he survived as a result of our training,

 

Devils Lake BC accident (TSB Report A05P0262) – The Environment Canada technician evacuated the submerged helicopter and rescued the person in the front seat. The report states that the “recent underwater emergency escape training gave the conscious passenger the knowledge and experience he needed to help him remain calm, escape safely, and rescue the unconscious passenger from the submerged wreckage”.

 

Aviation Today Sept 2005 – “I thought that I was going to buy it,” Jones recalled quietly in his Scottish brogue. “My first recollection was hitting the water. I could see the surface clearly and that is when my training kicked in.” Specifically, Jones remembered his Navy training long ago as well as his recent helicopter underwater egress, aircraft ditching and sea survival training he’d received from Pro Aviation Training in Langley, B.C. Despite severe injuries to his ribs, legs and eye, he steadied himself, pulled the buckle release, used the airframe to help his exit and floated to the surface. “I was very pleased when I saw a helicopter on the horizon,” Jones chuckled in classic understatement, crediting the training for saving his life. His three passengers weren’t as lucky. They died in the crash.”

 

Although our core training is based on Underwater Egress training, we have received many other, what we consider “success stories”, such as the following excerpt sent to us via email in March 2009.

 

the one tip emphasized by yourself that resonates with me now, is the ‘brace’ position. This position has never been demonstrated to me in a safety briefing before your course. I was in a Cessna 337 Skymaster that went down while doing wildlife surveys on August 17, 2008. The last thing I remember before waking up in the plane was going into the brace position at a very low altitude. From what I understand the plane rolled several times, striking various snags and trees that were in the wetland where we went down, one wing was completely sheared off, the fuselage folded into 2, and my door came off.

 

I suffered a badly broken wrist and lacerated elbow, as well as other serious injuries. The pilot succumbed. I mention the arm injuries because I expect that it would have been my head otherwise, and I can’t imagine that my limbs would still be attached if they had been free to flail outside the aircraft during the impact. I was severely injured and would not have been able to egress if we had come to rest in water (and it is a miracle that my body was above water) but I credit the ‘brace position’ with my survival. So thanks very much for that!”

 

7. Why is it so difficult for someone to egress from a submerged or semi-submerged aircraft? What do you teach your students that allows them the skill set they require to get out of a compromised aircraft?

 

The most difficult part of surviving a ditching accident is the underwater egress. Accident reports indicate that many people survive the initial impact, but needlessly drown because they were unable to extricate themselves from the aircraft. A study on survivability in seaplane accidents conducted by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) suggested that fatalities in seaplane accidents terminating in water are frequently the result of post-impact drowning. Most drownings occurred inside the cabin of the aircraft, and occupants who survived often found exiting the aircraft quite difficult. In fact, over two-thirds of the deaths occurred to occupants who were not incapacitated during the impact, but drowned trying to escape the aircraft.

 

Panic, disorientation, unfamiliarity with escape hatches, and lack of proper training are some of the major factors that contribute to drowning. During an emergency situation, rather than pause to think, most will react on instinct and as a result of learned behaviours; if people never acquired a learned behaviour that is appropriate for this type of situation, such as the steps to follow in an underwater egress scenario, the odds of reacting appropriately are much smaller. For example, when getting out of a car, most of us release our seat belt before opening the door. We do this without even thinking – it is a learned behaviour. If we are strapped into an aircraft that is sinking, a common reaction is to release our seat belt first, then try to get out. We have reverted to the learned behaviour we have acquired every time we get out of a car.

 

In many accidents, people have hastily and prematurely removed their seat belts and, as a result, have been moved around the inside of the aircraft due to the in-rushing water. With the lack of gravitational reference, disorientation can rapidly overwhelm a person. The end result is panic and the inability to carry out a simple procedure to find a way out of the aircraft.

 

Before releasing our seat belt, we need to stay strapped in our seat until the in-rush of water has stopped, our exit is identified, and we have grabbed a reference point. As long as we are strapped in our seated position, we have a reference point relative to our exit, which will combat disorientation. Also, pushing or pulling open our exit will be much easier if we are still strapped in our seat.

All on board must be familiar with the exits and door handles, and know how to use them with their eyes closed. This advice may seem simple, but think about the car example. Opening the door from the inside is not considered a difficult task. However, think back to a time when you were in a friend’s car, and you couldn’t locate or operate the door handle immediately.

An unfamiliar task, to be executed submerged, quite possibly upside down, in the dark, and in very cold water: what could seem like a simple undertaking suddenly becomes monumental.

 

In water accidents, seaplanes tend to come to rest inverted. The key to your survival is to retain your situational awareness and to expeditiously exit the aircraft.

 

To help prevent panic and disorientation, we teach our students the following 5 simple steps to follow in the event they are faced with an underwater egress situation . . .

 

1    Stay Calm/ Wait for the motion to stop:  No matter if you are submerging right side up or upside down, the key to a successful egress is remaining calm. Wait for the motion to stop (count up to 5 seconds). This will also give you an opportunity to think about what you are going to do next. Be prepared for the possibility of cold shock if the in-rush of water that floods the cabin is ice cold. Your body’s initial reaction to sudden immersion in cold water may cause exhalation of air, consequently you may involuntarily inhale some water. Don’t release your seat belt and shoulder harness until you are ready to exit. If you release your seat belt prematurely, the in-rush of water may push you around and contribute to disorientation.

 

2    Open/Identify Your Exit:  Have a plan or mental road map of how you’re going to locate your exit. To find the exit handle, put your hand on your knee, knee against the cabin wall, feel your way along until you find something you recognize like the armrest or a door seam, and work up from there to the exit handle. Be familiar with your exits and door handles and know how to use them beforehand. Everyone on board should have that tactile experience and know how the doors work.

 

3    Grab Hold of Reference Point:  Grab a reference point that you are familiar with in the direction of your exit. Don’t release your belt without having hold of a reference point. You should always have one hand on a reference point and don’t let go before you grip another.

 

4    Release Your Seat Belt/Harness:  Once the exit is open, keep a hold on that reference point, release your belt with the other hand and pull yourself through your exit. Never let go until you are out.

 

5    Pull Yourself Out:  Resist the urge to frantically kick as you may become entangled in any loose wires or debris. If you’re stuck, don’t panic, try backing up a bit and rotating a little before proceeding.

 

Once you’re clear of the aircraft, the next thing you want to do is find a way to the surface. This can be difficult particularly if you lack positive buoyancy that would normally cause you to float to the surface of the water.

 

How do you know which way is up? If you are able to release air bubbles, even if it’s dark, you may be able to sense which way the bubbles are going. If you feel increased pressure on your ears, this may indicate that you’re swimming in the wrong direction. Certainly if you’re wearing an inflatable life preserver, inflate it. As you’ll be rising rapidly in the water, exhale slowly and hold one hand above your head as you surface to make sure you don’t come in contact with any wreckage and/or debris.

 

Remember that training and preparation is the key to survival. By practicing the skills for ditching and underwater egress in a pool with professional staff, passengers, too, can acquire the learned behaviour we discussed above and avoid becoming victims of this unforgiving situation.

 

 

8. How does your training program work? Can anyone sign up to take a course and how much time does someone need to set aside for this type of training?

 

The aim of our training program is to provide participants with the skill, knowledge and confidence to survive a real underwater escape situation. More importantly, even as passengers, we teach strategies they can use to help prevent accidents.

 

This one-day training session starts with 3.5 hours classroom presentation, including ditching procedures, aircraft egress, passenger safety and sea survival techniques. During the afternoon session in the pool, practical instruction is given on life preservers and life rafts (righting from inverted position, boarding, equipment and use). This is followed by practicing several different scenarios in the underwater egress trainer.

 

For those participating in our optional compressed air Emergency Breathing Systems (EBS) module, the training consists of description of equipment, concepts and safety precautions and practical instruction and use on EBS in pool and underwater escape trainer.  We finish off with a debrief and presentation of certificates and training records.

 

This course is Transport Canada approved as a recurrent training program satisfying the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CAR) 401.05 (2) (a) two-year recency requirement for private pilots.

Normally anyone over the age of 15 can sign up and they should be in good health and physically capable to participant in the practical exercises. The training is completed in one day.

 

For more information, please refer to our website: www.proaviation.ca where we have a Discovery Channel video over viewing our training and a “How to Prepare for Ditching” and “Passenger Safety” page that gives basic guidelines and steps people can follow until they are able to take underwater egress training.

 

 

John’s Bio

 

John is a qualified instructor and professional pilot who has been flying since 1976 in both the Canadian military and civil aviation industry. John has over 12,000 hours flying experience and holds an Airline Transport Pilot rating for both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft.  In addition to his vast experience in over-water flight operations, he is also a certified SCUBA diver.

 

John’s extensive involvement in aircraft ditching and sea survival training started over 30 years ago when he was a Sea-king Helicopter Crew Commander flying for the Canadian Navy. As a designated Flight Safety Officer, he took part in preparing and delivering this type of training to military flight crew and later to civilian flight crew and passengers.

 

After completing his service with the military, he was an S76 Captain and Company Aviation Safety Officer for a helicopter commuter airline. John also attended the University of Southern California where he was awarded a Certificate in Aviation Safety. He then accepted a position with Transport Canada as a Regional Aviation Safety Officer using his experience and expertise to promote and deliver safety programs and presentations to the civil aviation industry.

 

After a tour flying for the Canadian Coast Guard, John, in addition to being Pro Aviation Safety Training’s Chief Instructor, presently flies offshore maritime aerial surveillance missions for Canada’s National Aerial Surveillance Program.

 

 

 

 

Pro Aviation is proactively involved with our Association and continues to offer and provide the public with safe options and the tools needed, to help alleviate and diminish aviation mishaps.

Pro Aviation Safety Training

Pro Aviation Safety Training

 

 

A quick background on this FOA member – John Heiler gained his overwater operations and underwater egress experience while flying Sea Kings with the military in the early ‘80s.  When Jackie and John Heiler developed their egress training program, there were only two underwater egress providers in Canada – Survival Systems and HSRS-both situated on the east coast. In 1998, Pro Aviation Training was the first to provide regular egress training on the west coast.

Not only will pilots gain the experience and benefit of underwater egress, but since 2000, Pro Aviation’s classroom presentation has been approved by Transport Canada, satisfying the Canadian Aviation Regulations CARs 401.05 (2)(a) -a two-year Recency Requirement for recurrent training.

It should be added, that Pro Aviation also provides Emergency Breathing Systems (EBS) training on systems such as HEEDs and Spare Air to companies requiring this training.

To date, Pro Aviation Safety Training has trained over five thousand people, attributing to the saving of lives as stated by their many testimonials. http://youtu.be/D7FiBolKeik

 

To learn more, go to www.proaviation.ca

 

FOA takes flight

FOA takes flight

Focusing on Best Practices to strengthen the industry
Written by Jim Hartwell

The intent of the founding members of the Floatplane Operators Association (FOA) was to deliver positive results to commercial floatplane operators and the travelling public.The mandate put forth by the membership was safety advancements and progressive ideas in the form of Best Practices.

The public needs to know that efforts are being made to ensure their enjoyment and safety as we strive to make improvements to our equipment, our methodology and our outlook.

As key words that we use as a point of focus and a motivator alike, Best Practices can mean many things to many people. Our first objective is to make it understood what the term Best Practices means to the FOA and the public and more importantly, what we are going to do to make Best Practices work.

Here is what we have done so far to make Best Practices work:

•Formed this association, creating common ground where all operators with a vested interest in improving upon safety can meet and discuss Best Practices. We have taken techniques and ideas for improving safety from each operator and are starting to see these practices shared and implemented.
•Those improvements include a consensus to implement PFDs whereby the FOA membership is working to develop procedures and products to ensure that in an emergency situation, all passengers exit the aircraft with a PFD.
•Advocated egress training for crew members. This is now offered by most operators.
•Installed ergonomic door latches and exit points in members’ aircraft for more efficient egress.
•Encouraged operators to use satellite-tracking systems, leading to improved flight monitoring of departures, in-flights and landings. These check-in calls with pilots and dispatch, flight followers and monitors are now cycled on a more frequent and consistent basis.
•Implemented back-up protocols related to specific flights and scenarios. Most operators are now using GPS navigation and tracking equipment.
•Improved load monitoring, segmented weights and actual weights. Each member creates and records a database for determining average weight per passengers, etc.
•Participated in the Senate Standing Committee examining light station de-staffing. This issue is of great concern to members who rely on weather reports from these light stations.
•Invited presentations to the FOA board from the B.C. Forest Safety Council and other groups, to show Best Practices and safety cultures in other organizations.
•Organized presentations to the FOA board by manufacturers of safety products such as luminescent exit strips and placarding, windscreen water repellents, etc.
•Assigned a board member to be each FOA member’s point of contact to engage with the association and to share and disseminate concerns, Best Practices and other ideas.
•Solicited membership by means of a questionnaire that will be used to create a baseline of statistics to determine where we can best focus our efforts with Best Practices. We are also compiling a list of members’ Best Practices to be posted on the FOA’s website
•Compiled a list of active webcams that are accessible to everyone through the FOA website, providing a further weather gathering tool for the operators.
•Exploring an online and printed manual containing local area information. The contents would come from the local area membership.
•Participating in the Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council (CARAC) process, especially where there are changes to the regulations that will impact floatplane operators.

The FOA also sees a need to continue educating the public about the safety, convenience and logic of commercial floatplane travel in the country. The FOA believes one of the best ways to accomplish these goals is through the continued creation and implementation of Best Practices.

————————————————————————
Jim Hartwell is the Administrative Executive Assistant of the Floatplane Operators Association.

Dunkyou Egress Training by Jim Hartwell

The FOA has made some great progress within its short time of existence. Efforts to create a culture of
safety within aviation has lead this association to seek out solutions to any and all short-comings within
the industry. A wanting for answers and an effort to make a real change in this industry has made the
FOA (since conception) a group that has reached out and solicited input and expertise from the
people who fly the planes, operate, promote and implement safety methods, maintain the aircraft
or just show an interest and desire in cultivating a safer environment for the flying community and the
public.
Since the FOA has recruited a membership of operators and stake-holders from all those concerned
with improving upon the safety aspects of flight, the idea was put forward that not only should the FOA
membership be privy to the strides we are making toward this as mentioned goal but the readership
and therefore, the public should be allowed to participate in this forum as well. Reading, learning and
participating with the goings-on of the FOA through this the first of hopefully many insightful blogs is
our way of saying-If there is something we can learn from this dialogue-we are listening. If there is
something you can take away from this dialogue-then you know that we can and are on the right path
in cultivating that-culture of safety
.
As this is the first of the FOA’s contributions to this blog, we hope that those reading this bio on Bryan
Webster’s egress training company- Aviation Egress Systems info@dunkyou.com will provide you the reader with an insightful and informative read into one of the more important
aspects of the FOA’s strides-Improving Safety through Best Practices.

FOA: What got you interested in this line of work?

Bryan: As a ditching survivor myself and after numerous local fatalities with aircraft involved in water incidents over the years, I decided to design a program which could train air crews and passengers how to handle a ditching. My original plan was to make this training safe and available at numerous communities all over Canada for an affordable rate, and now with servicing 52 locations I feel AES has achieved that goal.

FOA: I see a lot of our members as well as other operators getting this type of training. As someone like yourself who is providing this training, are there any trends with egress training that you may see coming up in the future?

Bryan: We train everyone from Police forces to Government agencies such as Coast Guard employees who fly as passengers in helicopters off large ship decks, plus airlines and private aviators including their families. Most float operators for example send their pilots back to us on a three year rotation to remain well versed in Egress Procedures. We also have contracts with Law Enforcement Helicopter crews annually as far away as Ontario, who are adamant this is the best way to keep their members safe while on night flights out over the Great Lakes. Transport Canada has indicated they will make Egress Training mandatory for all commercial float operators in the future, thus we are presently organizing numerous permanent satellite locations around Canada to better service our cliental.

FOA: It must be very satisfying in knowing that your program could dramatically make a difference in saving lives. Do you have any statistics to show how much of a difference this type of training has made in the saving of lives?

Bryan: The facts are simple, colder the water temperature higher the mortality rate as individuals with Egress Training immediately return to our in pool procedures during the event of an actual aircraft submersion. This is where time is extremely limited and greatly enhances survival over the untrained person whose first reaction is denial and then follows with disorientation. AES is accredited with saving numerous lives from our past trained individuals list who have actually ditched aircraft since our conception in 1998. This includes a life raft incident here on the BC coast where one of our life raft trainers assisted and was able to haul out a large individual from the water at winter temperatures, who was near drowning after falling out of her boat at anchor.

FOA: If you had a wish list for improving on safety in aviation in particular with egress knowledge and training; what would that be?

Bryan: First off, good quality seat belts with well-designed double strap shoulder harnesses save lives by avoiding head injuries and possible incapacitation during the high G force impact rapid deceleration phase of any ditching. I truly believe all commercial float operators across Canada should be Egress Trained at least every three years to be proficient in this area, not only for their benefit but to assist their untrained passengers.

FOA: A majority of people trained would be the crews themselves. Are there any plans/incentives or ideas on how to get the traveling public on board with this type of training?

Bryan: We are working with insurance companies at present to offer discounts for aircraft owners who have taken Egress Training and expect this to be available in the near future. The traveling public has now been well educated as to the merits of this training by referring to the recent high profile media attention on aircraft safety and they are contacting AES at a higher rate than ever before.

FOA: It is agreed that there can be no cost too great if it involves the saving of lives. What are the costs for this type of training? Is the time required to take egress training very time consuming?

Bryan: We have maintained our AES policy with an affordable one day course, here in Victoria BC where we are based a rate of $295.00 per student plus applicable taxes and $385.00 per student plus taxes in most Canadian communities with a reasonable distance of air travel support.

FOA: What is it that makes it so hard for someone to get out of an aircraft underwater/inverted? How do you address these challenges with the training you provide?

Bryan: Most individual are completely disoriented once inverted as their normal reaction is to immediately release their seat belts which causes the problem, then panic sets in and Egressing becomes a challenge. Our program demonstrates a four part series which when followed and understood keeps the individual calm and able to identify the exit prior to releasing the seat belts and greatly increasing their survival rate.

FOA: Do you see this training as being regulated in the near future?

Bryan: Yes as mentioned earlier Transport Canada has indicated this training is now being seriously considered for mandate to commercial floatplane operations partially due to the AES pioneering spirit of hard work and dedication for nearly 14 years.

FOA: As a member of the Floatplane Operators Association, you are in touch with a great deal of people actively involved in the industry you are providing a service for. Are there benefits from being involved with this association you would otherwise not be privy to otherwise? Does being a member give you an advantage in this industry by being involved with the very people you are providing a service to?

Bryan: I have been active in aviation since 1978 and have flown for and met a great number of operators and pilots who are personal friends and acquaintances from every corner of Canada. As well I am a B C Floatplane Association member plus a BC and Yukon COPA director dealing with situations involving pilots and policies on a regular basis. In 2007 I received the Transport Canada Safety Award for an exceptional contribution to the promotion of Canadian aviation Safety. Being a member of these associations puts me in touch with people of the industry and gives recognition plus respect toward my passion and drive to take Egress Training to the next level.

As we have been in business for over 14 years and travelled from Inuvik to Quebec and everywhere in between the only way I can see to be better connected would to be employed by Transport Canada and offer a similar program on my days off.

BRYAN WEBSTER

A diverse guy with new ideas and a great passion for aviation safety.

Born and raised at the end of the Vancouver Airport on Sea Island, I started my fixation with aircraft at an early age leading to my first commercial pilot position prior to my 19th birthday in a Cessna 185 on floats. In 1981 I applied for and received an operating certificate to provide air charter service at Dawson City, Yukon until 1984 with my beloved 1940 Luscombe 8A, Cessna 185, 206 plus a de Havilland Beaver- flying wheels, skis & floats.
After selling Klondike Air, my wife and I moved to Fort Smith, then Yellowknife NWT where I flew bird dog for a team of A26 water bombers as well as floatplanes in the summer months, followed by numerous types of ski equipped aircraft for the winter.
In 1988 I received my twin engine multi IFR and later Airline Transport License which led to flights for Medivac’s and corporate operations in a Beechcraft 200.
Next progression was with Federal Express at Edmonton, Alberta and later transferred to the BC Coast in 1991 where we presently reside in Victoria.
For over the next decade I held the position of the training pilot plus also flew the Cessna Caravans for Fedex Canada until 2001 when I went full time into and pioneered Aviation Egress Systems. This is an aviation safety company where I have built and designed my own Egress Training Simulators to replicate an aircraft inversion under a controlled and safe pool environment. The Aviation Egress Team trains pilots and passengers for emergency procedures on egressing from an aircraft which have ditched in the water.
Currently I have accumulated close to 12,000 hours in 35 different aircraft types and taught in excess of 5,000 people Egress Training in 52 separate locations Canada-wide including most of BC and the Yukon.
In 2007, I received the Transport Aviation Safety Award for my exceptional contribution to the promotion of Canadian Aviation Safety. This is an distinguished award which I am very proud of as it is a once in a life time honour.
For numerous past summers I have remained current in aviation, flying for a number of B.C. Coastal Seaplane companies as well as offering floatplane ratings and advanced pilot training for more technical aircraft including the Cessna Caravan on amphibs.

.

BC Forest Safety Council 2012-08-14

BC Forest Safety Council:FOA learns more about safety and how to implement techniques and methodology from the BC Forest safety Council

Submitted by Bruce Macdonald on Tue, 2012-08-14 08:18

The FOA was honoured to have as one of our guests at a recent board meeting; Mr. Peter Lineen.  Mr. Lineen presented an informative and enlightening presentation to the board members regarding the BC Forest Safety Council. As the FOA is striving for and seeking out ‘Best Practices’, we are always trying to bring forward anyone who can help us reach this goal. Having some similar concerns with Safety and by allowing us the opportunity to study the BCFSC approach regarding safety concerns, we came away from the presentation with more knowledge and some fresh ideas on how to best advance our efforts with safety.

In 2004 and 2005 the harvesting sector of the province experienced a tremendous surge in the number of fatalities in the industry. As a result of this unfortunate fact, a taskforce was assembled along with a series of inquests to focus on and make recommendations for addressing these accidents. In 2005 the task force presented a ‘Forest Safety Task Force Report’ which released 20 recommendations. Of those 20 recommendations, a co-ordinated approach to managing Safety across the board by managing safety across BC was brought forward.  The industries response to this recommendation was the establishment of the BC Forest safety Council.

Mr. Lineen stated that since the Councils inception, fatalities have dropped to half from their previous numbers. As we can learn from the methodology used by the BC Forest Safety council, the FOA board took away from the presentation many useful ideas and suggestions. Mr. Lineen was kind enough to offer any assistance he and the council can provide us as we strive forward with making the skies safer for everyone.

June 2012: