FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
2002
2002 - 2021.PDF
FULL LIST OF READER SERVICES EDITORIAL +44 (20) 8652 3842 Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey SMZ 5 AS, UK Fax +44 (20) 8652 3840 email fliqht.international@rbi.co.uk Editor Murdo Morrison +44 (20) 8652 4395 murdo.morrisorHPrbi.co.uk Editor's PA Debra Warburton (maternity leave) Acting Editor's PA Francesca Everett +44 (20) 8652 3835 trancesca.everett@rbi.co.uk News Editor Emma Kelly •44 (20) 8652 3096 emma.kelly@rbi.co.uk Commercial Aviation Editor Max Kingsley-Jones •44 (20) 8652 3825 max.kingsley.jones@rbi.co.uk Defence Aviation Editor Stewart Penney •44 (20) 8652 3834 stewart.penney@rbi.co.uk Operations/Safety Editor David Learmount •44 (20) 8652 3845 david.learmount@rbi.co.uk Business Editor Alexander Campbell +44 (20) 8652 3990 alexander.campbell@rbi.co.uk Business & General Aviation Editor Kate Sarsfield (maternity leave) Business & General Aviation Reporter Justin Wastnage •44 (20) 8652 i662justin.wastnage@rbi.co.uk Technical Reporter Michael Phelan +44 (20) 8652 3843 michael.phelan@rbi.co.uk Spaceflight Correspondent Tim Furniss +44 (1237) 471960 tim@spaceport.co.uk EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST European Editor Christina Mackenzie •33 (1) 64 23 68 89 christina.mackenzie@rbi.co.uk Israel Correspondent Arie Egozi +972 (3) 9413132 Middle East Correspondent Gerald Butt •357 22 771967 gbutt@spidernet.com.cy AMERICAS Washington DC Office Fax +1 (703) 836 8344 Americas Editor Graham Warwick •1 (703) 836 3448 graham.warwick@rbi.co.uk East Coast Editor Paul Lewis +1 (703) 836 3084 jpaul.lewis@rbi.co.uk West Coast Editor Guy Norris •1(949)2528971 Fax +1 (949) 252 8972 guy.norris@rbi.co.uk Brazil Correspondent Jackson Flores Jr +55 212439-6062 Fax 00 55 212349-6090 fubar@uol.com.br Canada Correspondent Brian Dunn •1 (514) 937-1855 Fax (514) 937-3352 brian@derniermot.com ASIA/PACIFIC Singapore Office Fax +65 338 6171 Regional Managing Editor Nicholas lonides •65 6434 3311 nicholas.ionides@rbi.co.uk Deputy Asia Editor Andrew Doyle +65 6434 3309 andrew.doyle@rbi.co.uk Regional Reporter David Fullbrook •65 6434 3314 david.fullbrook@rbi.co.uk Australia Civil Aviation Correspondent Paul Phelan •61(7)40532791 Fax+61 (7)40533003 pdphelan@optusnet.com.au Australia Military Aviation Correspondent Peter La Franchi •61 (0) 419 246 620 Fax +61 (2) 62312795 nulka@oiemail.com.au EDITORIAL PRODUCTION Group Production Editor Graeme Osborn +44 (20) 8652 3828 Group Art Editor James Mason +44 (20) 8652 4994 Chief Sub-Editor Chris Thornton +44 (20) 8652 4997 Deputy Production Editor Jackie Thompson +44 (20) 8652 3850 Sub Editor Megan Turner +44 (20) 8652 3848 Photographer Mark Wagner +44 (20) 8944 5225 Senior Technical Artist Giuseppe Picarella +44 (20) 8652 8054 Editorial Artist Tim Brown +44 (20) 8652 8043 WWW.FLIGHTINTERNATIONAL.COM Webmaster Sheena Buchanan +44 (20) 8652 4432 SUBSCRIPTIONS +44 (1444) 445454 rbi.subscriptions@rbi.co.uk THE FLIGHT COLLECTION kim.hearn@rbi.co.uk 9 and Database Rights 2002 Reed Business Information Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of the publishers 71-r' 7 Air Transport Intelligence (ATI), Flight International's sister XI / / online service at www.rati.com, contains the full text of Flight •••• Internationaland Airline Business since 1996. Full text of the magazines can also be found online with Lexis-Nexis, Dialogue, FT Profile, IAC and Reuters. Editor Kieran Daly +44 (20) 8652 3837 Reed Business Information COMMENT Basic instinct Airborne collision warning systems may give simple guidance to pilots, but faced with other sensory inputs, they may still be ignored Aviation accidents have a way of revealing problems that no-one knew existed. Since the 1 July mid-air collision over southern Germany, a problem has emerged that had not been foreseen, and others were already there but had not been noticed. The principal unforeseen issue is that air borne collision avoidance system (ACAS) training for pilots had been assumed to be simple. It is now clear that it is not simple. Pilots have to be able to carry out, in all cir cumstances, the standard operating procedure (SOP) for reacting to an ACAS order - the ACAS resolution advisory (RA) alert. It looks easy, but under certain combina tions of circumstances it is not. The Western SOP is simply that pilots obey an ACAS RA at all times, even if an air traffic control (ATC) clearance or instruction has told them to do the opposite. That sounds so sim ple it should hardly need spelling out - the Airlines' ACAS training must be made more precise than it is now ACAS RA says "climb, climb", so the pilot climbs; or the RA says "descend, descend" so the pilot descends. In fact the rule is a little more complex. In summary, the pilot has the choice - given other inputs such as being able to see the conflicting aircraft through the wind screen - of not actually climbing or descending, but he must never do the oppo site of what the RA says. But, says the manual sagely, the pilot must be certain that the air craft he can see is the same aircraft that triggered the RA. That sounds easy, but is actually impossible when milliseconds count. Meanwhile, a crucial issue that has emerged and had not previously been noticed is that Russia differs from the West in its SOP In Russia'ATC instructions take precedence over an ACAS RA. In the case of the recent collision that looks like the simple reason why the Russian pilot descended when the RA had told him to climb. As usual, there is more to this situation than meets the eye. Information gleaned from Swiss and German radar so far indicates that the Russian pilot had actually begun to climb at about the same time that he would have received an ACAS "climb" RA - it has been confirmed that he received the RA. One sec ond after the RA, however, ATC told the Russian pilot to "expedite" a descent of 1,000ft (300m). The Russian did not reply- probably confused by the conflicting orders. But that was not all. Fourteen seconds later the con troller repeated the order, again emphasising the need to "expedite descent". This time the Russian pilot obeyed ATC - a fatal decision, as it turned out. Since the event, Flight International has talked to pilots from a number of European air lines and pilot organisations about what they think they would have done in the same situa tion. They were all adamant that ACAS takes precedence according to SOPs, but felt that faced with two urgent ATC demands after the RA had operated, they would have followed the ATC order. Only one of the pilots differed, and he said he was not sure what he would have done. The difference between Russian SOPs and those of the West can be relatively easily resolved. The Russian authorities have already indicated that their ACAS SOPs will be reviewed. It is the obvious pilot uncertainty, however, which highlights the fact that the airlines' ACAS training must be more precise than it is now. Any training system which demands that pilots place absolute trust in the advice of a machine in the face of opposing instinctive reactions have to drill the procedure into the pilot by repetition, in the way that the military forces drill their troops to act according to orders instead of their instincts when faced with a frightening situation. In January last year two Japanese wide- bodied airliners came within a few metres of collision as the result of an ATC error. One of the pilots ignored his ACAS climb RA in favour of visual judgement and continued a descent. Meanwhile, the other pilot followed his ACAS RA, and collision was only prevented because he reversed his manoeuvre just in time because he could see the developing situation through his windscreen. This reversal saved the day -just. But the separation would have been safer if both pilots had followed their RAs in the beginning. The industry should tailor its ACAS training for pilots so that pilots trust RAs above every thing else and are not confused by other inputs. After all, ACAS only comes into opera tion when ATC has failed or when pilots have made a mistake in following an ATC clearance. So ACAS must be the final arbiter. SEE AIR TRANSPORT P12 www.flightinternational.com FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL 16-22 JULY 2002 5
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
