PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > Questions
Forgotten your Username/Password?
Register FAQ Calendar Advertise Mark Forums Read

Questions If you are a professional pilot or your work involves professional aviation please use this forum for questions. Enthusiasts, please use the 'Spectators Balcony' forum.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 6th November 2009, 11:07   #1 (permalink)
Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: North
Posts: 2
Interpretation problems

i give up! Could you please help with interpretation of following IOSA requirement?

FLT 1.11.3 The Operator should have a process to ensure data or products acquired from external suppliers (other than electronic navigation data products, as specified in FLT 1.11.4), which directly affect the safety of flight operations, meet required technical specifications prior to being utilised in the conduct of operations.

What can be considered as data or products from external suppliers? To me it seems it can be basically everything not produced in house - NOTAM, Meteo info, Flight plan data (waypoints etc.), takeoff performance calculation data and some more I guess...
and how detailed it should be described or it might be enough with few statements in OM ? how did you solve this? (I hope somebody did! )
Icar is offline   Reply
Old 7th November 2009, 07:27   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: the good ol' US of A
Posts: 53
welcome to the JAA/JAR...
DA-10mm is offline   Reply
Old 7th November 2009, 09:49   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 34
DA-10mm, I wonder what does IOSA have to do with JAR or the JAA?

IOSA stands for IATA Operational Safety Audit ...

Sorry I can't help with the original question.
Boxshifter is online now   Reply
Old 8th November 2009, 15:04   #4 (permalink)
QA1
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 16
IOSA Interpretation

I have only ever been involved with the maintenance aspects of an IOSA audit, but I would consider the following:

From the IOSA Standards Manual (Introduction)

Outsourced Functions
Where an operator has chosen to outsource operational functions specified in IOSA provisions to external service providers, conformity with those provisions will be based on evidence provided by the operator that demonstrates acceptable processes are in place (i.e., documented and implemented) for monitoring such external service providers to ensure fulfilment of all requirements affecting the safety and security of operations. Auditing is recommended as an effective method for such monitoring of external service providers.

From Guidance Material

Guidance FLT 1.11.3
The purpose of such monitoring and control is to ensure databases and other internal and external sources of operational data provided for the support of flight operations are current, accurate and complete.


Based on the above, provided you ensure your suppliers have acceptable quality control systems in place and you periodically audit them, I would consider that you were compliant; although you would obviously need to document that.

Also note: this is a Recommended Practice, not a Standard; so even if you are non-compliant it will only generate an Observation, that you may chose to respond to or not, rather than a ‘Finding’ - see IOSA Standards Manual introduction.
QA1 is offline   Reply
Old 9th November 2009, 06:26   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: the good ol' US of A
Posts: 53
back ay y'all in a few days...
in the middle of a big trip.
DA-10mm is offline   Reply
Old 9th November 2009, 11:33   #6 (permalink)
Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: North
Posts: 2
Thank you QA1!

Is it enough to describe Auditing as a process to control data or products from external suppliers or should there be regular monitoring/control of data/products from suppliers? like, when updated database (obstacle db for performance calc. or navigation data for flight planning system etc.) is received, it is somehow ensured that the db are current, accurate and complete?

Last edited by Icar : 9th November 2009 at 16:39.
Icar is offline   Reply
Old 9th November 2009, 19:58   #7 (permalink)
QA1
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 16
Nav Data Certification

If you are compliant with EU-OPS, your procedures should already cover this - OPS 1.873 refer.

As there is no official guidance material for EU-OPS the CAA recommend using TGL 44, which includes ACJ OPS 1.873.

You should also read EASA decision: 01/2005 which includes two documents:

LETTERS OF ACCEPTANCE FOR NAVIGATION DATABASE SUPPLIERS and

NAVIGATION DATABASE SUPPLIERS COMPLIANCE CHECK LIST

The above documents should give you a good understanding of what is expected.

I now know more about Nav Database supplier’s certification than I ever wanted to know – I must get out more.
QA1 is offline   Reply
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Posting Rules
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:23.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7
© 1996-2009 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, or sciolists*, to elicit certain reactions.

*"sciolist"... Noun, archaic. "a person who pretends to be knowledgeable and well informed".