Epsilon minus
Well EM, you do make some valid points and worthy of discussion. But for a start lets quash the notion that anyone is demanding licenses or FAR 121 style dispatch, they are not (at least I am not, nor as I read it are ICAO) but I agree it includes a review of the ICAO recommendations. Incidentally, EASA have been doing this for some time. Just to remind us I post the ICAO para here;
(quote
2. The amendment to Annex 6, Part I relating to the operational control responsibilities of operators, and the responsibilities, functions and training of flight operations officers and flight dispatchers, stems from a proposal by the United States which will assist accident prevention. The amendment proposal,
presented in Attachment A, introduces Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) that clarify the responsibility of the flight operations officer or flight dispatcher, in conjunction with that of the pilot-in-command, for the safe dispatch and operation of a flight.
unquote)
The initiative here is not to be sniffed at, it is one that has its origins in ICAO, an organisation which has, since its inception, moved global aviation to the high standards of safety we now all enjoy - so what they propose requires due diligence by all member states in the interests of flight safety not cost. I think we can all agree on that and, need it even be said, that we all put safety top of the agenda, most particularly Stelios (when he was there) and the other low cost carriers who know only too well the consequences that would follow were there to be an accident in LCC sector.
Having been a LCC ops manager, I know well the implications of cost. You might be interested to know that when I started an initiative to train my ops bods to the ICAO standards I had the full support of the CEO, who also recognised the need to have well qualififed people running his airline, both from a safety perspective but also on the basis that experience AND qualifications go hand in hand when it comes to making the best operational decision for his customers. I would agree however, that airlines who have tough union issues to contend with might take another stand, but in the UK that isn't too much of a problem.
The agrument for having well qualified and experienced operational control staff has an economic argument running parallel to the one of enhanced flight safety. I generalise here of course, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the operations officer or flight dispacther who has a qualification combined with experience on the job, will offer an airline more that one who has a shallow on the job training level of knowledge. The decisions ops officers now make have high value price tags and if I were running an airline in todays environment I would want the best qualified people Ę can find managing my daily flying program. The costs might well be saved by one well considered decision which uses the knowledge gained in training.
I can't enter into the very cynical discussion of hull losses, it is irrelevant. What I will say however, is that our (the UK) industry really would benefit in both areas of safety and business by the introduction of the proposal. Anyone who doubts that ops officers and flight dispatchers have an influenece on flight safety hasn't ever worked as one.
The CAA will consult no doubt, but in the end there will need to be a reason for NOT adopting a proposal which seeks to enhance flight safety.
Last edited by no sig; 1st Nov 2005 at 10:16.