Industry Insider
When a company embarks on a new fleet acquisition programme it should follow the pathway I described and this should apply for every change in an organisation, even if perceived as an improvement, it will involve the risks associated with 'change'.
Example - The Swedish military took a decision to retread experienced jet pilots into their helicopter force. No risk assessment was carried out and the result was that a pilot who was commanding a helicopter (seniority derived from jet-jockey days) carrying out SAR did not have the necessary experience to take on the task in the way he did. Result - accident, fatal I seem to recall.
All change carries risks and as one contributor has already remarked the growth in helicopter automation was not a 'big-bang' event but crept upon us incrementally. Looking back we can see that the risks associated with these new 'toys' were never fully understood. It is the case though that by doing a little digging we are finding out that there is a plethora of 'near misses' out there but nobody joined up the dots... until now.
It's not the helicopter itself that I am getting at but the way an organisation deals with it's introduction. It also needs to ask itself "are our current training systems going to deliver the right solution for the new equipment", along with "Are our SOPs adequate for the new type."
G.