Atfm Exempt Status

[oct]

Can Any One Explain The Criteria For Being Atfm Exempt If You Are A Private Air Ambulance Operator??

[flowman]

From the CFMU ATFCM manual:

Hospital Flights

After consultation with the European Aero Medical Institute (EURAMI), flights which are categorized as NACA V or VI would always qualify for approval to use STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED.

Flights categorized, as NACA IV would normally be expected not to use
STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED. Should such a flight receive an ATFCM slot with a delay, which the medical personnel accompanying the patient, consider would jeopardize the patients ability to recover, they have been advised to contact the CFMU helpdesk. Such calls shall be treated sympathetically, and every effort made to reduce any delay to a minimum.
A flight positioning to an airport to collect a patient categorised as NACA V or NACA VI, and doing an immediate turnaround with the patient on board to return would also qualify for STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED. However, routine positioning flights e.g. returning empty after an evacuation or positioning for fuel, or positioning to an airport to collect a patient some time after arrival (i.e. not time-critical) do not qualify for the use of STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED.

Note: The NACA (National Advisory Committee For Aeronautics) scale is an international scoring system, ranging from 1 to 7 points, to give an overall description of a patient’s medical condition:

NACA I - minor health disturbance
NACA II - out-patient check up needed
NACA III - hospital treatment needed
NACA IV - possibly health threatening
NACA V - acute critical condition
NACA VI - resuscitation
NACA VII - death

A NACA score of III or more points includes severe disease or injury patterns, which may need further and urgent treatment in more specialised hospitals.


Where the CFMU receives a call from an aircraft operator requesting approval for an STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED, that caller shall be referred to the relevant national AIP to find the appropriate office, or FMP if such an office has not been nominated or is unavailable.

Hope this helps.
flowman

[oct]

Hi Flowman,

Thanks for the reply. There is an operator at EGHH who uses the ATFM Exempt status for positioning flights and for returning flights back to base. I wondered if that was standard procedure when you were allowed to use the ATFM status in the flight plan.

[flowman]

It might be standard practice but that doesn't make it correct. The FMP will normally authorise such requests but are supposed to report them to the CAA who will follow up any possible abuse. Perhaps you should talk to UK FMP and alert them to a possible misinterpretation of the rules.

"Routine positioning flights e.g. returning empty after an evacuation or positioning for fuel, or positioning to an airport to collect a patient some time after arrival (i.e. not time-critical) do not qualify for the use of STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED."

[oct]

Hi Flowman,

Thanks for the information, there is a clear abuse of the rules appreciate the advise!!

[minti the mini]

Dear People

Please bear in mind that the operator at EGHH brings many patients into EGHH and often uses EGHH as a fuel stop with patients on board. This may be why they are filing ATFMEXEMPT flight plans back to base.

They also have to apply for the approval each year and are audited by the CAA each year to keep the approval.

Kind regards :ok:

[flight check]

Interesting thred. I agree with minti the mini they do bring patients into EGHH. However most of the flights go to other uk airfields. Pretty much all the return flights are ATFM exempt and empty when returning to base. when positioning the day before to collect a patient they appear also to be filed as exempt avoiding slots.

"Routine positioning flights e.g. returning empty after an evacuation or positioning for fuel, or positioning to an airport to collect a patient some time after arrival (i.e. not time-critical) do not qualify for the use of STS/ATFMEXEMPTAPPROVED."

If as I understand it Flowman's comments are correct how can this operator get away with abusing the system when other A/A companies have to apply by the rules?? Surely all patients do not qualify for ATFM status and are time critical:=:=

[garman man]

The company at EGHH is very professional, handling many repatriations of holiday makers that need to come home via ambulance flight. They also employ a first officer who works for the air traffic service at Swanick who also audits all the flights so, if there were any deviations of the exempt status he would bring it to the attention of the operations manager after he's audit. My only worry is, if the flight has been sent out ATFM exempt is the pilot responsable should the authorities wish to ramp check the aircraft and question the status of the flight.

[garman man]

The operator at EGHH is very professional and handles thousands of holiday maker repatriations every year. The company employes a first officer who also works for the air traffic control service at Swanick who also audits the operation so, if there were any issues or abuse of the system he would be able to bring them to the attention of the manager.
If however a flight was incorrectly dispatched by operations ie: ATFM Exempt and it was not, would the pilot be responsable if the aircraft was ramp checked on arrival by the airport authorities??

[oct]

GARMAN MAN, I think the pilot is responsable, he/she would see the flight plan before he/she departs and would see the exemption. But if this operator is as professional as you say they will have a system in place for applying the NACA code to the relevant flight. Although judging by their past history probably not.

[Back Seat P1]

"Oct" are you actually raising a guinuine issue with regards to ATFM exemption, or are you using a forum to try and discredit a company? I would argue the later is your intent....?

The company based at EGHH sucessfully transports UK patients both private and NHS back to the UK for emergency/lifesaving medical treatment, and to be closer to their family with high quality medical treatment in difficult circumstances.

If you are raising a general concern or observation re ATFM exempt status then your posting probably needs to include, or review, other operators in this business and not just statements like 'Although judging by their past history probably not' which is an attempt purely to discredit a company. Maybe a starting block would be to look and see if this is true accross the other Air Ambulance UK operators. A starting point is to look at EGTE, EGTK or smaller operators/charter companies out of EGTF and other airfields. Once you have done a more rounded review of Air Amulance operations then your points maybe valid with regards to ATFM status and not just a blatent attack at one operator!

If there is a clear generalised abuse of an ATFM status, then with your evidence, and not just rants, you should pass this to the appropriate agencies such as ATC or DFT or CAA.

This is my rant over :mad:

[Sir Herbert Gussett]

Great to see the staff off the "EGHH operator" are on this forum in full-swing defending their employer. :)

[DFC]

Once you have done a more rounded review of Air Amulance operations then your points maybe valid with regards to ATFM status and not just a blatent attack at one operator!



I love that defence.

So until every car thief has been caught nothing can be done about the ones that were caught red handed.

or

Until you are not the only one that has had your car nicked the police should not take any action.

-----------

I am not in favour of malicious untrue allegations. However, if something was not correct the "everyone else is doing the same" is not a defence.

[oct]

Thanks for the advice back seat p1.

Maybe a starting block would be to look and see if this is true accross the other Air Ambulance UK operators. A starting point is to look at EGTE, EGTK or smaller operators/charter companies out of EGTF and other airfields.

We pulled 150 flight plans this morning as you suggested. All from the airfields you thought might help. Only one operator files 100% ATFM exempt on all their flight plans. As I am not trying to discredit any company I will not mention the airfield they operate from. My rant if you would like to call it that is the rules are there for everyone to operate too. If one operator decides they don't apply to them and they abuse the system then it makes it harder for others, including the airports, air traffic and other operators who are trying to operate professionally within the system. Every one makes mistakes and that is fine, but don't try to defend a complete lack of understanding or ignorance to the rules because you don't think they apply to this company or any other.:mad::ugh::ugh:

[10W]

Raise your suspicions with the CAA. They have the power to investigate and take appropriate action. If they're operating within the rules, then that's the end of the matter. If they're not, then they need to be dealt with.

PPRuNe can't change the situation tangibly, but the authorities might be able to if required.